Mitt Romney: Jeep will move all production to China
Debate Rounds (3)
At a campaign stop in Ohio, Governor Mitt Romney told an audience that automotive manufacturer, Jeep, was recently sold to "the Italians," and was "thinking about moving all production to China."
I maintain that this is not a true statement of fact, and wish to debate the subject.
I will adopt the position of "Con," since I want to challenge the premise that Jeep is in any way to move all production to China. I ask that Pro defend Governor Mitt Romney's claim that Jeep is preparing to transfer "all production to China."
Despite having many of us liberals repeatedly decry this as a mistake or a deception, the Romney campaign has not retracted the statement.
I am willing to be fairly relaxed concerning any rules for this debate, and am willing to honor any agreements made in the comments section. My only real request is that we set aside the final round for summaries of our best arguments - as a convenience to readers who may wish to vote on our performances. I feel that such summaries allow readers to more easily digest our arguments quickly, and allows them to understand our emphasis.
Pro may begin arguments at once, in R1, if they so choose; this is a short debate at only three rounds. I don't expect to need more than two rounds for my presentation.
I present this debate in order that I may discuss, in the company of intelligent persons, a statement that I feel was an intentional attempt to deceive the (already gullible) American electorate... or an attempt to hide a mistake.
Resolution: Automotive maufacturers ARE moving their sales to companies in China, proving Romney's statement valid and shouldn't be criticized any further.
So we don't get any untrue statements from my partner and I here is the video: . Alright from what the video says Romney claimed that Jeep is sending their production to China. First of all, this is true, but first I would like to point out that this is not only Jeep that is going to send their production overseas. CEO of GM, claimed at a speech in China that 7/10 of all production is there in China, and is claiming to move more to China.  So how can thins be false when Obama bailed out the auto industry? Doesn't this mean 70% of your tax dollars from the auto bailout is going to China and other places overseas? This is the premise of my argument and I will further debate the subject next round.
Many thanks to my partner for his Opening Presentation.
A recent article appeared in the Bloomberg News that reported on an announcement that Chrysler would soon begin production of Jeeps in China, to answer growing demand in that market. The explosive Chinese demand for the Jeep brand fueled the investments, according to the article, and that transportation difficulties demanded on-site production. Simple enough.
That was until the right-wing blogosphere picked up the story.
If a reader were to have only read the first paragraph of the Bloomberg article, then it would have been possible to have misunderstood the point of the story: That Jeeps were selling so well that new production would be required in order to keep up with the increased demand. No jobs were being moved overseas, no production would be moved overseas, no factories in America would be shuttered - only that new production would need to be created in expanding markets. In other words, new factories would be built in China - but no existing production would be moved from the American markets.
However, right wing radio and blogs exploded in fury, claiming instantly that Jeep production was "moving" to China. From there, it didn't take long for a viral meme to form around the idea that Jeep factories were closing around the nation, shuttered in favor of cheap Chinese labor. Obama's auto bailout was painted as a failure, whose effects did not save the ruin of the American autoworker - who had just lost the privilege to build Jeeps in America.
The Romney campaign pounced on the bad news, triumphantly shouting during a recent rally in Ohio, "I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep — now owned by the Italians — is thinking of moving all production to China." Tragically, this surprise was revealed to workers at a GM powertrain plant.
To say the least, the statement got attention.
The CEO of Chrysler, Sergio Marchionne, was one of the people that was surprised by Romney's announcement. He was completely unaware that his company was moving any American production anywhere. “Jeep production will not be moved from the United States to China,” he said in response. “Jeep assembly lines will remain in operation in the United States and will constitute the backbone of the brand. It is inaccurate to suggest anything different.” 
The fact is, that the Jeep brand is doing so well in the United States that production in America will be expanded by
5,700 new workers by next year - expanded, not moved away.  As regards to American competition with China in the auto industry, there are no Chinese car models being exported to the United States - but there are models (like Jeep) that are being exported from America to China.  In addition to the 5,700 new Jeep assembly line workers that will be added next year, the company expects to invest an estimated $4.2 billion in American investments.
Therefore, my argument as of this round is:
The claim that Jeep was moving production away from he US to China was a mistake, caused by poor reporting on right-wing blogs. The Romney campaign never corrected the mistake, however, after it was used as a talking point in a campaign speech. Since it was subsequently used in political ads, it has now become a lie.
