Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My partner and I have been hitting a lot of NAD Bank and just overall Mexico cases. We were wondering if anyone had some DA's or Counterplans that are effective against them. We have a few but need some more to stay competitive. We are willing to do a trade for some of the stuff we have written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cap K links pretty hardcore.  There shouldn't be a link debate at all.

 

Anthro links.  NADB's mission is to finance developments which improve human health.

 

The NADB has limited capitalization, so whatever plan is doing trades off with other possible uses of that money.  Should be easy to find a CP where the NADB invests in other stuff instead.  (Or a SQ set of investments that plan will have to disrupt).

 

Might try to track down the criticisms referenced here:

"Still, the NADBank has been no stranger to criticism. Environmentalists condemn its secretive operating style, while others have chastised the bank's inability to offer lower-interest loans to desperately poor communities."

http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/nadbank-blues/Content?oid=1083801

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consult Mexico, Imperialism net benefit, usfg is usually unilateral action in mexico (even if there are talks) which furthers imperial/colonial objectives, consulting is a peaceful bilateral process especially if we adopt their results. and they're Mexico say yes ev works in your favor. just win the competition/perm debate, and consult good theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consult Mexico, Imperialism net benefit, usfg is usually unilateral action in mexico (even if there are talks) which furthers imperial/colonial objectives, consulting is a peaceful bilateral process especially if we adopt their results. and they're Mexico say yes ev works in your favor. just win the competition/perm debate, and consult good theory.

 

This actually fails spectacularly against NADB cases.  The NADB board of governors is 10 people, 5 from the US, 5 from Mexico, so 'binding consultation' is literally normal means.

 

(Specifically, its 3 from the USFG, including someone from the treasury and someone from the EPA, 3 from the Mex FG, 1 representing the border US states, 1 representing the Mex states, and each country gets 1 representing NGOs working in the area).

 

Now, you might have a good argument that the NADB is *not* the USFG, and run T based on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This actually fails spectacularly against NADB cases.  The NADB board of governors is 10 people, 5 from the US, 5 from Mexico, so 'binding consultation' is literally normal means.

 

(Specifically, its 3 from the USFG, including someone from the treasury and someone from the EPA, 3 from the Mex FG, 1 representing the border US states, 1 representing the Mex states, and each country gets 1 representing NGOs working in the area).

 

Now, you might have a good argument that the NADB is *not* the USFG, and run T based on that.

Yeah maybe not NADB lol but it worked pretty good for other mexico affs (money laundering, energy reform were the affs I beat with this). this also works good with really well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...