Instigator / Pro

TOURNAMENT R(2) SupaDudz v. Dr.Franklin


All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
Sources points
Spelling and grammar points
Conduct points

With 1 vote and 4 points ahead, the winner is ...

More details
Publication date
Last update date
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Judicial decision
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Characters per argument
Contender / Con
~ 226 / 5,000

On Balance, Economic Globalization Benefits Worldwide Poverty Reduction. (taken from the National Speech and Debate Association)

Round 1
I thank my opponent for taking the debate! I will now present the premises before I move on to the case.

The Burden of Proof is on the CON for this debate in regards to the resolution. My opponent must prove that economic globalization is detrimental to helping the issue regarding poverty in the world in order to have the ballot awarded to them.

DefinitionsPoverty is defined as the state of being extremely poor

Globalization is defined as the process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale.

These are the standards that PRO will set for the debate. My opponent is free to contest these premises to the debate if he so chooses to. I will now be moving on to the PRO case for economic globalization being beneficial to the reduction of poverty.


A. Technology
Many technological advancements are much more accessible and can spread to other places of the world. These technological innovations can spread through leaders and encourage innovation within the respective countries. Businesses will be able to build key technological footprints in the country. Globalization is the key cause to having such technology around the world. Markets have became much more accessible for technology, allowing countries to influence their markets for more competition. Basic capitalist principles suggest that competition is good for consumers in general, because they will lower the prices of their goods. With technology, it becomes more accessible and affordable to these people who may not have the money without the global trade imports.

2A. Tech Good
Technology has been found to boost GDP, eliminates area of waste in healthcare, and increases productivity in the job. Technology becomes a “tool kit” to solving the issue that lie within the core of healthcare itself. Technology also enhances creativity. The ability to share creative products using revolutionary features such as Augmented Reality, Game Design, and art, are all beneficial to society. Technology is beneficial to learning as well. It creates an environment for a student to learn at their own pace, making test scores increase, and giving more funding to public schools. They also keep students engaged and interested in the topics they learn. Technology also helps reduce the poverty levels in country by offering manufacturing jobs, connects the rural poor to education, and secures land registry so that people can claim ownership to land. 

Technological advancements are provided through economic globalization, and technology is key to reducing poverty levels.

B. Trade
Trading goods has been a key part of developing societies over the course of history. Trade between countries boost a country's GDP, making that country a more profitable country with a steady influx of trade. International trade also stimulates economic growth in countries as well, making it much more profitable. Bigger countries with larger products can trade with other country to increase GDP of the country. A study conducted by Europa suggests that these trades lead to a country becoming a more profitable and liveable country. Free flowing trade allows businesses to grow into hubs of job production and also specialization opportunities for people to provide the more. The more jobs people have, the less likely they are to be in poverty. My opponent may contest that trade is harmful, but he would be wrong. Restricted trade causes mass consequences that cut off the natural flow of trade. The cost is an increase in taxes by the taxpayers themselves, driving them into a poverty cycle. If my opponent were to argue that trade now is bad, it is because it is not free enough at the moment. The solution is to allow natural, free flowing trade

C. Globalization Has Helped The Poor
Globalization plays a key role in helping the poor people. When trade reforms occurred in Colombia, the tax on imports went from 50% to 13% and in India, it went from 80% to 30% in the 90s. In fact, the same article says that there is hard to find any cases where a poor country has benefited from trade restrictions. The goal created by Millenium Development Goal was achieved in 2008. That article suggested that, between 1981 and 2001 the percentage of rural people living on less than $1 a day decreased from 79 to 27 percent in China, 63 to 42 percent in India, and 55 to 11 percent in Indonesia. These opportunities created by foreign nation has improved the quality of life for these people. This is direct proof that globalization has helped the poor people that live on this planet. From 1950 to the end of the 20th century, capital income grey 2% per year worldwide. Also, the rates of rural people living off of $2 a day declined 20% in 3 decades  

