Its DebatableOr Is It?

Affirmative Case by Ciera Horton

Intro:
Milton Friedman, an American economist, writer, professor and winner of the 1976 Nobel Prize
in Economics, famously stated about the balance between freedom and equity: A society that
puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get
a high degree of both.
Because I agree that valuing freedom leads to both freedom and equity, while valuing equity
really gets us nowhere, I stand resolved: In the realm of economics, freedom ought to be valued
above equity.
Definitions:
Equity: The quality of being fair and impartial. (New Oxford American Dictionary)

Freedom: The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or
restraint. (New Oxford American Dictionary)

Economics: The branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and
transfer of wealth. (New Oxford American Dictionary)

Resolutional Analysis:
Heres the truth, Judge. The resolution is a paradox. Its asking a statement that is itself an
anomaly. When we value economic freedom, we achieve both freedom and great equality
(equity) in a given economy. However, when we first focus on equity apart from economic
freedom, then we get neither. In other words, when we support the Affirmative, we get both the
Affirmative and Negative sides of the resolution. But when we support the Negative, we actually
dont get equity or freedom. Ill explain this paradox throughout the course of my case.
Value and Criterion:
My value in todays debate round is economic growth, with a criterion of economic freedom.
Economic growth is defined as, an increase in productive capacity but also as an improvement
in the quality of life to the people of that economy. (Investopedia) When we support freedom
and personal liberty as the foundation for a healthy economy, we statistically see that societies
are far more stable and, in fact, equitable. Freedom, according to economist Frederich Hayek, is
necessary as the cornerstone on which to build an economy. When we value freedom, we get
economic growth and with this growth, we see less inequalities and greater equity.

(Outline to help you: Economic freedom >>> Economic Growth >>> Equity, Stability, Security,
Less income inequalities, more fair taxation etc.)
Contention 1: Economic Freedom Leads to a More Healthy Economy
Philosophers and economists have debated for years about what is necessary to create a stable
economy. Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, asserted that individual freedom ought to be
valued because it recognizes our rights as humans and leads to a better economic environment.
For most of the past thousand years, Asia has been made up of predatory states that limited and
suppressed economic freedom and enterprise. However, according to the CATO Institute , this
has recently changed in what we are now calling the Asian century. Asia has shown shifts into
expanding economic freedom, valuing what Adam Smith called natural liberty, an individuals
ability to have choice in his economic activity. Between 2007 and 2012, China grew 56%
economically, India 43% and smaller developing countries 50%. This has largely been spurred
on by globalization, technological innovation and also the liberalization of domestic and foreign
trade. CATO is calling this change as continental awakening that is transforming the world.
Their conclusion to these miracle economies, as they have been deemed, is that the key for
governments to provide economic stability [is] to expand economic freedom. This is a prime
example of how upholding economic freedom creates a more stable, healthy economy. When we
incentivize individuals to exercise their liberty in a competitive market, we see a great difference
in both micro and macroeconomics. (http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa725revised.pdf)
Contention 2: A Healthy Economy Supports Equity
The truth is, judge, that a healthy economy is a more equitable economy. Economic growth does
not lead to more inequality. Instead, the stronger the economy, the more equality there is. In the
1980s, an economist named Scully conducted a study on the relationship between freedom and
equity. In his study, he analyzed 70 countries and concluded that income is more equally
distributed within countries that are politically open, that have private property and market
allocation of resources and that are committed to the rule of law than in countries were rights are
abridgesocieties that value freedom have higher shares of national income. (Scully 1992)
This means that when an economy is founded on principles of free rights and liberties, there is
actually greater equity because there is less income inequality, more equalized opportunities for
the poor, and there is statistically less of a wealth gap between the poor and rich. He found that
income inequality is more than 50% higher when rights are restricted. Lack of freedom and
competition negatively affect income distribution. His work continues to be the most
academically thorough investigation of the issues related to the topic of the necessity for
economic liberty and supports the truth that a healthy economy, founded on freedom, actually
gives us greater equity.

