Against Resolution B
Because NAFTA is a detriment to the U.S. economy and the North American environment, the U.S. should withdraw from the NAFTA.
This argument is false because NAFTA has not been a detriment to the US economy and it has not hurt the North American environment. Abandoning NAFTA now would be much, much worse for the US economy and the environment. Even though NAFTA may not be perfect, the US has already agreed and committed to it; it would be irresponsible, brash, and unfair for the US to withdraw from NAFTA now.
Group 1 opened the debate by claiming that figures which claimed to show an increase in American exports since NAFTA are misleading, saying "wrong numbers lead to wrong conclusions." However, the United States Census Bureau has conducted studies proving that these published export figures are between three and ten percent low .
On rebuttal, Group 1 opened their rebuttal by pointing out that even though American exports have increased under NAFTA, imports have increased more. They also pointed out that many of the exports consist of parts that are to be constructed in Mexico, meaning a loss in the supply chain for the US. Group 2 opened their rebuttal by returning to the claim that NAFTA has not done what was promised, and this time the backed it with statistics; "Three years into NAFTA, 60 of 67 companies pick for a survey concluded that the promised made by NAFTA advocates have been broken; the promises did not even come close to being fulfilled."
We can all agree that expanded trade raises the income and growth of an economy. Therefore since it is undeniable that NAFTA has expanded US trade, it is also undeniable that NAFTA has been good for the US economy.
American non-NAFTA trade has increased 67% from 1993-2002, and in that same time period NAFTA trade has increased 105%. In terms of dollars, total trade among NAFTA partners more than doubled from $302 billion in 1993 to $652...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document