“GLOBAL FREE TRADE HASS DONE MORE HARM THAN GOOD"
Pros: Rico
Cons: Kaye
Moderator: Jay Ar
J: Good day ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to be your
moderator in this debate. I’m Jay Ar Baguio and I would like to
welcome you all. First of all, let me introduce our debater for this
topic, both of them are knowledgeable in this topic that we are going to
discuss. On the affirmative side, a student taking BSME( Bachelor of
Science in Mechanical Engineering), Mr. Rico Tumapon and on the
negative side is a student taking BSCE (Bachelor of Science in Civil
Engineering), Ms. Kaye Lora. Without further ado I would like to
welcome the first debater to deliver his stance. Alright Mr. Tumapon,
the floor is yours.
R: So first, let me defined what is free trade. Free trade is a complete
absense of restrictions upon free exchange of goods and services. It is
the absence of tariffs. In such a world, a country would import all
those commodities that it could buy from abroad at delivered price
lower than the cost of producing them at home. So… What so good
about free trade? At the heart of it free trade is simply an extension
of free market economies, if a free market is the most efficient way
of allocating resources within a country then maybe it’s the best way to
allocate resources between countries. Economists often model the idea
of comparative advantage to explain why two countries can benefit
from trading freely. According to David Ricardo, some countries have a
margin of superiority in the supply of some products. Everyone does
not play by the same rules. Countries such as the U.S. and France
have squabbled for years over agricultural subsidies to farmers
that distort free trade. More recently, as nations like China and
Brazil that practice differing versions of state capitalism have
entered the global trading system, the playing field has gotten
more uneven. The Chinese economy, for example, has a number of
industries, like green energy, that are protected by the state.
National players are explicitly supported over foreign competitors.
J: Thank you Mr. Tumapon for your opinion. Okay now let’s allow
Ms. Lora to give her stance on how global free trade has done more
harm that good.
K: The biggest criticism of free trade agreements is that they are
responsible for job outsourcing. There are seven total
disadvantages:
Increased Job Outsourcing: Why does that happen? Reducing
tariffs on imports allows companies to expand to other countries.
Without tariffs, imports from countries with a low cost of living
cost less. It makes it difficult for U.S. companies in those same
industries to compete, so they may reduce their workforce. Many
U.S. manufacturing industries did, in fact, lay off workers as a
result of NAFTA. One of the biggest criticisms of NAFTA is that
it sent jobs to Mexico.
Theft of Intellectual Property: Many developing countries don't
have laws to protect patents, inventions, and new processes. The
laws they do have aren't always strictly enforced. As a result,
corporations often have their ideas stolen. They must then
compete with lower-priced domestic knock-offs.
Crowd out Domestic Industries: Many emerging markets are
traditional economies that rely on farming for most employment.
These small family farms can't compete with subsidized agri-
businesses in the developed countries. As a result, they lose their
farms and must look for work in the cities. This aggravates
unemployment, crime, and poverty.
Poor Working Conditions: Multi-national companies may outsource
jobs to emerging market countries without adequate labor
protections. As a result, women and children are often subjected
to grueling factory jobs in sub-standard conditions.
Degradation of Natural Resources: Emerging market countries
often don’t have many environmental protections. Free trade leads
to depletion of timber, minerals, and other natural resources.
Deforestation and strip-mining reduce their jungles and fields to
wastelands.
Destruction of Native Cultures: As development moves into
isolated areas, indigenous cultures can be destroyed. Local peoples
are uprooted. Many suffer disease and death when their resources
are polluted.
Reduced Tax Revenue: Many smaller countries struggle to replace
revenue lost from import tariffs and fees.
J: Thank you Ms. Lora for the informative and interesting talk. I
now call upon Mr. Tumapon to give a question or deliver a speech
rebutting his opponent.
R: Those nations which have opened their borders to trade and
instituted free markets domestically have experienced unprecedented
growth in income, which has benefited rich and poor alike, a fact
recorded data sources from the national to international level. So, how
can you loudly complain about the growing gap between rich and poor or
can site a particular scenario?
J: Next, I call upon Ms. Lora to defend her case
K: There are some countries that weak want something from them.
Countries don’t just start interacting with other countries because
they want to share the recipes, they interact with the other countries
because they want something that other countries have and that’s why
they talk about this part of specialization where they do something
better. But the problem is, at a certain point the countries that are
really good at staff don't need this other countries to do anything
except that you're going to clean that stuff that they're not willing to
do. They send their worst jobs to China, to India, or across the globe
because they don't want to see their own people do them. they are not
willing to see their own people do such things.
J: Thank you Ms. Lora, now you may summarize your thought and ask a
final against your opponent.
K: For a number of complicated reasons, income inequality is most
likely to increase in fast-growing nations though again it’s important to
emphasize the poor are still becoming less poor. Nations with mature
market economies have more equal distribution of income than
developing market economies and far more equal distribution than
those nations that shut themselves off from the world. So…what about
inequality within developing nations that adopt market policies? About
half these nations have seen an increase in income inequality, about
half have seen a decrease. But in all cases, the income of the poor has
risen. It’s just that in about half the nations, the income of the rich
grows faster. How can you explain the fast growing inequality in most
of the nations?
R: It’s no accident that democracy has grown in nations with free and
open markets. In a nation where government controls the economy, it
also controls the fate of individuals. Your ability to make a living,
support your family, or advance in your job are all controlled by
government. Government has powerful tools to keep citizens in line. A
market economy liberates. Your employment is no longer dependent on
the will of government. Power is diffused to unions, private businesses,
trade associations, and, mostly importantly, individuals who now have
less reason to fear government.
We’ve already tried massive foreign aid and government directed
economic development. This resulted in dismal human tragedy. Now,
poverty is decreasing and democracy increasing in all nations which
have embraced market reforms.
The danger developing countries face comes not from trade but from
the misleading rhetoric of the anti-globalists and the complacency of
western leaders.
J: Ladies and gentlemen finally we come to the end of our debate. I
congratulate all debaters and I hope that the debate will be beneficial
for everybody. I declare this debate officially coconcluded. Once again
thank you and goodbye.