Contention 3: Economic Freedom Supports Equity

According to Economic Freedom, Prosperity, and Equality: A Survey in the CATO Institute
journal, Relatively few scholars doubt that economic freedom is a necessary condition for
prosperity; the myth that economic growth endangers economic equality also is giving way to
hard evidence to the contraryOnce we make enhanced economic liberty a central goal of
foreign policy, the benefits of prosperity and equality will be enjoyed more widely than at any
time in history. (http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/1997/11/
cj17n2-1.pdf) This is saying that upholding economic freedom as a central goal gives us many
benefits that include greater equity, stability and income equality. You see, the resolution is
rather paradoxical. When you support the Affirmative, you get both freedom and equity. When
you support the Negative, you really get nothing. For, as Milton Friedman asserted, A society
that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality
will get a high degree of both.

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!

Fun and Fancy Free Affirmative Red Book Case by Ciera Horton
Writer and political activist Ayn Rand once said, Political freedom cannot exist without
economic freedom; a free mind and a free market are corollaries.1 Because I agree that
economic freedom must be the basis for a strong political system, I stand Resolved: In the realm
of economics, freedom ought to be valued above equity.
Definitions:
Freedom: the power or right to act, speak or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.2

According to one report from the Financial Services Modernization Act, economic freedom is:
personal choice, protection of private property, and freedom of exchange.3

!
Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial.
!

Resolutional Analysis:

This resolution comes down to a question of the role of the government versus the power of the
people. Should the people have more freedom when it comes to their resources and economic
situations? Or, should the government have the power to step into economics to ensure equality?
This is ultimately a debate regarding a free market economic system.

!
Value: Private Property Rights
!

In the realm of economics, freedom can be vague and encompass many different facets. In
todays round, the Affirmative side is going to focus on the single most important reason why
economic freedom ought to be valued above equity. Freedom includes a protection of private
property rights. In economics, this takes on two main forms: First, people have the right to
control their own property and secondly, they have the control to transfer their property by
voluntary means.

!
Criterion: Capitalism
!

Philosopher and economist Adam Smith first advanced his belief in capitalism in his
monumental work, The Wealth Of Nations.4 Capitalism is a system of economics where industry
and trade are controlled by private owners in a competitive market. There are many different
kinds of capitalism, but for todays debate round, we are going to use laissez-faire capitalism,

which means that the government has its hands off of the consumer market and that only allows
restrictions that are there to protect property rights.

Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises argued that, The idea that political freedom can be
preserved in the absence of economic freedom, and vice versa, is an illusion. Political freedom is
the corollary of economic freedom. It is no accident that the age of capitalism became also the
age of government by the people. 5

!
Contention One: Freedom Leads to Increased Property Rights
!

Economist Fredrich Hayek argued that freedom needed to be the foundation of a stable economic
system. According to Hayek, when the state tries to equalize people, thats really unequal
treatment of individuals and leads to a redistribution of income.6 This does not value property
rights. Instead, the focus should be on freedom, that people have autonomy and the ability to
exercise the use of their own materials and property.

Political theorist Milton Friedman asserted that property rights were the most basic human
rights and an essential foundation for other human rights. 7 When freedom is valued, property
rights are protected because people have the liberty to decide how to use their property and
money, how to earn it, spend it, give it awayso long as it does not involve force, fraud or theft.
A country that is founded on economic freedom also encourages investments and a free market
system that will perpetuate the economy.

!
Contention Two: Property Rights Support Economic Growth
!

Ronald Reagan once summed up his view of economics by saying, The best social program is a
job.8

He was correct. Capitalism has done more to reduce poverty than any government initiative in
the modern world. This is because a free market economy encourages consumer competition by
protecting private property rights, which in turn leads to job growth. More jobs means more
money being poured back into the economy, which in turn leads to economic growth because of
a governmental focus on supporting freedom above equity. Evidence has shown that countries
with freer property rights have economic growth rates about twice as high as those countries
without free private property rights and that a free market system is essential for strong
democracy.9

The Index of Economic Freedom has demonstrably shown for over twenty years how countries
with more emphasis on economic freedom have more growth and outperform the rest of the
world. The nations with more freedom have higher incomes, better health care, education,
environment production and less poverty.

In fact, countries like Chile and South Korea, that not long ago were in deep poverty, are now
economic powers because they valued economic freedom.10

!
Contention Three: Freedom Supports Equality
!

Not only does economic freedom lead to increased property rights through capitalism, and
thereby economic growth, but freedom also leads to a better protection for equality. This is
because freedom and equity are not independent. An economy must be founded on freedom and
individual liberty that supports property rights, but chances for equality can stem from such a
system.

