Free Trade

RebuttalsMost of our regulations are in fact wasteful. Allow me to give you some examples.1. Private Investigator's Insurance - Texas now requires every new computer repair technician to obtain a private investigator's license. In order to get that license, an individual must have either a degree in criminal justice or a three year apprenticeship. If you are a computer repair technician that violates this law or if you are an individual citizen that has a computer repaired by someone not in compliance with the law, you could be fined up to $4,000 or put in prison for a year.2. Business Priviledge License for Bloggers - The city of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to pay a $300 license. The city even went after one poor woman who made just $11 from her blog over the past two years.3. Funeral Director License for Monks - Louisiana says that monks must be fully licensed as funeral directors and actually convert their monasteries into actual funeral homes.You can find these and more on my first link.There is more to it than what my opponent seems to think as he seemed to narrow it down to environmental, financial, and labor regulations.Employers only cut labor if they are in an economic slump and are not making a profit, so that with less workers they can. This is actually based on the decision of consumers if they wish to buy the items at that business or not. If they are not doing well there then they will take their business somewhere else. Its just natural.Prices are adjusted to free trade. Corporations can freely pick their prices. If they could not then that is not free trade. Free trade does help everyone. What happens is that you eventually have two businesses competing against each other. If a business wants to gain the upper hand, then the obvious choice is to bring down prices so more people would buy his/her items. This benefits consumers to as they are getting things at a cheaper price. It benefits workers because they get to keep their jobs and their pay might increase as a reward because the owner would not want his workers to go on strike. "eg, bob makes ten dollars an hour, 120 per day. his boss cuts his job to five dollars an hour, 60 per day. his boss pockets twenty of that savings, and passes on the rest to everyone else. in this case boss got richer, and everyone else saved some,but bob lost out. but then what happens when 'everyone else' also eventually gets knocked down? all their jobs get cut or reduced or not starting out as high, whatever. eventually everyone will be working for nothing while the boss makes beans."Two problems here. The first is that the boss would not single out an invidual and cut his salary if he is doing the same thing as everyone else. That would only happen if he was a bad worker and chances are he would be fired instead of getting his salary cut. The second is that the workers might ban together and strike. This would actually make the business lose money as there would be no more workers. Chances are the businessman would agree to their demands and give them higher pay. Also, why would he cut anyone's salary if he was making a good profit already? That makes no sense. He would want to keep workers to keep making money and probably keep their pay so they don't strike.While I place one source, my opponent still placed none. In fact it seems to have increased exports for us, but I do not have a problem with tariffs because they benefits local businesses. As long as tariffs are 25% or less they can help. Anything over is too high. So I am OK with tariffs as long as they are not high."even if the poor get richer at a faster rate than the rich... that only means there's upward mohility. that means you can go from nothing to something significant realtively quick. but, that doesn't mean much as far as free trade. instead of getting to something more significant, you get to less when you're poor."When you get more money you become more wealthy. People have been becoming rich and that is the bottom line. People are becoming richer so it is benefitting everyone.What if GM wants to make more cars to make more money? Then they would make more factories with more robotic devices operated by more people. So in the end everyone becomes happy.My opponent has said that my source is biased, but he has no proof. "Improvent in Economic Freedom" would be a subtitle. The biggest improvement is the nations in the 1st quintile and the ones with lowerst improvement are in the 5th quintile. On the Y axis are the numbers in terms of growth in GDP.1. http://www.businessinsider.com...#