As the CEO of Chrysler, the auto manufacturer that produces Jeep points out, there are no plans to move any American production to China. The new production in China is "new," it is not being taken away from anywhere.
First, I would like to thank my opponent for his rebuttal.
Now I would like to ask why you didn't refute the claim that in the video of GM's CEO who gave a speech in China? This video clearly tells the people that they are in fact sending jobs to China. It's funny the day after this comes out GM is down 14% in their profit.  I believe sincerely without a shadow-of-a-doubt that proves Romney's claim. My opponent doesn't have any citations in the first area of his rebuttal claiming, "The company expects to hire 5,700 new American workers by next year to build Jeeps in America, but I have one question: Why aren't there jobs here now when Americans need them most? The president spent a plethora of money to save the auto industry, but they are using that money in China. My opponent wants to claim that there is a higher demand of Jeep in China, while nerly 7/10 of those jobs are in China (Refer to source 2). I am not denying Romney went a little quick on this one, but if you look deeper into the problem, except superficially it appears Romney's claim is spot on.
My argument for this round is that Romney in fact made a true claim as evidenced by citation 2 in the previous round.
Many thanks to my partner for his last presentation.
I do not want this next statement to appear haughty, and place my conduct points at risk, but I feel that it is necessary that I say it.
Although there are various ways of defining an "argument," and even different forms of arguments, all of them essentially follow the same vein. That is, an argument is a logical chain - a series of statements, called "propositions," one of which is required by the others, called the "conclusion." The classic example of an argument (from my experience) is:
Proposition 1: 1
Proposition 2: +2
Proposition 3/Conclusion: Therefore 3
My argument for this debate is:
P1: Romney Claims that "All Jeep production will be moved to China."
P2: According to the CEO of Chrysler, this is an expansion of new manufacturing into China, not a move away from America
P3: Jeep has announced no plans to move any work away from America into China
P4: Right wing blogs mutated the facts, and Mr. Romney repeated the inaccurate reporting
P4/C: Therefore, Mr. Romney was mistaken
To which I add, that Mr. Romney cannot possibly be unaware that his claims are not true any longer. Since he continues to repeat them, his claims are now "lies," because he is intentionally passing bad information.
In order for this argument that I have built to be challenged, the propositions will have to be demonstrated as not requiring my conclusion, or that enough of them are in error as to discredit that conclusion. Since my propositions are essentially only a simple narrative of verifiable events, disproving any of them will be difficult:
(Advanced debaters will recognize that I am simplifying the process. I ask that criticisms of this be withheld, as I am aware that I am offering only an 'abridged' explanation.)
After a fashion, my partner has offered a number of opinions, which can only be described - they cannot actually be refuted; how can I 'correct' him on his own opinions? He attempts to attack my premise that Jeep is not shuttering American factories to move that work to China - by agreeing with me that Jeep is expanding it's operations in China. He does successfully aim an attack on my statement that Jeep will be adding 5,700 jobs in the US... but this challenge fails because the article was cited, correctly (in source 1 ).
Finally, the statement: "Romney in fact made a true claim as evidenced by citation 2 in the previous round"
Breaks down as follows:
P1: Citation 2 is accurate, therefore
P2: Mr. Romney made an accurate statement when he claimed that all Jeep production will be stopped in the US, and moved to China
However, my citation reported nothing that I am aware of that would do anything to support such a claim. In fact, that article was a story that was intended to debunk Romney's claim, by reporting that the CEO of Chrysler was attempting to rebut Governor Romney's inaccurate claim. Essentially, we are asked to believe that right wing blogs are in a better position to know whether or not Jeep factories will close in the US in favor of China - than the CEO of the company himself. This almost begs the question: "Will the right wing blogs still be correct when Jeep still doesn't move all of it's production to China?"
I am making a verifiable statement of fact. It either is, or is not, true. American workers either are, or are not, making Jeeps in the US, and will (or will not) continue to do so. The company has (or has not) announced plans to close American factories and move all of that work to China. I am claiming that the Jeep factories that are operating in the US are really there...and that Jeep has made no announcements that the company will change this. To support this argument, I will include this link to the Chrysler LLC website, so that it can be examined for any such statement: http://www.chryslergroupllc.com...
I remind readers that it is a legal requirement that investors be made aware of any such action by Chrysler.
Therefore, my argument as of this round is to simply extend my arguments, with all of my citations and references intact.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by emj32 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never engaged any of Con's arguments, and Pro's arguments were weak themselves
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.