Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chaos

"investment"

Recommended Posts

I really feel like this word completely changes the topic limits and possible plan mechanisms, but I don't see anyone discussing it.

 

Am I wrong here?

 

If not, people should start using this thread to discuss their thoughts about the word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Investment seems to (on-face) mean spending. Most plans constitute some form of spending. Investment could also mean other things (arguably to a lesser extent, i.e. the cards saying this would be a bit more shadily worded) such as "modification" or "focus" which could lead to cases that change status quo transportation infrastructure capabilities or increase focus on certain forms of transportation, i.e. security via the TSA.

 

To be completely honest though, I have zero idea what camps are going to come out with. This seems like a year (more so than other years) where politics REALLY becomes huge, and there are a bunch of agent/states CPs, as well as some deep econ debates, especially relating to the word "investment" - i.e. authors from the Austrian v. Chicago v. Keynesian schools of thought.

 

Sorry for that tangentially related rant. Why do you think it limits the topic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really feel like this word completely changes the topic limits and possible plan mechanisms, but I don't see anyone discussing it.

 

Am I wrong here?

 

If not, people should start using this thread to discuss their thoughts about the word.

 

I feel like the word investment opens up new plan opportunities. AKA, a plan text without investment would be something like

- the USFG should develop highways.

 

When the word investment comes in, you can use different spending mechanisms. AKA

- the USFG should develop highways by reconstituting funding from ITS programs.

- the USFG should develop highways through subsidies from the Obama Administration.

- the USFG should develop highways, and also implement a national flat tax for investment. (Flat Tax= simpler way to get money from the public)

 

Stuff like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it unlimits the topic, mostly. Because SPS, etc. become topical.

 

But also, I think it could have a limiting function. I think the word investment means something more than just $, and that it will probably be used to describe specific mechanisms that funding has to do.

Maybe the government isn't allowed to directly be involved, but they have to use a contractor, or something. That's probably normal means too, but yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a very minute amount of research and these two definitions came up first:

  • The action or process of investing money for profit or material result.
  • A thing that is worth buying because it may be profitable or useful in the future.

It appears that any plan that costs money and has advantages meets the word investment and that is why I thought there didn't need to be much to talk about.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it'll be hard to pin down a limiting interp with it. Contextual to things like public transportation, it would seem to mean building up something for future benefit. After all, cities don't build subways for profit, just for social goals and an easier econ infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a very minute amount of research and these two definitions came up first:

  • The action or process of investing money for profit or material result.
  • A thing that is worth buying because it may be profitable or useful in the future.

It appears that any plan that costs money and has advantages meets the word investment and that is why I thought there didn't need to be much to talk about.

 

 

 

 

 

If you want to be technical, The advantages have to be monetary or financial in nature to qualify as "Return on Investment". There's a good case to be made that IF the Aff doesn't have an Econ Advantage, then they're not topical.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is false that the term investment must apply to monetary investment. One can invest any resource one has in a particular direction to achieve an objective. For example, a large company can invest its human capital into cloning humans to achieve the objective of a clone army. Debate coaches invest their time and cognitive abilities into producing capable debaters because they find it rewarding to see kids grow and develop.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is false that the term investment must apply to monetary investment. One can invest any resource one has in a particular direction to achieve an objective. For example, a large company can invest its human capital into cloning humans to achieve the objective of a clone army. Debate coaches invest their time and cognitive abilities into producing capable debaters because they find it rewarding to see kids grow and develop.

 

 

He's right. Let's look at this from a "its" perspective. The resolution says "its investment".

What things (other than money) does the USFG have the right to invest/expend in expectation of future returns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's right. Let's look at this from a "its" perspective. The resolution says "its investment".

What things (other than money) does the USFG have the right to invest/expend in expectation of future returns?

 

The government has a lot of resources, and certainly the most prominent of which is money. But it would also be a fallacy to assume that it is the ONLY resource available to government expenditure of resources. There is much to be said about human capital, and we all know that given the size of the government, there is a helluva lot of human capital that the government could deploy for the sake of transportation infrastructure.

 

Transportation infrastructure is not just physical objects like roads, canals, ports, and railway lines.

 

I'd love to spout off with a half dozen non-physical objects, but I also don't want to ruin the ideas of creative debaters. I suggest you think more critically. And if all else fails, use better search terms to identify what problems exist in infrastructure and how non-material solutions can be seen as an 'investment'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post on this subject available here: http://utdebatecamp....tructure-topic/

 

Good post, but dealing with roads, rail, canals, ports does not necessarily mean physical upgrades. There can be non-physical upgrades too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Chaos... investment super-underlimits the topic because exactly what Ankur was talking about. But if you should be able to get away with anything if you put things in terms of investment of capital.

 

http://www.econlib.o...manCapital.html

 

Talking about investment of capital is pretty legit...

 

the

investing of money or capital in order to gain profitablereturns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.

 

 

Yes, I know dictionary.com is a horrible source, just put in some more time and find another definition...

 

 

This really starts to bend the rules-

 

 

http://en.wikipedia..../Social_capital

 

Saying that you're investing by utilizing your contacts... -.- not so much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Chaos... investment super-underlimits the topic because exactly what Ankur was talking about. But if you should be able to get away with anything if you put things in terms of investment of capital.

 

http://www.econlib.o...manCapital.html

 

Talking about investment of capital is pretty legit...

 

the

investing of money or capital in order to gain profitablereturns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.

 

 

Yes, I know dictionary.com is a horrible source, just put in some more time and find another definition...

 

 

This really starts to bend the rules-

 

 

http://en.wikipedia..../Social_capital

 

Saying that you're investing by utilizing your contacts... -.- not so much

 

 

 

But here's something you probably weren't expecting... I think limiting it to physical structures is probably better for debate and will produce better debates.

Squirrely affirmatives taking extraordinarily liberal views of topicality do two things to debate - make it unbearable to watch (for judges) and make it void of meaningful clash and argumentation (for competitors).

 

My point was merely that many teams who hide behind squirrely cases to mask their inadequacies as debaters will continue to do so... and that teams should be prepared by thinking out of the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I belive that in certain point of views an investment is only good in terms of money. Altough not all advantages are money related, it makes more sense for a better investment to be one that mostly increases money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Interesting questions based off of this for the cross-x community (Note that this idea has been floating around in my head ever since some points where made back and forth at the Digital Debate Camp, which is awesome might I add, and I claim no credit for being the first to think of it)

 

1) So the topic reads "its transportation infrastructure investment" so does the word its coming before transportation infrastructure instead of investment change anything? I mean, grammatically it seems that transportation infrastructure is the object of the substantial increase rather than outright money (or other resources) as we would tend to define investment as; however it seems like many people are interpreting the topic to mean "investment in transportation infrastructure." Which is right?

 

2) If its modifies investment, does the bidirectionality of just needing to increase resource use for transportation infrastructure make a huge difference in how this year may play out, or will few people take advantage of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...