Students Debate the Transfer of Big Business to Other Countries
November 18, 2003
During the Mount Union College student debate on Monday, November 17, students had the opportunity to debate on the negative and positive aspects of transferring big business to foreign countries.
Arguing against the transfer of big business to foreign countries were Jennifer Runtas, a senior from Newton Falls; Kelly Hammond, a senior from Elyria; and Joshua Arnette, a senior from Wellsville. Arguing for the transfer of big business to foreign countries were Tim DeStefano, a senior from Carrollton; Steve Young, a senior from Pickerington; Aaron Robinson, a freshman from Buffalo, New York; and Robert Riffle, a senior from Grafton.
Following opening remarks from the moderator, Dr. Martin Horning, professor of economics, the students began arguing their points.
DeStefano began the debate by stating that foreign countries should send their business to the United States using foreign direct investment. He noted that foreign direct investment creates jobs for people in the United States and large amounts of revenue for companies.
Runtas spoke second, pointing out that transferring big business to foreign countries causes people in America to lose their jobs. Transnational companies send their business over to other countries to save money and to exploit workers there with low wages and inhumane conditions.
Young countered Runtas, saying that for companies to save money by outsourcing work is beneficial. He also said that outsourcing work to other countries provides better service for customers and work efficiency.
Hammond offered that sending companies overseas exploits underdeveloped countries. Many people are living in poverty without proper healthcare, nutrition and housing. Corporations offer these workers little money or benefits.
Robinson believed that outsourcing work overseas is a smart move for U.S. companies. It saves jobs in the long run, helps businesses remain competitive and helps reinvest money into the U.S. economy.
Arnette declared that U.S. corporations are only out for profit in other countries. The money saved by outsourcing work is injected back into the U.S. economy, but only to a small part of the population. He said that it was time for Americans to stand up for workers in other countries and show corporations that exploiting them for cheap labor is wrong.
Riffle ended the debate by saying its wrong to generalize that all companies pay their workers low wages. Pay rates often depend on the economy and government policies in different countries. Globalization is positive, he said, because it increases revenue for companies and gives them more money to invest for jobs in the United States.
Runtas took first place for her arguments, Young won second place and DeStefano won third place.
Judges for the debate were Dr. James Dillon, professor of mathematics, Angela Smith Alder, assistant professor of political science, Dr. Ann Ritchey, assistant professor of mathematics, Dr. Clara H. Becerra, assistant professor of Spanish and Robert Garland, director of libraries. Dillon was also chief scorer. Dr. Santosh Saha, associate professor of history, served as debate coordinator.
Dean Richard Marriott offered closing remarks.