Jump to content
Debate is life

Senior Corps

Recommended Posts

States isn't a good argument against a case like that, because you don't capture their actor; the states can't exactly take control of the Senior Corps. You'd have to make the argument that the states have some comparable senior citizen program, which they probably don't.

I'm not necessarily saying against senior corps. I'd just run 1 off timecube.:) I haven't done enough research on senior corps to no what to run (its something I'm prepping this vacation).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest svfrey
Do this. Also states cp with federalism.

 

wait, why are u agreeing with this kid?

you dont even know what agamben and heidegger are talking about or what context they are being cut for K's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest svfrey
I'm not necessarily saying against senior corps. I'd just run 1 off timecube.:) I haven't done enough research on senior corps to no what to run (its something I'm prepping this vacation).

 

ahh, another "andrewism"

'1-off timecube'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Affs will be prepped for everything if they're any good. I think the states cp is a very reasonable option. You have good solvency evidence and its one of those cps' you can take the time to prep out much the same way you would with an aff case. You could always go critical and run Agamben or Foucault or whatever, but states can be pretty strategic as well.

 

Dude... States CP links wayyy harder to Agamben/Fuko than even federal government. At least in a federal government you have the chance of deliberative democracy exposing crappy disco in the system - states are more localized and the ones with higher incomes/political clout will invariably run a program that's set as a national precedent.

 

Also, the States CP is dumb. There are so many perm advocates for it that it's ridiculous, it has a huge major solvency deficit, considering there's no evidence saying that the current surge of Senior Corps volunteers will move to a striclty state initiative, all of the offense on Senior Corps bad will link harder to states (states more lenient in allowing church and racist promotion, etc.), and the reason Senior Corps was created was mostly due to a lack of senior volunteer promotion at the state level.

 

While States CP could be a strategic option, specially with a politics DA to fuel it, it's unlikely that you'll have an easy time with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my personal strategy, whether or not it is good is yet to be seen. I haven't hit Senior Corps yet. However, I do run it. Anyways:

1. 'Senior Citizen' K - This basically is an Adv turn run as a K/NB. It says that the construction of the idea of 'seniors' is ageist, and the only way to actually solve for ageism is to deconstruct this idea. It specifically deals with Senior Corps.

2. Remove all age barriers CP - This says that we should remove ALL age barriers to Senior Corps as a means to deconstruct the idea of 'seniors'. This radical stance against ageism is key to jump start the de-ageist movement.

 

Then we go on to how we solve better. We solve all of the aff, plus we get better qualified ppl. (aka younger ones, we don't actually say this, kind of screws up the ageism arg, but you get the idea). Plus we solve for ageism and they actually make it worse. So..... the best policy option is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its better run as a K, they link and reinforce the ageist mindset with their discourse, they can't perm out of that discourse without severing out of an integral part of the plan and the 1AC. Therefore the alternative (abolish ageist terms to deconstruct the ageist mindset, necessarily allows people off ALL ages into SeniorCorps.

 

How are you going to link turn it. If anything this K is a Floating PIC. The aff takes a step toward liberating seniors, the K takes 2. It also solves all the real world implications of Nursing homes because it accesses a greater number of people (and the better left unsaid fact that young people = better care).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you have to be older than a certain age to join the Senior Corps.

 

But in the world of the critique, we would have to get rid of shit like Medicare, senior citizen discounts, and other shit wouldn't we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because you have to be older than a certain age to join the Senior Corps.

 

But in the world of the critique, we would have to get rid of shit like Medicare, senior citizen discounts, and other shit wouldn't we?

 

But my point remains: Plan can remove all age barriers to join the Senior Companions program in Senior Corps and change its name to remove the reference to age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you talking about a new plan?

 

You could remove the age barriers, but it would kill some solvency and some advantages.

 

&If you did change the name of the Senior Corps, that would make you untopical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
perm solves all residual links

 

Unless the alternative is shit in the first place (which it is).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah there are teams who run the #1

 

but #2 is extra topical, seriously that's dumb

 

 

Why would changing the name be extra-T? As long as it's the exact same organization with only a change of name you'd still have the same "national service program."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would changing the name be extra-T? As long as it's the exact same organization with only a change of name you'd still have the same "national service program."

 

Because it spikes out of the Senior Corps critique.

