Resolved: that, on balance, the rise of BRIC has had a positive impact on the US

They started by saying my first contention "USA is still best economically" is irrelevant, however, I would like to start by saying it is more than relevant. The BRIC countries are rising economically and our GDP has actually increased over the years BRIC has been in service (2003-2009). And although they do import the US goods, it doesn't stop the fact that we have leverage over them as well. Not only do they need us for our exports to them, but do they need us for the money we send them, the rise of BRIC was never seen as a way to ruin in US government, if anything it was seen as a way for the world to become more unified economically. My opponent goes on to say that the countries of BRIC hold much of our debt, although that may be true, if it weren't for these countries the USA wouldn't be able to afford the Bail out plan, or the war in Iraq and Iran, the rise of BRIC gave them strong enough economies to give us loans. Although we may be in debt now, I can assure you the long term affect of the bail out plan will give the country many economic benefits. You must not forget that we were part of BRIC's economic rise, The USA funded much of the economies of the BRIC nations, through imports/exports and government relations. Although we do get many goods from these foreign countries, it still saves us millions of dollars because the products and goods in those foreign countries are much cheaper than they would be here. Even so, like I previously stated, India and China do not have a monopoly on cheap labor, we COULD get labor from other countries, but why stop while the BRIC countries are ahead? These foreign jobs in the BRIC countries help many American businesses stay in business because of the economic growth going on in those countries. BRIC countries are reportedly in need of more transportation and our goods because of their economic rise. We, however, do not need more cars much less of anything we are exporting to BRIC nations. The rise of BRIC nations has helped our governmental economy because businesses are flourishing. My opponent mentioned how the countries will pollute more because of their growth, but that fact is false. The only way for these countries to bring down their pollution output is to get alternate sources of fuel, like bio fuel or nuclear energy, however, these countries cannot get these sources of energy with out a good economy, Brazil and USA are currently working together on bio fuels in their country, not to mention India and china are opening several nuclear plants through out their countries. Pollution levels will decrease if BRIC nations and America can cooperate on how to switch our sources of energy to cleaner energy. Now, onto refuting my opponents c-1) My opponent states that "the US loses more and more jobs to foreign competition" this may have been true in the past, but the countries are working hard on their economies, the cost of foreign products will increase putting these businesses at not much of a choice but to pull out of these jobs overseas and give the jobs to American citizens, sometimes it takes a crisis like the recession to start a breakthrough. But do not get this confused with stopping selling cars and other products to these countries, for we do benefit from that. c-2) My opponent stated that "domestic industries, have less of a chance of survival because foreign competition has such lower costs" but like I previously stated, the rise of these countries will most likely increase the workers' wage to keep up with the rise in economy, so in turn, these countries will not be a form of cheap labor and Americans can bring the jobs back to America because of the economic rise of BRIC. I do not see how the lower costs of work their has much to do with the economic RISE. c-3) My opponent goes on to mention that the goods are cheaper over seas and US cannot compete with these imports, this may be true, but like previously stated, the rise of BRIC will do nothing but increase the prices of these goods, making this argument beside the point. c-4) My opponent says GDP will be lowered, however did I not mention that the us GDP has infact increased over the rise of BRIC? My opponent may be saying it will decrease, but you must keep in mind the resolution is HAS HAD a positive impact, not will have, so this argument is irrelevant. c-5) I fail to see the significance of the diversity of the US output of goods, what does this have to do with the resolution that the rise of BRIC has had a positive impact on the US? But also, these companies DO depend on our goods because we are the first to have them, computer technology sales are nothing short of increasing. so again thanks for taking this challenge.