Snarf 3598 Report post Posted January 2, 2009 A lot of the biofuel/methane affirmatives I've read are predicated on an oil advantage, saying that removing the US from oil dependency helps the economy, etc. My questions are 1 - Won't we feel the economic shockwaves when EVERYONE ELSE dependant on oil implodes after peak oil? 2 - Wouldn't removing the dependency harm countries (Venezuela, Russia) who use the US as a primary importer of oil? This isn't something a la Oil Prices - the price doesn't matter for this. Its saying that removing the US as a market is harmful, because it would destroy the Russian/Venezuelan economy. Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Audit 39 Report post Posted January 2, 2009 Yeah... read the oil DA. It purposefully turns these advantages. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NANANANA 66 Report post Posted January 4, 2009 A lot of the biofuel/methane affirmatives I've read are predicated on an oil advantage, saying that removing the US from oil dependency helps the economy, etc. My questions are 1 - Won't we feel the economic shockwaves when EVERYONE ELSE dependant on oil implodes after peak oil? 2 - Wouldn't removing the dependency harm countries (Venezuela, Russia) who use the US as a primary importer of oil? This isn't something a la Oil Prices - the price doesn't matter for this. Its saying that removing the US as a market is harmful, because it would destroy the Russian/Venezuelan economy. Thanks 1- That's why good teams make international modeling arguments. And if they don't, then they'll claim that the US is the linchpin of the global economy and it would take the hit more if the US didn't transition. 2- We hardly import any oil from Russia, nor Venezuela. It makes more sense to run a disad to someone the US is a substantial partner with, like Mexico or Canada. like the following A. Mexican economy high - US oil dependence B. Plan tanks dependence C. Mex econ key to solve immigration D. Immigration causes terror E. Alexander Or something like that like A. Dependence k2 heg - keeps us in Middle East B. Khalilzhad If you need these cards, pm me 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snarf 3598 Report post Posted January 5, 2009 I'd feel better if I knew what Lane said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bizharro 9 Report post Posted February 22, 2009 Is it possible that a Solar Aff would have oil dependence as an advantage, saying that by switching to solar power, we solve oil dependence? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Panther_debater 77 Report post Posted February 22, 2009 Is it possible that a Solar Aff would have oil dependence as an advantage, saying that by switching to solar power, we solve oil dependence? Yes, you can probably run an oil dependence advantage with just about any Alternative energy, just as long as you are able to win that the plan causes enough alt. energy to trade-off with oil. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathan_debate 745 Report post Posted March 4, 2009 Layne's theory of offshore balancing is covered here: http://www.twq.com/02spring/layne.pdf You can also read his book on Google books (don't know how much is included) Interesting note: Layne's theory is based on foreign policy since woodrow wilson, which suggests it might just be better than assertions to the contrary by Khalilzhad (et al) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites