The U.S. will never abandon free trade--institutions and self-interest check
Ikenson 2009 – director of Cato's Center for Trade Policy Studies (Daniel, Center for Trade Policy Studies, Free Trade Bulletin 37, “A protectionism fling”, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10651, WEA)
A Growing Constituency for Freer Trade The WTO/GATT system was created in the first place to deter a protectionist pandemic triggered by global economic contraction. It was created to deal with the very situation that is at hand. But in today's integrated global economy, those rules are not the only incentives to keep trade barriers in check. With the advent and proliferation of transnational supply chains, cross-border direct investment, multinational joint ventures, and equity tie-ups, the "Us versus Them" characterization of world commerce no longer applies. Most WTO members are happy to lower tariffs because imports provide consumers with lower prices and greater variety, which incentivizes local business to improve quality and productivity, which is crucial to increasing living standards. Moreover, many local economies now rely upon access to imported raw materials, components, and capital equipment for their own value-added activities. To improve chances to attract investment and talent in a world where capital (physical, financial, and human) is increasingly mobile, countries must maintain policies that create a stable business climate with limited administrative, logistical, and physical obstacles. The experience of India is instructive. Prior to reforms beginning in the 1990s, India's economy was virtually closed. The average tariff rate on intermediate goods in 1985 was nearly 150 percent. By 1997 the rate had been reduced to 30 percent. As trade barriers were reduced, imports of intermediate goods more than doubled. The tariff reductions caused prices to fall and Indian industry suddenly had access to components and materials it could not import previously. That access enabled Indian manufacturers to cut costs and use the savings to invest in new product lines, which was a process that played a crucial role in the overall growth of the Indian economy.16 India's approach has been common in the developing world, where most comprehensive trade reforms during the past quarter century have been undertaken unilaterally, without any external pressure, because governments recognized that structural reforms were in their country's interest. According to the World Bank, between 1983 and 2003, developing countries reduced their weighted average tariffs by almost 21 percentage points (from 29.9 percent to 9.3 percent) and unilateral reforms accounted for 66 percent of those cuts.17 The Indispensible Nation The United States accounts for the highest percentage of world trade and has the world's largest economy. The WTO/GATT system is a U.S.-inspired and U.S.-shaped institution. Recession in the United States has triggered a cascade of economic contractions around the world, particularly in export-dependent economies. Needless to say, U.S. trade policy is closely and nervously observed in other countries. But despite the occasional anti-trade rhetoric of the Democratic Congress and the protectionist-sounding campaign pledges of President Obama, the United States is unlikely to alter its strong commitment to the global trading system. There is simply too much at stake. Like businesses in other countries, U.S. businesses have become increasingly reliant on transnational supply chains. Over 55 percent of U.S. import value in 2007 was of intermediate goods, which indicates that U.S. producers depend highly on imported materials, components, and capital equipment. And there is also the fact that 95 percent of the world's population lives outside of the United States, so an open trade policy is an example to uphold.
AT: Quebec Secession
1. Quebec can’t secede without consent from the Canadian government – either the secession will be peaceful, which means no impact, or it won’t be able to
India Express 1998: Without Govt nod, Quebec can't secede: Canada SC. http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/19980822/23450044.html
TORONTO, AUG 21: In a historic verdict, Canada's Supreme Court yesterday ruled that the French-speaking province of Quebec had no right to secede without the Federal government's consent.
``Quebec does not have the right to separate either under the Canadian constitution, or under international law,'' a nine-judge Bench of the court held in a unanimous verdict.
2. No secession, the people of Quebec don’t want it – would have done it already but they like it as it is
Jeff Heinrich (a prize-winning reporter with the Montreal Gazette) February 19, 2008: No secession lesson for Quebec: ex-refugees 5,297 chose Canada. http://www.danielturp.org/media/2008/fevrier/Heinrich-No-secession-lesson-for-Quebec_TheGazette_2008-02-19.pdf?PHPSESSID=e83a215ec5e279b910add29791523011
"Quebec already had two chances to declare independence, and it didn't do it," Berisha said, referring to the failed referendums on sovereignty in 1980 and 1995.
