homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:00 pm
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:59 am 
Interesting idea that may appeal to those with a libertarian bent. Unilaterally abolish all tariff and non-tariff barriers for the countries in the resolution. Nearly every economist will back you up that it is to your benefit to liberalize trade regardless of what the other country does. Paul Krugman has a good introductory article on this. Also look up "GATT-Think" and neo-mercantilism.

Someone could even add on a mandate to withdraw from any trade agreements we have already made with those countries, if they wanted to make a big deal out of national sovereignty and the ceding of jurisdiction to international trade dispute settlement tribunals.

Any thoughts?


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:02 am 
Offline
Tsarcastic
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 3512
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Under my own vine and fig tree
Would be probably a good idea. Possible disads would be Chinese dumping and potential immediate shock = local market collapse.

_________________
"It is not possible to choose between injustice and disorder. They are synonyms." -- Nicolás Gómez Dávila

~IM_R


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 2015 2:32 am 
Concerns about potential immediate shock could be alleviated by phasing in tariff cuts over a period of time. In economic terms, Chinese dumping is really just a big coupon for American consumers paid for by Chinese taxpayers.

I'm thinking this case might be an uphill battle due to ingrained opinions, held even among most people generally in favor of trade, that trade has to be "fair" and that exports are good and imports are bad. But if somebody was really good at explaining and impacting the economics on it, it has the very simple/logical/straightforwardness that I like.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 2015 10:21 pm 
Offline
Tsarcastic
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 3512
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Under my own vine and fig tree
If you're going to run a pro-free trade case, I would look at Cato and Heritage's breakdown of why trade is good. But be prepared, with concise cards, to explain some basic concepts very quickly like;

*The seen vs. the unseen
*Short term dislocations (ex. less manufacturing employees) vs long term benefit
*Why a more prosperous Asia is best for the US
*Why America's 100% dominance of manufacturing (1946-1980s) was totally unrealistic and ahistorical
*Expanding the PPF and why that's good
*Why we benefit from cheaper products

Because if you don't or your cards are long and not to the point, good ole 'Merican chest thumping and China bashing is going to win real quick.

_________________
"It is not possible to choose between injustice and disorder. They are synonyms." -- Nicolás Gómez Dávila

~IM_R


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:47 pm 
Offline
Guardian of the Black Room
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 856
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: 127.0.0.1
IrishMex Rebel wrote:
Because if you don't or your cards are long and not to the point, good ole 'Merican chest thumping and China bashing is going to win real quick.

I ran a unilateral free trade case once... IMR's warning here is completely on-point. Judge bias is huge on this one, and people are super sensitive to even possibly giving China an upper hand. There's a book from CATO, "Mad About Trade: Why Main Street America Should Embrace Globalization" by Daniel Griswold, that's a nice read on this topic. It's now a bit old ('09), but it provides a nice overview of arguments (and anecdotes) promoting free trade.

I'd be fine with sending my briefs to people about this case if they promise not to laugh at what younger me thought was strong evidence. :P

--Andrew

(I'm sure some new people are gasping, saying "WHAT? anorton did debate?")

_________________
"The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits"
- G.K. Chesterton


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited