This house believe in the united states of the world

Sorry I waited until the very last second to post my final round.... In the video the pro argues that the amount of time the shop is open is completely irrelevant to profits because consumers plan what they buy and can plan when they buy it, but that is simply not true. If you follow around any woman in America into a mall, for every one thing she actually needs she will buy 6 others things she doesnt need. This is because Americans, like much of the rest of the world, are impulse buyers, who often buy stuff they dont need right away and probably will never really 'need' but buy stuff just because they want to. People are impulse buyers, and if you start to cut out the days that are available to them to go out and buy on impulse rather then on necessity, then you are doing great damage to how much money corporations and these shopping malls take in at the end of the year. After that the pro goes on to say that the current map of the world and all the borders of countries happened on accident and that if you changed one thing in history it would have ended up drastically different. Then the pro argues that if you dont have one world government then you will end up with many many small countries like in the stone age. That is completely false though because if history has taught us anything its that countries try to expand their borders and not divide themselves into oblivion. The United States, Russia, China, England, France, Spain, Germany, etc are all countries who have long histories of trying to expand their borders or colonize other parts of the world rather then divide into smaller and smaller nations. On another hand, its irrational to claim that without a world government nations will divide and divide because the one thing that makes nations hold together is nationalism. People will almost always be proud of the country they came from and would always fight for that country to maintain its own independence from any occupation, and nationalism is the reason why that nations fight back against other invading nations, because people want to maintain their own independence under their own terms. Countries will not divide and divide into oblivion as long as nationalism and other senses of unity keep certain people together. However, since nationalism also doubles as an agent against foreign occupation, you could even go on to argue that a world government would never work because people are simply too divided and diverse to ever agree to be under one world government. After that argument the pro gives a speech on why countries should stop funding armies and use that money to research technology or something, but he is once again overlooking the point that a nations military exists for many reasons other then to just wage war against other armies. A nations military is used to preserve order, to give citizens a sense of protection, they can also be used to provide assistance to disaster stricken countries, and as Ive have brought up numerous times before that the pro keeps ignoring, other countries are not the only threat to a nations security. There will always be warlords and terrorist organizations who will be threatening governments they do not agree with and this combined with all the other reasons I just mentioned are why nations do need a military, and also that a world government would still need a military. Lastly the pro asks I give another argument against world government but I wont because A) Its considered bad conduct to give a new argument in the final round when the opponent cant respond to it, and B) Seeing as how half my other arguments have been dropped I dont see why I should introduce even more of them if they are simply going to be ignored. That concludes the arguments I have made, as for the number of dropped arguments by the Pro: - 1 - Pro dropped the argument that less stress for workers doesnt offset the amount of profit lost by forcing businesses to operate just 4 days a week - 2 - Pro dropped the argument that a nations military is used for numerous reasons other then to just wage wars - 3 - Pro dropped the argument that there would still be a need for the military to fight against warlords and terrorist organizations - 4 - Pro dropped the argument that we would still have to hide some of the technology we are researching against terrorists and hackers, meaning that in a world government we wouldnt be able to simply be free of keeping secrets... - 5 - Pro dropped the argument that even if there was a world government, terrorist organizations would still have numerous places to hide in and operate out of. - 6 - Pro dropped the argument that simple police officers would not be able to fight these terrorists and that we would still need a military to fight them. - 7 - Pro dropped the argument that a world government would have a fixed tax rate on corporations which would harm how much profit they could make since in a world with numerous governments, countries compete by keeping tax rates lower which helps businesses grow, profit, expand, and thrive I would like to thank everyone for reading this debate and I hope you vote