The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Generalized System of Preferences

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/20/2011 Category: Economics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,356 times Debate No: 16059
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Resolved: the United States Federal Government should substantially reform its policy toward trade with China and/or India

Observation one: Definitions, We are going to start our plan by defining key words both in the resolution and key words that relate to our plan.

All definitions are taken from the random house dictionary unless otherwise stated

Should- must, ought

Substantially- of ample or considerable amount, quantity, size, etc.

Reform- to change to a better state, form, etc.

Trade-the act or process of buying, selling, or exchanging commodities, at either wholesale or retail, within a country or between countries

Policy-a definite course of action adopted for the sake of expediency, facility, etc

Towards-in the direction of

Generalized system of preferences-is a preferential tariff system extended by developed countries (also known as preference giving countries or donor countries) to developing countries (also known as preference receiving countries or beneficiary countries). It involves reduced Most Favored Nations Tariffs or duty-free entry of eligible products exported by beneficiary countries to the markets of donor countries., GSP certificates of origin, a guide for exporters

Observation 2: Resolutional Analysis:

Doomsday December 21, 2012? Not likely but we have already suffered from a serious mishap on December 31, 2010 at midnight. This was the day that the generalized system of preferences, or the GSP, expired and Congress did not see fit to continue its lifespan. The GSP greatly helped our economy, foreign relations, and other poor countries that cannot help themselves, such as India. The removal this system has forced poor countries to try to live at the same trade restriction standards as fully developed countries such as China and Japan. Today the Affirmative team will be presenting to you a comparative advantage case. This means that the affirmative team must show that through their plan they will bring about at least 1 significant, inherent, and solvent advantage to make the status quo better and must solve for at least one goal to be solvent.

Observation 3: Goal/Criteria:

1. Goal, or the standards the affirmative team must meet to be solvent: Recognizing India as a key to strategic U.S. interests, the United States has sought to strengthen its relationship with India.

This was stated by the US dept. of State

The criteria to meet this Goal are to reinstate and make permanent the generalized system of preferences.

Observation 4: Plan

Agencies: USFG, Congress, President, US dept. of commerce

Funding: normal means

Mandates: reinstate and make permanent the generalized system of preferences

Enforcement: USFG, Congress, President, US dept. of commerce

Observation 5: Advantages

1. Advantage 1: Increase foreign relations

Link, or how this advantage is related to our plan: Mandate 1

Internal Link, or how the impacts of this advantage will come about: GSP strengthens relations between US and trade partners

GSP increases relationship between countries

The Economic Times, September 8, 2006, quoting John Murphy, vice president of International Affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,

"GSP(general system of preferences) is an important tool facilitating trade, one that benefits companies and consumers, and which strengthens the relationship between the US and our partners," said US Chamber Vice President John Murphy in the letter on behalf of the business associations.

Impacts, or the results of this advantage:

Impact 1: increase influence on how India uses their nuclear technology

From this two results come about

A: increase environment

B: increase national security

C: decreased terrorism

Impact 2: Increase co-operation on international issues and increase influence on India, from this two results come about

A: increase human rights

Preferential trade agreements increase human rights

Foreign affairs, Emilie M. Hafner-Burton Professor of Politics and International Affairs, September/October 2009,

Preferential trade agreements have proliferated in the past two decades. Over time, those negotiated by the United States and the European Union have increasingly incorporated standards that do not relate directly to trade, especially ones involving human rights.

B: decrease pollution, above ev.

2. Advantage 2: Increase economy

Link: Mandate 1

Internal Links:

Internal Link 1: GSP increases trade,

GSP low cost boost foreign economy and encourage trade

William H. Cooper, Specialist in International trade and finance, foreign affairs, Defense and trade division March 30, 2006, report for congress

The program is also supported by observers who think that GSP is an effective, low-cost means of providing economic help to developing countries. They maintain that encouraging

trade by private companies stimulates economic development more effectively than

intergovernmental aid and other means of assistance.

Internal Link 2: Increase trade = increase economy

Trade increases economy

Produced by the Economic Education division, Public Affairs Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

But as they continue to grow and accumulate wealth, they will have both more resources and a greater resolve to keep the environment clean. Because trade increases economic growth, it can eventually give these countries the resources they need to fight pollution.


Impact 1: increase jobs

GSP helps manufacturing base

The Economic Times, September 8, 2006, quoting John Murphy, vice president of International Affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,

"By offering a helping hand to partners in the developing world, GSP allows the US to develop diverse low-cost sources of inputs for our manufacturing base while strengthening protection of US intellectual property," he said.

Impact 2: decrease national debt from increase in jobs

3. Advantage 3: Increase Indian economy

Link: Mandate 1

Internal Link: Increase GSP gives India benefits

GSP helps covered country and US

Cato Institute, Sally James Policy Analyst, Nov. 16, 2010,

The preferential market access given by the United States to most developing countries through the Generalized System of Preferences yields real benefits for the covered countries and for U.S. consumers and firms importing the goods. Americans save hundreds of millions of dollars a year from duty-free imports, and many poor people abroad have benefited from preferential access to a rich market.


Impact 1: Increase Indian jobs

GSP creates foreign jobs

March 2010, The trade partnership,

By eliminating U.S. tariffs on imports from certain developing countries,

the program(GSP) encourages the development of job-creating industries in

countries plagued by poverty and a paucity of good employment


Impact 2: increase Indian quality of life

Mwahahaha i will destroy you with my case! =)



I will primarily be arguing the advantages, but I will address the mandate.
First of all, this mandate is unclear. Sure, the GSP "helps" but if we don't even know WHAT this plan specifically is doing, how can we KNOW that it is dealing with trade (topicality) or HOW it claims it accomplishes it. It's hard to argue against a vague mandate...
The mandate of this plan is to reinstate a GSP that apparently has expired. Why did it expire? Was it because it wasn't considered worth the money it takes to keep it going? This plan is recreating something deemed useless by the Government.

The advantages.
First of all, in order for advantages to be topical (to the resolution/following the resolution), you must only glean them from trade with China and/or India ONLY. You can't claim advs from trade with any other country. ALL of the evidence under the advantages talk about ALL of the effects of GSP, not just those between the US and China. The last advantage claims that we help India but presents NO evidence (credible or otherwise) to say that this plan will specifically help India through trade between US and China/India.
Debate Round No. 1


CapStevie forfeited this round.


Encheat forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


CapStevie forfeited this round.


Encheat forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: FAIL DEBATE, as both sides dropped out... (checking the voting period debates, from Least To Most votes. By giving this one, it won't be prioritized in the system anymore.)