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

Protectionism will be detrimental to the U.S economy.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/9/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 450 times Debate No: 103867
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




I believe that protectionist policies advocated by Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders will ruin the United States economy. The support for protectionism is exorbitant. Free trade benefits the economy of the United States.

Format (To Whom It May Concern):

Round 1.) Acceptance

Round 2.) Arguments

Round 3.) Rebuttals

Round 4.) Conclusion

I wish my opponent good luck!


Please explain how eliminating the trade deficit, which would increase GDP by about $1.8T, is a bad thing?
Debate Round No. 1


First of all, you are implying that tariffs will eliminate the trade deficit. That is wrong, and I will explain that later in Round 3 if you use that argument.

Reason #1: Tariffs will hurt consumers.

Since a tariff is a tax on imports [1], it will hurt consumers by raising the prices of goods they purchase. For example, let's say you want to buy an imported car that costs $10,000. If a 50 percent tariff is placed on all imported cars, then the car you want to buy will now cost $15,000. Due to increased prices, consumer spending will decrease. Since consumer spending is a component of gross domestic product [2], tariffs will hurt the U.S economy by increasing prices.

Reason #2: Tariffs will hurt U.S exporters.

If the U.S government places a tariff, then whom would other governments around the world target in retaliation? They would target U.S exporters by increasing their tariffs on U.S goods. U.S exporters would see their profits decrease as their goods are now more expensive in foreign markets. Exporters would have to offset the losses by increasing prices or cutting jobs.

Reason #3: Tariffs will be exploited by bureaucrats and special interests.

In 2016, lobbying groups spent over $1.6 billion on the federal government [3]. It is very clear what would happen if tariff laws were placed. The largest corporations and exporters would lobby lawmakers to create loopholes that favor them. Meanwhile, smaller companies and exporters would be hurt by tariffs. This increased corruption will hurt the United States economy. If you want to see reduced corruption, then do not support tariffs.






You did not explain to me how eliminating the trade deficit, which increase the output of the American worker by $1.8T would be a bad thing? Let us say we prevented imports of foreign cars, forcing them out of the American market, causing Americans to buy more American-made cars, or forcing them to open factories here, causing more American jobs. Is this a bad thing? If so, why?
Debate Round No. 2


Please provide a source for the $1.8 trillion figure. Thanks in advance.

Moving on, preventing imports of foreign goods is a bad thing. It will not do the things that you've listed. Here's why.

Reason #1: Retaliation

You are implying that countries will be idle when the U.S prevents imports of foreign cars. Other countries would prevent imports of U.S cars from coming into their country. This causes the decline of both foreign markets and the United States market.

Reason #2: Backfiring

You are also implying that the trade deficit will be reduced when we prevent imports or we place tariffs. Of course reducing the trade deficit is beneficial to the U.S economy. However, protectionism will not do that. That is because placing a tariff will increase the demand for a U.S good in the United States relative to other countries. That would mean that the demand for American currency will increase. This would appreciate the value of the dollar. Appreciating the value of the dollar leads to a decrease of exports since foreigners would purchase less of U.S exports that have become more expensive. [4]



Is this fool going to answer my Qs or not?
Debate Round No. 3


1.) You have to resort to insults now, which is quite amusing.

2.) I never said eliminating the trade deficit was a bad thing. Eliminating it is a great thing for the U.S economy. If I did as such, please point out where I said eliminating the trade deficit was harmful.

Thanks for a "wonderful" debate.


I guess the answer is "no", this fool will never answer my Qs. He is mind-numbed robot who is unable to go off script. In other words, he is not educated, but propadandized. How sad.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Nd2400 10 months 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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had sources, as for (con) didn't give any. Plus show poor conduct, by name calling.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 10 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con called Pro a "fool" in the last two rounds. This is poor conduct.