Jump to content
cleelau

Privatization/Prizes Cp Perm

Recommended Posts

Will privatization cp's / prizes cp's like "The USFG should offer a prize of $100million to the first private organization to ______(Plan text)______" be really vulnerable to perms. Technically they are not competitive b/c we can have prizes and do the plan at the same time. But most of the perms would eliminate the net benefit of the cp. Like if a private corporation was offered the prize to send up a satellite that NASA was already working on, then they probably wouldn't take the offer. Or, if the Net Benefit was that we save money through prizes, then you lose that net benefit if you perm the cp. I guess the question i'm asking is where do you draw the line for perms? Would most teams win that a perm is illegitimate if the perm takes out the net benefit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would most teams win that a perm is illegitimate if the perm takes out the net benefit?

 

Probably. Counterplans draw their competitiveness from a net benefit. If the perm precludes solving for the net benefit (which it does in your example cuz the govt is still spending money) then the perm isn't competitive because only the counterplan accesses the net benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The perm alone isn't necessarily "illegitimate," but it does link to the net benifit which is a reason to prefer the counterplan alone.

 

In order to make the perm viable, you should:

1) Argue there is a solvency deficit to the CP alone (privates have no jurisdiction/ability to do _______).

2) Win a link turn or no link on the the net benifit to ensure there's no risk of the disad, then the perm ensures there's no solvency deficit to changing the agent.

3) Read a 2AC add-on for why USFG action is key (maybe like a relations or credibility add-on) that only the plan can access.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In order to make the perm viable, you should:

1) Argue there is a solvency deficit to the CP alone (privates have no jurisdiction/ability to do _______).

2) Win a link turn or no link on the the net benifit to ensure there's no risk of the disad, then the perm ensures there's no solvency deficit to changing the agent.

3) Read a 2AC add-on for why USFG action is key (maybe like a relations or credibility add-on) that only the plan can access.

 

If you win all of this, then what's the point of going for the perm at all? If you've already proven no net benefit, a DA to the CP, and a solvency deficit, then it doesn't matter if the cp is competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you win all of this, then what's the point of going for the perm at all? If you've already proven no net benefit, a DA to the CP, and a solvency deficit, then it doesn't matter if the cp is competitive.

 

The add-on isn't a DA to the CP. It's just another reason to prefer the plan and functions as a solvency deficit to the CP. If the counterplan has an internal net benefit that isn't a disad to the case (like private sector key to jobs), the perm allows you to solve the 2AC add-on and the internal NB.

 

You're right, if you only win a link turn on the net benifit, it doesn't make a perm better than just the plan, but it's still a test of competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...