"Quebecers like to make love, but they don't want a baby to be born - that's how it is with the politics here. Why? Because people have it too good. It's paradise here, so why change it?"
AT: Racism
1. Plan doesn’t address the root cause of racism
BB Robinson, Phd “Responding to Root Causes – Not Symptoms: White Supremacy as the Root Cause of Racism” 8/20/06 http://www.blackeconomics.org/BE&Future/RootCauses.pdf
Getting down to brass tacks, most Americans will tell you that racism persists, and that racism contributes to the adverse outcomes that Black Americans experience. Moreover, if they are true to themselves, most Americans will identify the root cause of racism as “white Supremacy.” That is, racism exists because of the unfounded notion that Whites are superior to Blacks. Given that most Americans conclude that White Supremacy is the root cause of the problems that Black Americans face, why are so many efforts [are] initiated to solve Black American problems without addressing this root cause?
2. Plan doesn’t spillover to other countries – racism will still persist worldwide
3. U.S. foreign policy is a form of institutionalized racism
Anup Shah December 20, 2004 “Racism” http://www.globalissues.org/article/165/racism#RacisminEurope
In the US, racism is a well known issue. From racial profiling to other issues such as affirmative action, police brutality against minorities and the history of slavery and the rising resentment against immigrants.
Since the horrific terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, Security concerns have understandably increased, but so too has racial profiling, discrimination etc. In the early aftermath of the attacks some Americans that were understandably outraged and horrified, even attacked some members of the Sikh community where at least one was even killed, because they resembled certain types of Muslims, with beards and turbans. Various people of Middle East or South Asian origin have faced controversial detentions or questionings by officials at American airports. This web site’s section on the war against terror has more details on these aspects.
4. Racism declining in status quo – election of Obama and nomination of Sotomayor prove legislative racism is on the decline
5. Racism will always exist under a capitalist system
Saswat Pattanayak is an online journalist Thursday March 2007 http://saswat.com/blog/crash_course_kenneth_eng.html
What needs to be done at this juncture is not for black commentators attacking Asian press or South Asian commentators condemning Kenneth Eng. For all we know, Eng could well become a celebrity in a few months. The root cause of racism is not one bigoted mind. Its capitalism that we largely let go unchecked for in its practice. We must address the manner in which private capital creation safeguards specific group interests rather than working for the betterment of the world. The racial tensions in the US are economic in nature. There is no place for moral preachings here. No place for Crash finale! Lets admit and accept that as long as we refrain from critiquing the capitalist causes (private monopolies) we will have to accept racism as part and parcel of the deal. Till now, people other than white are being called in their suffixes. American history is differently noted than African-American history! How will we expect Engs of the world to even feel grateful for immense sufferings of generations of black people that must be acknowledged at every mention of America even as an idea? How will we expect white people to understand that Columbus was not after all some hero and that this land was indeed “made for you and me”, and not just for the English speaking elites. Such expectations will bear fruit only if people are treated equally irrespective of race in this country and elsewhere. However that would mean perhaps to quote Paul Robeson, “adopting the nature and politics of Soviet Union where people are treated as people, not as black or white”. Even adopting one-tenth of former Soviet policies would entail the reversal of centuries-old capital accumulation policies that are in place in a flourishing capitalism. As long as a society is built on bedrock of money as the only thing that matters--to buy health insurance to higher education--people will always be treated as secondary subjects. And where people need to be treated as secondary subjects, to refrain those very people from fomenting a revolution against their secondary status, it becomes imperative for the capital masters to wage a divide and rule policy that keeps people ignorant about their collective struggles in everyday lives. While at it, the economic system goes unchecked in its biases against working class by deliberately playing one group against another when it comes to economic parity, share holding and accountability. No wonder, thousands of discrimination cases at the workplace are filed every week based on racial disparities.
Share with your friends: |