D. Education
Education has a critical role in fixing poverty in the world, and globalization. The most obvious example of globalization is foreigners coming to developed nations universities. These countries have access to the vast education systems that would have been unobtainable if it weren’t not for globalization. The benefits of education are internal and external. The external benefits mean that campus and school have an increased diversity, a more accepting environment, and different philosophies from around the world influencing the educators that come. These students also provide knowledge from their country, and share in the classroom, meaning classmates expand the knowledge they once have. These students intake knowledge given to them from these universities, take it to their home country, and improve their country from the resources given to them. The globalization of education is allowing stereotypes between race and gender disintegrate, with more understandings of each human being. America is currently the lead in acceptance for all, and these ideas can help spread this message to other countries as well, causing a better quality of life for people affected by societal norms and hatred in their home country. Studies have also been proven that globalization enhances a students ability to obtain knowledge and utilize it in a beneficial manner

Concluding Statements
My opponent may a virtually impossible task in this debate. My statistics have come from the likes of Yale, Colombia, and professors globally that carefully study and analyze this information. These statistics make this a steep slope for my opponents to climb. The effect of globalization has been prevalent in many sectors and is overall more beneficial than detrimental to reducing poverty worldwide.

I am awaiting my opponents rebuttal, and wish him the best of luck in this debate!

So they are a couple ways to tackle this debate but I would argue that Globalization is not beneficial to combat worldwide poverty.

On Balance, Economic Globalization Benefits Worldwide Poverty Reduction. (taken from the National Speech and Debate Association)”


1.Bad Results-Worldwide poverty is at its worst in Africa and the globalizing economies of Africa have not led to any significant development nor poverty reduction. The reductions only come to countries that are already developing and international companies preying on their population.[1]

2.Abuse-There is a sincere connection of Debt and Poverty:

“Analysis of the data suggested that people in poverty in 2000 tended to have debts relative to their incomes 20 to 25 per cent higher than those of the population as a whole.
  • Borrowing by poor people can be justified by the fact that for most households of working age poverty is only temporary. 35 per cent of households in the sample were in poverty in at least one year between 1991 and 2002 but only 2.5 per cent of households were in poverty for ten years or more.
  • An analysis of how much poor households might have borrowed if they had been able to respond to reasonable forecasts of future income and borrow on reasonable terms suggests that, between 1995 and 2000, households whose incomes rose sharply borrowed considerably less than they might.[2]”
Now this is where the connection of debt, poverty, and globalization align. The quick modernization of economies not prepared leads to a debt slaverly of millions of people. Multinationals are bigger than the country's economies itself. They are forced to work for large corporations to make up for their debt. Debt Slaverly is an architect of globalization and does not help to reduce poverty.[3]This is evident in sweatshops in East Asia.

Round 2
My opponent has brought up his points in a very short and effective manner. While my opponent does say some very true points, he either does not use any form of link analysis on any of my claims I make in R1 to fuel his claims, and fails to rebut the points given by me. I will now rebut his arguments

AT Africa
My opponent looks at Africa through their rate of poverty increasing over the last few years. My opponent does not suggest a link at all to globalization in his argument because there is no link. Africa is not pushing their globalization and trade market enough, as their share in global trade has dropped from 4% to 1.5%. If Africa were to expand it’s reach in the global market. However the same article says with more globalization, the growth rates in Africa have increased by 6% due to the investments made. In fact, there are a lot of misconceptions about Africa. Besides countries like Sudan and the Congo, most Africans are living normal lives. The tools are there and there has been help, but right now the resources are not YET there for a takeoff. This does not mean there can not be one, and the potential is there. While they have not benefited as much as other countries, they still have benefited. This means my opponent loses this argument according to the BoP, which my opponent agrees too.

AT Abuse
My opponent fails to specify a direct link in ½ of his argument directly talking about how debt is linked globalization. In fact, debt is proof of a healthy economy. This article suggests if debts are rising, that means the economy is going at pace with what is and the risk for unemployment is role. Debt is healthy to an economy for stable job growth. It becomes the responsibility of the local government to effectively use the tools given by globalization to expand the economy. Also, debt does not have a strong impact as debt risk. Right now, there is no increase in debt risk that is concerning. This means that the debt isn’t directly hurting people because the debt risk is low. My opponent has no impact to this argument at all, and I should get the point solely on that.

