The topic is: “Shock therapy reforms do not result in better economic and social outcomes compared to gradual reforms”
Instructions:
-explain the nature of the issue
-cover the two or three most important arguments in favor of the position you are taking
(therefore you need to go beyond the points that you personally made in the oral debate)
-explain the most important objections to the position you are supporting, and respond to
these objections, using evidence and sources.
You must cite literature to support your points. You should cite at least two ACADEMIC sources.
Each position paper will be evaluated individually based on the clarity of your writing, coverage
of important points, the strength of your arguments and evidence, and the extent to which you
took account of opposing viewpoints.
Arguments in the presentation:
Shock therapy does a disservice to the poor and favours the rich enacted through rapidly changing policy. After the mass privatization of state assets, much of the Polish population fell into poverty, and the economic policies passed in Russia like the abolition of price regulation, aided in hyperinflation and increased unemployement rate. The far superior gradualist approach can be seen in China where theres strength in macroeconomic stability, and promotes economic recovery in the long run. Shock therapy only helps to destroy the old mechanism, but not to create a new one. The economy cannot be stable and sustainable for further development.
