Jump to content

KatLike

Member
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About KatLike

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 02/20/1992

Profile Information

  • School
    Rufus King IB High
  • Location
    Milwaukee, WI
  1. You have an actual class during school for debate? Is this a common thing in other schools?
  2. Judge 1: On ballot: umm..sorry about the numbers on the side..I was trying to write the ballot in binary Judge 2: On ballot: Don't ask people out on a date during in a cross-x..at least ask her out to somewhere better than McDonald's! Judge 3: On ballot: I know I said that I love speed, but I forgot to tell you that I don't remember how to flow...sorry that I didn't explain myself completely when you asked...I was sort of lost. Partner: Are you using your usual paradigm? Judge 4: No, I got a new one. Partner: What is it? Judge 4: Vote for the team that doesn't have you on it! (all the Milwaukee teams know most of the judges from other schools)
  3. What are the biggest tournaments in the Great Lakes area? Are they open or invite? Also, which divisions are available at each? Thanks for you help!
  4. Does anyone know of any camps before June 23rd or after August 2nd? I have some major scheduling issues... Thanks!
  5. How should I respond to the argument that extinction is good because it solves for dehumanization? The Affs argued this when running child soldiers.
  6. KatLike

    PEPFAR negative

    Are you talking about GHS or some plan that gets their funding from PEPFAR? PEPFAR already has the funding allocated by Congress. If you're going to run an argument like this, you should run solvency and make the argument that there is no inherency/harms but many judges prefer a counterplan rather than saying the status quo is best. Otherwise, how come AIDs isn't getting better if PEPFAR was enacted in 2003? The Affs would just make an argument saying that in 4 years PEPFAR hasn't been doing anything. Maybe you can make a PEPFAR CP and have PEPFAR do the plan if the AFF case is not already involved with PEPFAR. PEPFAR is really only supposed to be about AIDs though...
  7. KatLike

    AU CP Funding

    Where does/should the AU get their funding from? Isn't the whole point to increase AU credibility with the net benefit being unity, infrastructure, etc..? Would getting funding from the EU or another country destroy the net benefit? Any thoughts?
  8. KatLike

    GGR Inherency

    Thanks for clearing that up. And, yeah..probably politics links.
  9. Yes, I'll consider that. The way that the Neg team was debating it required that the Aff prove that there was no way that the plan could be done in the status quo, which the way we interpreted it would have taken away from our solvency. They asked, "Why can't your plan be done in the status quo?" and expected us to have an answer like there is not enough money allocated toward SSA, etc...
  10. "The Plan: The United States Federal Government should establish a Global Health Service to mobilize, prepare, send, manage, and compensate U.S. health professionals to expand the capacity of community health workers in the “President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief” (PEPFAR) focus countries in sub-Saharan Africa." Advantage 1: Diseases: (HIV/AIDs, Malaria, TB, and pretty much all other infectious diseases) with the impact of extinction by pandemic Benatar and Fox '05. Advantage 2: Public Health Diplomacy: Plan increases U.S. soft power and prevents extinction by nuclear war. Advantage 3: Bioterrorism: Plan increases awareness of new diseases. The community health workers tell officials who tell CDC/NIH and then they come up with a vaccination...long story. Impact is extinction Ochs '02. Basically, the plan is to send 150 recent college grads., medical professionals, and peace corps volunteers to SSA to train 1 million community health workers. The community health workers will in turn work on PEPFAR goals. Funding is from PEPFAR's $15 billion. Brain Drain isn't really a good argument against this because the community health workers are not the same as doctors. They just learn the basics like how to give a vaccine. Plus there is ev. that they cannot be traded internationally in all of the camp files put out *I looked, MGW put it out as a Brain Drain AFF, I guess it's in response to the brain drain problem...
  11. KatLike

    GGR Inherency

    Is the Global Gag Rule Aff still inherent? It looks like Congress and the Senate repealed it. Maybe we could just run overturning future Bush veto bad. Or, any thoughts? http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/09/07/congress-votes-to-repeal-global-gag-rule
  12. worse round ever (with tag-team): 1AC: after plan text was read, "we reserve the right to clarify" C-X: NEG-"what is your plan going to do?" ------AFF-"I'm not answering that." ------NEG-"Why not?" ------AFF-"We reserved the right to clarify. I'm deciding not to clarify" 1NC: "Judge, we don't know what their plan is doing, they won't tell us, allow our generic link cards." *Reads 5 off* C-X: AFF-"How do your DAs link?" ------NEG-"I have no idea because I don't know what your case is doing!!!" ------AFF-"Weren't you listening?!?!" ------NEG-"Well DUH!!!" *Yelling match for the rest of the rest of the speeches. and the AFF team made an argument that our analytics of the round needed authors...
  13. Benatar and Fox '05 – Professor of Medicine and Bioethics @ University of Cape Town and Professor of Sociology and Bioethics @ University of Pennsylvania [solomon R. Benatar and Renée C. Fox, “Meeting Threats to Global Health: A call for American leadership,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 48.3 (2005) 344-361//Project Muse]edlee There is a "back to the future" irony in the fact that the eruption and spread of a multitude of "old" and "new" infectious diseases has become the most serious global threat to the health of humankind (Benatar 2001a; Garrett 1994). The current epidemics of infectious diseases—including the "white plague" of tuberculosis that was supposed to have yielded to the powers of antibiotics—take their greatest toll on populations of so-called developing countries, and also among disadvantaged groups in privileged "developed" societies (Benatar 2001b; Gandy and Zumla 2003). The recent epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS; Lee et al. 2003) is a small-scale example of the new, acute, rapidly fatal infectious diseases that may, like the 1918–1919 flu epidemic, sweep through the world with high mortality rates in all countries, with accompanying profound social and economic implications. This paper, by a South African physician and an American medical sociologist, considers challenges that face global health, health care professionals, and governments at the beginning of the 21st century. Our reflections rest on three major premises: that global health problems pose major medical, social, and economic threats to all countries; that it is in the long-term self-interest of wealthy nations to address the forces that significantly affect the health of whole populations; and that at this historical juncture, the United States is the country with the most potential for favorably influencing global health trends. In addition to discussing the nature of threats to global health, we explore some of the major impediments to efforts that could be undertaken to foster alterations in policies that would effectively address the tragic discrepancies in health care and research that currently exist, and to overcome global apathy to the HIV/AIDS pandemic (Hogg et al. 2002). These obstacles involve a confluence of important American values, exemplified by political ideologies that have global as well as national health import; the prevailing ethos of bioethics in the United States; and the current views of many other countries towards the international policies and actions of the United States. As sociologist Robert N. Bellah (2002) has provocatively stated, in and through the "relentless" process of globalization, the United States has become a "cultural model and economic dynamo" as well as a military superpower, and more "by default" than by intention, a country with "imperial power." In our view, because of its singularity in these respects (for better or for worse), the United States not only has the scientific, political, and economic capacity to assume major responsibility for improving world health, but also the moral obligation to exemplify and implement values in action that are conducive to this advancement. We make this statement with two caveats. First, we are wary about [End Page 345] unduly promoting the dominance of American influence in the world by encouraging its moral hegemony in global health. Second, as noted above, we are mindful of the cultural and political factors that curtail the readiness and willingness of the United States to assume such a leadership role, and that contribute to health inequities in the American health care system that call for reform rather than emulation. We believe, however, that these caveats should be superseded by the moral imperative of facing up to national and global threats posed by disparities in health and emerging epidemics. Moreover, we believe that the long-term interests of Americans, and indeed of all privileged people and their societies, will be served by major improvements in global health (Benatar 2003).
×
×
  • Create New...