The United States should significantly increase the number of Syrian refugees entering the country.

I, of course, accept your suggested rule. I never like to do that sort of thing in debate, ad hominem isn't welcome in my book. I will only be using legitimate arguments. I would also like to thank my opponent for accepting. I will start with my plan, then move on to my criterion, and then my points. My plan is for the United States to take in 100,000 refugees who have been security screened and have at least a high school level education. They also must be part of families, and agree to learn english as well as become citizens. The criterion for this debate is well being of both the United States and these refugees. Moving on to the points. P1: We have a moral obligation to accept these refugees. We need to do this as human beings. There are 250,000+ people dying here, including many families and children. We can"t just leave them where they are right now. They are in horrible living conditions, and many of them have died trying to get to other places by starvation, drowning, and other reasons. We cannot have these people dying. The Golden Rule is as follows: one should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. What if we were these people, watching our families and friends die, and nobody helped us? These people have education, families, and just want to live a better life where they aren"t under the threat of death, and we can help them. It is the only compassionate choice. These refugees are currently in horrible living conditions in camps. According to Voice of America, refugee camps along the Turkish-Syrian border also have recently reported cases of cholera and malaria. Experts say these diseases all have the potential to become deadly epidemics in crowded camps, where poor sanitary conditions are commonplace, and daily meals and safe drinking water can be hard to come by. Add this point to my criterion of well being. P2: Accepting these refugees would greatly help the economy. This would mainly happen in two ways, which I will organize into two sub points. Subpoint A - Creating more jobs. This would happen for both our (referring to the United States) citizens, as well as the new refugees entering the country. Let me explain. One of the most common concerns from local people is that refugees will take over jobs, especially unskilled jobs. Refugees often lack the skills necessary to do higher paid jobs due to different languages and other problems, so a large amount of people coming into the job market can cause lower wages to fall. Although, this is not true. However, in the longer run, refugees appear to create an outsized role in creating new jobs, and even raising the wages of the locals. One of these reasons is that refugees appear more likely than others to create small businesses, according to The Washington Post. Michael Clemens is the leader of the Migration and Development Initiative at the Center for Global Development. Clemens says that refugees are more likely to create small businesses because compared with other immigrants, refugees are less likely to have a job waiting for them in their host country. Subpoint B - The National Bureau of Economic Research found that immigration benefitted 19 out of 20 of the industrialized countries they studied. Another study by the Social Science Research Network found that a large amount of refugees going into Denmark led the native workers to switch to more skilled jobs and away from jobs that were mostly manual labor. As a result, many U. S. citizens earned higher wages and received better jobs, even with the refugees also getting jobs. Add this point to the criterion of well being. I look forward to my opponent's case.