AT Diseases
Diseases have spread, but my opponent practically ignores all the other health benefits given by globalization. Globalization has been essential into improving the healthcare industry. Organizations such as WHO work with various countries to try and fight these diseases by working on vaccines and such. Can we also note that we are living in a pandemic. Look at the effects globalization has had. We are now able to find out the results of Covid within 24-48hrs, we have vaccines already being tested, and proper procedure has been put into place. We are fully capable of combating this disease as we are doing so right now.

Extend all the cases from my R1 contentions. My opponent failed to specify his argument structure on his response, and failed to respond to any of my cases. Let’s do some extension. All the benefits I have listed have much more magnitude and can virtually affect all of my opponents' cases in this debate and my link and impact evidence shows. Extend my entire case.

In Conclusion…
  • My opponent does not provide enough link evidence in his debate to even come close to outweighing the arguments made by PRO in this debate
  • My opponent does not specify an impact to any of his case, and my opponent fails to recognize that we are living through an impact, yet we are making strides into slowing down the Coronavirus
  • My opponent makes fault assumptions about Africa in an attempt to spare his argument
  • He shows no reason to why his reasons beat mine, which he never extended in R1

Awaiting R2!

thx Supa

Technology-Technology drives resource depletion and poverty due to technology driven inequality. It increases the chance of people being stuck in the poverty trap.[1]Income inequality is actually linked to rising poverty which is enabled by technology. While it is true that technology can improve some things, it only effects poverty negatively.[2] 

For example, the GDP of America has risen an incredible amount, the poverty rate has remained stagnant.[3]technology also kills manufacturing jobs[4]

technology does have some benefits but does not help poverty

Trade-Mass trading ang globalization has not helped poverty. There has been a lost of jobs and since the US increased trade, the poverty rate has stangated.

this is all I have, im sorry I dont have any time at all

Round 3

My opponent does not defend his entire case he makes at all, therefore he has no attack against my attack at all. Extend all the points I made attacking his case, and the judge should take note

My opponent conceded major parts of my case as well. My opponent concedes that globalization is helping education and boosting education. Proper education coming in from developed countries will increase jobs and will overall build up GDP’s and give more jobs to reduce poverty. Extend.

My opponent concedes the entire case that globalization helps the poor. He does not even contest the statistics. This means even if my opponent rebuts other points, he doesn’t even rebut the main objective. Extend.

AT Trade
My opponent provides absolutely 0 sources citing his claim as well. He has no credibility to this argument since he has no sources. My sources give a link to helping poverty and that link applies to the case. My opponent does not use any form of evidence to justify his claim. The direct link is that trade provides more economic stability within countries to provide resources in general to allow people to make more money from a boosted economy.
AT Tech
I am going to perform a turn on my opponents argument. Technology actually reduces poverty. A study in Tanzania, a poorer country in Africa, showed the effects the country had when technology was being funded. There was a decrease in the levels of poverty. In fact, there are 10 ways that technology reduces the rate of poverty and how the expansion of tech reduces poverty levels. The World Bank even suggests that technological intervention in the field of agriculture has a way of helping 3rd world and developing countries. My opponent also cites poverty stats, but he does not prove how poverty is linked to technology. He shows no link at all and has any evidence that is even close to a link. Since my opponent does not provide a coherent link, his refutal has no impact at all.

I have no idea if my opponent conceded, but I responded to his argument.
  • My opponents conceded his case
  • My opponent conceded ½ of my case
  • My opponent has no link to disprove the claim in all the rebuttals

CON has virtually no way of winning this debate. Vote PRO!

I concede

thx for the debate torunament opportunity
Round 4
Extend arguments. Thanks to my opponent for the debate. Vote PRO!
vote for supa