All apposed to out sourcing must put up or shut up!!!

Before I begin, I ask that the voters understand that the Con side is not necessarily representative of my true opinions. Rather, I play the role of Devil's Advocate and urge voters to make a decision based upon debating skill and argumentation rather than your personal opinion. To begin, I offer this Observation: The PRO side of this debate has stated that we (consumers, etc.) are the MAIN reason for outsourcing. I, representing the CON side of this debate will win as long as I am capable of proving that the consumers ARE NOT THE MAIN REASON for outsourcing. That means as long as I can prove that the allegation made by PRO is untrue, I will have won this debate. In this case, PRO carries the burden of proof, and MUST PROVE that consumers are the MAIN reason for outsourcing. I will first begin by addressing the points my opponents brought up in his speech, then moving on towards my own contentions. 1. The idea of outsourcing is NOT based on America's need for the best and most of everything. How so? There have been several recent re-calls on products made overseas, particularly China. http://www.nytimes.com... http://www.usatoday.com... Mattel recalled over 9 million toys in the United States due to the fact that they were found to have been painted with lead paint. 83 various products sold by Mattel, including several Sesame Street and Dora the Explorer products popular with younger children have been manufactured with lead paint. According to Thomas G. Rawski, an economics professor at the University of Pittsburgh, has stated [regarding China]: "… there are lots of things happening that in an ideal world shouldn't be happening, including things that wouldn't happen in Japan or the U.S." I have no idea how you were brought up, nor do I really care. Regardless, the fact remains that the products outsourced to other countries is simply not of the "best" quality, and certainly far from the safest. Lead paint hasn't seen use in the United States since 1978 for obvious health reasons. Products manufactured overseas, otherwise "outsourced", are a far cry from being of the same standard as products made within the US. Why? Simple, technology has moved at a pace faster than governmental regulation and consumer protection agencies within the countries we outsource to. The inspections standards and manufacturing procedure is radically different in Mexico or some South Asian country compared to the guidelines put in place by the US government. Products made in areas outside of the US do not follow the same rigorous amount of inspection, nor are they produced under proper procedures. Thus, outsourcing in such cases is actually DETRIMENTAL to the interests of the American people, at times endangering the lives of us, our children, and even our pets: http://www.usatoday.com... The most disturbing aspect of this is not the fact that some animals were contaminated. This occurrence literally sent tremors down the pet industry for a simpler, lesser-known fact – FDA regulation regarding pet products and food is notoriously strict, stricter even than the standards in place for human consumption. That is not to say that I am opposed to outsourcing, in fact I support it! However, it is morally reprehensible to continue to out-source our products to outside countries where governmental regulation is far less than adequate. 2. My opponent has stated in his case that we as consumers are the cause for outsourcing. That is not true. The true cause for outsourcing is not the American people, but simple economics. When companies realized that it is possible to out-source labor and manufacture their products in other countries at a cheaper cost, they moved production out of America. Of course we want the best we can have at the best prices! But the problem is, we have no control over what larger companies do. Don't tell me boycotting; such an action is both ineffective, inefficient, and impractical. If we were to boycott every single product that was not made in the US, we would die within the week (assuming we could actually take such a protest out that far). We are not the cause for outsourcing, economics is. Companies want to maximize their operations by outsourcing. Consumers want to maximize their spending power by buying goods at a cheaper price with a reasonable decrease in quality. Foreign governments want to kick-start their economies by attracting US companies with special tax-exemptions, subsidies, and a favorable exchange rate. Under my observation, PRO must PROVE his allegation to be true. However, I and simple economics state that the MAIN CAUSE FOR OUTSOURCING LIES NOT UPON THE CONSUMERS. Rather, cause or "blame" cannot be assigned to any one group or entity/ies. A complex system of a globalized economy and a set of incentives act together to furnish outsourcing, not an individual group of players within a sophisticated game setting. Companies, governments, and the eventual diffusion of wealth feed more directly to outsourcing than consumers. Consumers looking to maximize their limited wealth are no different from Companies looking to maximize their limited resources are no different from Outside Countries looking to maximize their resources; everyone acts in self-interest. Everyone acts in their own interests. Everyone acts in their own interests. Companies, Outside Countries, the US government, the People's Republic of China, my next door neighbor, you, me, she, he, EVERYONE ACTS IN THEIR OWN INTERESTS. EVERYONE CONTRIBUTES TO OUTSOURCING. For the above listed reasons, I STRONGLY urge a Con ballot. Thanks.