Jump to content

anondebater

Member
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Okay

About anondebater

  • Rank
    Registered User
  • Birthday 09/05/1990
  1. Reading this thread an how Stephen Weil, Eric Lanning, and Brendan Bankey literally (and verbally) destroy everyone in their path shows the irony on how bad debaters turn out to be when they trash talk other people.
  2. what? poor people do pay taxes in america. what kind of planet do you live on where people at or below the poverty line dont pay taxes. if they are a citizen, they have the same responsibility as any other american citizen and that also includes paying taxes. how long has that cliche been going on: the two things you can rely on is death and taxes. wow you guys... fail brew please show me one reliable source that says poor citizens in the united states dont pay taxes.
  3. From past experience too, I don't believe UH is that bad of a tournament as it has been pictured. Granted some of the Judges aren't the techiest of all the judges in the Houston circuit, a lot of them are pretty smart. And I believe all judges prefer an indepth debate rather than a teched out speech that just scratches the surface of the topic. All the judges I have seen at UH are either returning judges that have had past experiences in judging CX or they are past LD debaters. Being only 2 months into the Debate season, I think a lot of the judges are going to be new to the topic, so many of the debaters shouldntt assume they understand what the Federal Poverty Line is. And In University of Houston's defense, I think the tournament is one of the better run tournaments in the circuit where they keep things running on time and food really close since they have many small convenience stores and fast-food joints scattered around campus. Overall, the University of Houston tournament is a good experience whether or not the judges fit your style.
  4. Just finished the game, thought it was great. Plot-wise, it has a great story line even though it was a bit sad if you were a little too power hungry. (I think it kind of builds in with its main theme of its criticism of capitalism) Play-wise the fps was more realistic than most others I have played and the graphics were fantastic. I'm excited about the new Bioshock coming out where you get to play as a Big Daddy and would really recommend this game. What do you think?
  5. than by golly, you are more prepared from the get go
  6. in my opinion, how much evidence you memorized and recognized in your possession precedes how many tubs you have.
  7. Cap 1. What is the political strategy behind removing cap? 2. Is there empirical proof that removing cap is successful? 3. How is undistributed energy capitalist? 4. Your Herod evidence has little to do with environmental policies. How do you claim to solve your link? 5. What governmental forms would your alt proceed if it is implemented? 6. Your Dillon evidence says that rendering something calculable leads to holocaust. Does assigning a number to anything, capitalist? 7. Status of K China Wind 1. Wouldn't US in the Wind business increase competitiveness with China? 2. What is the brink to the impact? LOST 1. Why wouldnt LOST also entrench Obama's political capital?
  8. i answered it in Andrew's cx above. Btw this has to be my last post for tonight. Sorry
  9. yes Yeah we fiat. But if you make an argument that not all NGO don't support it, then its still pretty arbitrary. Then we will defend solar and wind only. It is saying that blackouts are more common in the US
  10. Depends on each state and how much the state prices their energy. We will defend too high. We only specified Wind and solar in that we don't explode the parameters of this debate. Hydrogen is a clean energy- if you want evidence later, we'll provide it. If you want to make an argument that Hydrogen is bad for the climate, then we'll answer that Hydrogen is still comparatively better than the current form that provides electricity to our grid, namely coal. Sure, our Perez evidence warrants that at certain times of the day energy use spikes. Like when you get home from school, you usually turn on the light. These little actions everday also happen everywhere around the area you live in. This risks overloading the grid. Also we'll defend that Blackouts are becoming more common as in our Washington times evidence
  11. We are also claiming Wind and Solar as per our Perez evidence. Only a slight solvency mitigation. It is up to the judges to decide if the plan is good or not No, we will defend all types of energy to fall under Renewable Energy because most will replace the energy provided by the grid now. Not all states can provide a successful deregulated energy as per our Bluvas evidence. Federal government mandate can actually enforce this where needed. X apply the answer from above and we are only using our Washington Times evidence to gain uniqueness on blackouts. If you really want full advantage its in our last Perez evidence
×
×
  • Create New...