The Research Institute of Industrial Economics: Rather, the results point in a clear direction:
that economic freedom - as a dynamic concept - appears to go together not only with general
wealth and growth, but also with equality.11
How can this be? This is because in a more stable, strong economy, there are less economic
inequalities. We have already seen how freedom leads to greater property rights and economic
growth. When an economy is thriving, there are more job opportunities and chances for
someone to better their condition. However, this change in equality is because of someones
work and not from giving the government more power. It is from an emphasis on freedom,
individual property rights and a capitalist market.
Conclusion:
Economic freedom, as shown through the concrete example of laissez-faire capitalism, leads to a
protection of private property rights. When we value property rights and individual liberty, we
see greater economic growth. Having a more stable economy founded on freedom actually can
also lead to more equality. Therefore, we should support capitalism, limited government and a
free market system by valuing freedom above equity.

!
!
!
!
!

An Equal Slice Negative Case by Ciera Horton

The International Monetary Fund organization launched a fiscal study intended to show the
effects of globalization on economic equity. Their question was, Should equity be a goal of
economic policy? Should governments overcome obstacles of financial barriers in order to
provide equal opportunities and reduce poverty? Their answer was yes. They noted in the
conclusion of their 98 report, Governments should sometimes intervene to ensure not only that
the size of the pie increases, but that everyone gets a fair share. 1

Because I agree that one of the goals of economic policy should be to provide fair opportunities
and reduce inequalities, I stand resolved: In the realm of economics, freedom ought not to be
valued above equity.

!
Definitions:
!
Equity: The quality of being fair and impartial. (New Oxford American Dictionary)
!

Freedom: The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or
restraint. (New Oxford American Dictionary)

Economics: The branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and
transfer of wealth. (New Oxford American Dictionary)

!
Value: Social Justice
!

Equity comes from the philosophical principle of social justice, also known as distributive
justice. Social justice refers to ensuring that individuals have the ability to realize and reach their
potential in society. It includes forms of human development with relevant policies and
institutions that commonly include education, healthcare, labor rights, progressive taxation and
social security. When we value equity above unchecked freedom in the realm of economics, we
better achieve social justice.

!
Criterion: Egalitarianism
!

Egalitarianism relates to the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and
opportunities. (New Oxford American Dictionary) It maintains that we are all fundamentally
equal in worth and social status. And because we are equal, we deserve similar economic
opportunities. Egalitarianism is the underlying philosophical principle behind why we should
value equity. It is based on the moral essential that all people are created equal and, therefore,
should be protected from discrimination and should be granted similar opportunities to better
their economic situations.

Contention One: Equity Leads to Social Justice

As a principle, equity is both intrinsically and extrinsically valuable. Its intrinsic because equity
and fairness is important in and of itself. Its extrinsic because, by valuing equity through
egalitarianism, we achieve social justice, institutions and protections in the government that take
care of citizens impartially. Kate Bird, a researcher with the Overseas Development Institute,
argues that social justice is important because People share a common human dignity, and as
such should be treated as equals, with equal concern and respect. This matters for policy because
citizens can hold the state responsible for ensuring that all citizens are treated as equals and for
influencing how things are distributed.4 By valuing equity, we are affirming to take care of
those without a voice, those who are hindered by widening gaps in between the wages of
workers and bosses in industrial countries. Egalitarianism, as a philosophy that values human
dignity, provides equality of opportunity through progressive taxation (vertical equity), free
health care and reduced income inequality.

!
Contention Two: Social Justice Creates A Healthier Economy
!

Income inequality varies greatly from place to place. Unfortunately, wage inequality has been
increasing in many countries and where there is greater inequity there is a greater poverty. The
results from policies that promote equity above freedom are astounding. Studies have shown
that there are fewer cases of life-crippling poverty, less discrimination based on gender, race or
ethnicity and more fair treatment in the labor market. Policies that support equity also reduce
political conflict, since there is statistically less conflict when income distribution is seen to be
equitable.

The study from International Monetary Fund7 quoted at the beginning of this case, went on to
show the different ways that policymaking in favor of economic equity can influence the
economy: Policies that promote equity can help, directly and indirectly, to reduce poverty
fewer individuals fall below the poverty line. Equity-enhancing policies, particularly such
investment in human capital as education, can, in the long run, boost economic growth, which, in
turn, has been shown to alleviate poverty.

