Resolved: That the US should implement additional protectionist policies

First of all, I apologize if I exaggerated my opponent's position. I understand that he does not truly believe free trade to be "deadly. " I will refute his other claims pertaining to assumptions and conflation later in this round. My opponent states that I have made an exaggeration about the extent of wage reduction because of trade with China. Excuse me. However, my point still stands, free trade will cause neither income annihilation nor wage reduction. Contrary to my opponent's allegation's, the US can both encourage economic growth and free trade at the same time. As I have already shown, our societal values will not necessarily change simply because China commits unfair practices and we trade with China. My opponent has asserted that there is a difference between a job that is closely associated with trade from China, and a job that depends on trade with China. Beyond this, though, he does not make any real distinctions between the two. Let's look at it this way. If there are two businesses in a small town, and they are said to be closely associated with one another (that is, the success of one is linked to the success of the other and vice versa), the two establishments clearly depend on one another. The same is true of the millions of American jobs that are closely associated to trade with China. They depend on this trade. My opponent next brings up the idea that trade with China has cost the US 2 million jobs. he specifically targets outsourcing techniques, the process of moving American jobs overseas. Though I agree that this may be true, the statistic he references here is a gross statistic, not a net figure. This mean that he is not accounting for the number of jobs that have been created by the economic growth that this trade has encouraged. If we look to a 2005 study by the economic forecasting company Global Insight, we can see that, ""[Outsourcing] lowers costs, frees domestic resources to pursue other productive ends . . . and increases labor productivity . . . These benefits flow through to lower prices, lower interest rates, and higher spending throughout the economy. . . . Increased economic activity creates a wide range of new jobs . . . over time, the U. S. economy operates more efficiently, [produces more], creates more than twice the number of jobs than are displaced, and increases the average real wage" [1]. This same study found that, for example, outsourcing had created more than 257,000 net new American jobs in 2005 alone. Obviously, this movement of jobs only encourages economic growth and in the long term is highly beneficial. Again, excuse me if I misrepresented my opponent's position. My opponent seems to recognize that trade is mutually beneficial, but he then goes on to say that it has been proven not to be. I am somewhat confused by this contradiction. he then cites the Opium Wars and the Slave trade, stating that they are examples of when free trade has failed. However, the Opium Wars occurred because Britain was smuggling opium past Chinese borders, despite Chinese restrictions on drugs. This shows that restrictions and tariffs cause trade conflict. In the example of the Slave Trade, Europeans and Americans forced Africans into slavery. China is doing nothing that serious to America, so this example should be disregarded. Furthermore, trade restrictions could hardly have prevented slavery. My opponent also claims that I simply repeat the assertion that trade is mutually beneficial. I would like to point out that I had several sources to back this up; it is in no way an empty claim. Even if China has committed unfair labor practices, these would not have made that country rich on their own. China needed one more ingredient to become wealthy: trade with the US. Without trade, China would still be poor and underdeveloped, ad have an enormous incentive to continue using unfair policies. Now that free trade has allowed for Chinese growth, China can afford to level the playing field. My opponent next moves away from economic impacts and asserts that free trade, because it has allowed China to grow, will elevate China to the status of a superpower, and allow China to spread oppression. However, as China grows, it will be able to integrate itself into the global capitalist system, and will have a motive to decrease oppression and allow justice to reign. A developed China will be a free China. We are already starting to see this in Chinese trade practices. Free trade is important not only to the US economy, but to the entire world. Tariffs will only hinder economic growth and development. Please vote in negation. [1] . http://www.globalinsight.com....