Net Benefit Das Under New Resolution.

[MrBahumbug 4]

It would be super helpful to see some potential NBs and the counterplans that make them work.

[rsoni 23]

China Relations NB - Consult China CP

[swagondeck 210]

china doesn't give a fuck. consult brazil will be much more prominent.

[Coconuts 872]

china doesn't give a fuck. consult brazil will be much more prominent.

Very incorrect, China has huge ties to Latin America. Consult China will be big, but not as big as China do the plan instead.

[swagondeck 210]

Very incorrect, China has huge ties to Latin America. Consult China will be big, but not as big as China do the plan instead.

consult brazil will be much bigger, it has ridiculous ties with every LA country 

 

china is invested in latin america, but mostly for economic gain like commodities... there's no reason why they'd "do the plan" 

[georgebushsdogpaintings 494]

There's this team on my local circuit that literally always runs Buy America. I doubt it will change next year.

[nathan_debate 745]

To figure out these netbenefit DAs.....you need to go back to what TYPE of counterplan are they? From which flows....the TYPES of disads that can be used as netbenfits.

 

So...the question in one sense is question begging.....what kinds of counterplans will they be net benefits for? Or what specific type will they be net benefits for?

 

Also there will be a number of impact turn to the aff advantage....that the counterplan won't solve.....which might be had.

 

For the following 3 are the most likely advantages:

• Econ/Trade

• Relations

• Soft power

And to a lesser extent regional stability, democracy promotion, hegemony, terrorism, protectionism/free trade credibility, & crime. Energy, environment, and agriculture (food) are also possibilities.....of course along with ethics, human rights, otherization/dignity/dehumanization., sexism, and racism.

[rsoni 23]

consult brazil will be much bigger, it has ridiculous ties with every LA country 

 

china is invested in latin america, but mostly for economic gain like commodities... there's no reason why they'd "do the plan" 

I was trying to say we consult China so that they don't feel pushed out by the US in Latin America hence ruining thier relationship and yea consult Brazil will be pretty big to but what would be the NB?

[JosephOverman 1069]

I've never debated against a consult CP seeing as they aren't very useful for TI. In all honesty, are they a legitimate strat that judges vote on? To me, it seems abusive enough for the aff to easily win on theory or at least win "Perm: Do the CP". And I would assume that a chance of the consultant saying "no", and thus there being no solvency, would outweigh the NB especially since one instance of consulting isn't going to make or break a relationship. To those that HAVE debated consult CPs in the past, how accurate are my thoughts on them? 

[ktg9616 889]

consult brazil will be much bigger, it has ridiculous ties with every LA country 

 

china is invested in latin america, but mostly for economic gain like commodities... there's no reason why they'd "do the plan" 

 

 

Also, consult is shit compared to a China do the plan CP with solid lit base and actual solvency advocates, instead of a farfetched "consult solves relations" claim.

[swagondeck 210]

lit for china doing things in Latin America? like i said, the only thing they do is basically exploit the resources in those countries, there's no reason why they'd want to invest. 

 

Brazil NB would obviously be a Relations DA, and maybe the internal isn't great but it makes a lot more sense, all 3 engage brazil in trade and anything that happens in LA will very likely affect Brazil. 

[Miro 1470]

I've never debated against a consult CP seeing as they aren't very useful for TI. In all honesty, are they a legitimate strat that judges vote on? To me, it seems abusive enough for the aff to easily win on theory or at least win "Perm: Do the CP". And I would assume that a chance of the consultant saying "no", and thus there being no solvency, would outweigh the NB especially since one instance of consulting isn't going to make or break a relationship. To those that HAVE debated consult CPs in the past, how accurate are my thoughts on them? 

The fact that they could say "no" means that Perm: Do CP severs out of the certainty of the plan.

[chusuf 120]

china doesn't give a fuck. consult brazil will be much more prominent.

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/DP33DusselNov12.pdf

 

 

China has huge ties w/ latin america

[swagondeck 210]

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/DP33DusselNov12.pdf

 

 

China has huge ties w/ latin america

this seems to be talking about companies that invest in LA

 

 

"In LAC, only 95 Chinese transactions 

have been completed, while of these only 56 show what they are worth"

 

this article also says "Chinese capital can only be exported if it is both approved by the 

public sector - the NDRC, MOFCOM, SINOSURE, and the EIBC" so there's a solvency deficit too, you can't fiat all of those

[Coconuts 872]

consult brazil will be much bigger, it has ridiculous ties with every LA country 

 

china is invested in latin america, but mostly for economic gain like commodities... there's no reason why they'd "do the plan" 

If it benefits them, why wouldn't they do the plan?

[nathan_debate 745]

I've never debated against a consult CP seeing as they aren't very useful for TI. In all honesty, are they a legitimate strat that judges vote on? To me, it seems abusive enough for the aff to easily win on theory or at least win "Perm: Do the CP"

 

 

Thats severance (based on cross-x not the actual text itself) and that creates a moving target & is basically like a 2AC replan which could avoid any potential neg. disads and even case turns.  That would utterly kill fairness, education, and debate.

 

You can't make the aff conditional.

 

I think based on functional competition versus textual competition that the perm just doesn't work out.

Functional is FAR more important.