 

But if your plan did change the name, you wouldn't be increasing in the "Senior Corps," you'd increase in "[insert name here] Corps," making you untopcial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to work on the answer to the perm, but as to the K itself. It is not a language K, it is a specialized Ageism K. It isn't neccessarily saying that using the word 'senior citizen' is bad or ageist, it is saying that the Senior Corp's definition of "your a Senior citizen and can join when your so and so years old" is an ageist attitude, and once you break down that barrier of saying you are a old enough now we can begin to fight ageism. It is a tweeked version of the Miami aff. Look at that for the cards. I don't have it with me now, so I am fuzzy on some of the details, but it is not a pure language K. I do have to work on the perm though, that is very much true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude... States CP links wayyy harder to Agamben/Fuko than even federal government. At least in a federal government you have the chance of deliberative democracy exposing crappy disco in the system - states are more localized and the ones with higher incomes/political clout will invariably run a program that's set as a national precedent.

 

Also, the States CP is dumb. There are so many perm advocates for it that it's ridiculous, it has a huge major solvency deficit, considering there's no evidence saying that the current surge of Senior Corps volunteers will move to a striclty state initiative, all of the offense on Senior Corps bad will link harder to states (states more lenient in allowing church and racist promotion, etc.), and the reason Senior Corps was created was mostly due to a lack of senior volunteer promotion at the state level.

 

While States CP could be a strategic option, specially with a politics DA to fuel it, it's unlikely that you'll have an easy time with it.

I wasn't advocating Foucault/Agamben being run with the states CP, sorry if that was confusing. You could but you'd have to be prepped for negation theory, perf cons, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to work on the answer to the perm, but as to the K itself. It is not a language K, it is a specialized Ageism K. It isn't neccessarily saying that using the word 'senior citizen' is bad or ageist, it is saying that the Senior Corp's definition of "your a Senior citizen and can join when your so and so years old" is an ageist attitude, and once you break down that barrier of saying you are a old enough now we can begin to fight ageism. It is a tweeked version of the Miami aff. Look at that for the cards. I don't have it with me now, so I am fuzzy on some of the details, but it is not a pure language K. I do have to work on the perm though, that is very much true

 

to add, "Ageism can be defined as "any attitude, action, or institutional structure which subordinates a person or group because of age or any assignment of roles in society purely on the basis of age"." Linda Woolf

the age restrictions themselves are ageist so unless plan gets rid of these restrictions entirely, they link to it, which fits in nice with cp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to work on the answer to the perm, but as to the K itself. It is not a language K, it is a specialized Ageism K. It isn't neccessarily saying that using the word 'senior citizen' is bad or ageist, it is saying that the Senior Corp's definition of "your a Senior citizen and can join when your so and so years old" is an ageist attitude, and once you break down that barrier of saying you are a old enough now we can begin to fight ageism. It is a tweeked version of the Miami aff. Look at that for the cards. I don't have it with me now, so I am fuzzy on some of the details, but it is not a pure language K. I do have to work on the perm though, that is very much true

 

My problem with your idea is that all of Senior Corps, even setting aside the age restriction, is like that. The entire point of Senior Corps is to get old people out and active for the sake of them being out and active. Any sponsorship of the Senior Corps is a link to ageism, in theory.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My problem with your idea is that all of Senior Corps, even setting aside the age restriction, is like that. The entire point of Senior Corps is to get old people out and active for the sake of them being out and active. Any sponsorship of the Senior Corps is a link to ageism, in theory.

 

more or less, but at the point when the aff lowers the age restrictions by say 10 years, this just entrenches ageism on a bigger level then they can solve for, by lowering the age restriction they now call 10 years of generations seniors, which is bad, not only that, but saying " you are a senior, you are old, and you need to be active" also links back into ageism, the mindset that "old" people are not active is ageist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what about an aff that removes the age barrier completely

 

no one is running such case in our region, if they do that strat is pretty much wrecked, probably have to run a econ d/a, tix, and case stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yay for 15-year-olds serving in the Senior Corps!

 

Hmm... well, all those Ageism stories are saying youth-elderly interaction is key to breaking down ageist attitudes. To be quite frank, I'd think more highly of a 55 year old if I was working with them than if I was being taught at a desk by one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, in all seriousness. We hit a senior corps case claiming ageism as an advantage. They said that because the geezers (lol) were going to be teaching the little kids, it would solve for ageism. Couldn't you just technically use imperical evidence talking about how a TON of elementary school teachers already are SENIORS and say that if current teachers aren't solving for ageism, why would more help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, in all seriousness. We hit a senior corps case claiming ageism as an advantage. They said that because the geezers (lol) were going to be teaching the little kids, it would solve for ageism. Couldn't you just technically use imperical evidence talking about how a TON of elementary school teachers already are SENIORS and say that if current teachers aren't solving for ageism, why would more help?

 

I'd turn their argument. If I was 10, and 3 old people came into my classroom to 'teach', I'd laugh and think, 'wow, geezers.' The Senior Corps program defines Seniors as some sort of expendable group of people that should have an obligation to serve society because of their knowledge - you make them servants of the state, if anything. You don't break down barriers because they still take that whole 'elder' position when working with kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...