Because equity values human dignity through its underlying philosophical foundation of
egalitarianism, the Negative side supports the value of social justice. By valuing equity and
social justice, we are able to work towards a stable economy that seeks to be fair, impartial and
provide equal opportunities for everyone, regardless of their social situation. We should increase
the size of the pie and make sure everyone gets an equal slice.

!
!
!
!

Equality Is Like Gravity - Negative Case by Ciera Horton!

Intro:
American writer Joss Whedon audaciously declared at a campaign meeting for Equality Now in
2006, Equality is not a conceptIts a necessity. Equality is like gravity. We need it to stand on
this earth as men and womenWe need equality.
Because I agree that equality is not a concept, its a necessity, I stand resolved: In the realm of
economics, freedom ought not to be valued above equity.
Definitions:
Equity: The quality of being fair and impartial (New Oxford American Dictionary)
Freedom: The power or right to act, speak or think as one wants (New Oxford American
Dictionary)
Economics The branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer
of wealth. (New Oxford American Dictionary)
Value: Fairness
Fairness is defined as the state of being free from bias, dishonesty or injustice. (Random
House)
What is the goal of economics?
The purpose and goal of an economic system is to provide fairness and justice in regards to the
production and consumption of goods and services. Fairness is the utmost value because it
recognizes the essence of human dignity, that all men are created equal. Because of this
essential equality, our nation was founded on ethical principles of social justice and fairness that
should be upheld in economics. Well see throughout the case the different ways in which a
system based on economic equity upholds fairness as the highest value.
Criterion: Equal Opportunities
The Negative criterion in todays debate round is equal opportunities. This is the meaning that
underscores equity in the realm of economics. Supporting equity means that we are providing
equal rights and opportunities for everyone, regardless of gender, ethnicity, education and
income. Examples of economic equity are broad and range over many different facets of
economics. Today we will see how focusing on equity supports a fair system of equality that
protects from discrimination and injustice.

Contention One: Equal Opportunities Leads To A Fair System

Equity is a condition where resources, assets and taxes are distributed in a way that is balanced
and fair. This allows consumers to participate in the market economy without experiencing
unnecessary financial difficulties. There are generally enough resources to go around and so the
tax liability upon both businesses and individuals is not burdensome for any and the
production and consumption can be managed without financial strain. Governments can
therefore implement financial strategies that can support the movement of the economy and
provide for the less fortunate. This is not a situation of manipulation according to the old Robin
Hood saying, steal from the rich to give to the poor. Economic equity does not mean there is
equal economic status where everyone makes the same amount of money in a socialist society.
Instead, it is an economic system that protects the lower-income citizens by providing welfare
and apportioning taxes that provides for those who are usually neglected. Its about equal
opportunities. The goal in the end is for people to build upon the fair appropriation of goods and
services, which is made possible by the fact that the rules are the same for all, despite their
current economic situation. When an economy is grounded upon principles of equity and equal
opportunities, we see more fairness in the system. (wisegeek.com/what-is-economic-equity.htm)
Contention Two: Fairness Fulfills The Goal of Economics
A study by the Overseas Development Institute has comprised a list of three economic issues that
should be at the core of any financial system. As we will see, valuing equity and fairness
achieves these complex goals. (Harry Jones 2009. Equity in Development: Why It Is Important
And How To Achieve It. London: Overseas Development Institute.)
1.

Equal life chances: Valuing economic equity and fairness also provides for equal life
chances. One way we see this is through utilitarian welfare functions that provide for
those who need provision. This allows us to allocate goods and services to participants in
the economy and helps provide for equal life chances, such as an education and getting a
job.

2.

Equal concern for peoples needs: Goods deemed as necessities should be distributed to
those who are unable to access them. Recently, the Rockefeller Foundation has found
gross inequities across the United States in the agricultural industry, leading to decreased
incomes, low food sources and high taxes for field workers. This inequality has led to
greater poverty and poorer living conditions for thousands across the country. Instead,
we should be valuing equal concern for peoples needs regardless of their circumstances.
(www.rockefellerfoundation.org)

3.

Meritocracy: Positions and rewards in society should be based on fair competition, effort
and ability. The United States is the very embodiment of meritocracy. We are a country
where people are judged on abilities and not family conditions. We encourage social
mobility, equal opportunities and discourage income inequalities.

We should value equal life chances regardless of identity or social situation. Everyone is created
equal and deserves equal opportunities. Equality is like gravitywe need it in order to survive.
Therefore, we should value economic equity, which is both fair and just for all.