Jump to content

facade2525

Member
  • Content Count

    127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

facade2525 last won the day on November 30 2012

facade2525 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

112 Excellent

About facade2525

  • Rank
    Champion
  1. Same -- if you have the aff PM me for a trade, thanks!
  2. If you're talking specifically about land grants... a. They have monetary value--land is an asset that's worth capital--so if you're getting into the capital expenditure debate a lot you should be able to find solid evidence that monetary assets count as capital too. b. If you're reading Bering Strait (and your land grants evidence is Burroughs) then you actually do (or at least can, according to your interpretation) spend a reasonable amount of money. Burroughs outlines a "modified land grant financing plan" where a private company does the project for the USfg, with land grants, and in return the U.S. purchases bonds/stocks/securities from the company--that purchase of securities costs money, but not a lot. It also isn't a free gift, because the companies end up essentially paying for the land grants through the return on investment of the securities.
  3. I disagree. Traven said the tournament is in almost a month, so I'd expect competitors to be "up-to-date." I honestly don't know if NextGen is noninherent now, but I guess that's something to look into. Don't feel pressured to change your aff. It's a lot of work, new blocks, etc. and you won't know it nearly as well as your current aff, plus you won't know what to expect from the neg. If you do change your aff solely for the sake of unpredictability, then I'd suggest going all-out on the unpredictability and picking something obscure that nobody on your circuit will be ready for. That doesn't necessarily mean a full-k-screw-the-topic k aff, but something that your opponents won't have evidence against. I hope that helps!
  4. gg you win No but seriously, I'm not making fun of the heg impact; I'm making fun of the States education k2 primacy internal link leading to the heg impact. I'm sure Zhang and Shi and other authors make a brilliant case as to why the U.S. needs to have a military primacy in order to keep the peace, and I also understand that education plays a role in military success because of factors like technological advances. My argument is that the scenario is extremely hyperbolic--what I DON'T buy is that solely because States have to pay for a TI project, they'll end up slashing education so badly that the U.S. will all of a sudden lose its military primacy and the world will erupt into great power wars. I agree with Klinger and Nas that if we had an atrocious education system our military would be adversely affected; I disagree with your interpretation of Klinger and Nas as meaning that any minor cuts to State-funded education (due to budget battles with TI projects) will automatically cripple military primacy to the extent that great power wars will start happening. "but education and foreign language skills, as well as a technological advancements are k2 military power, and probably are boosted by education... " (sorry, for some reason the quote thing isn't working) I agree, and your evidence does say that. But I don't see how it's reverse causal, especially in the case of some relatively minor spending like a TI project. inb4 "Yeah but our aff is totes expensive": Any aff that's so expensive that the States can't handle it without catastrophically slashing funding everywhere else is probably a. unpopular and b. also too expensive for the federal government. Plus, one could also make the argument that there's a strong probability it's not intrinsic: Why can't we cut funds from other State projects and keep education going? I apologize for my excessive editing. It's probably confusing haha
  5. Arguments like this make me very sad. It's hard to defend TPD against k-hacks when TPD includes impact scenarios like that^ Ex: Nas and Zhang+Shi are talking about "primacy" in two very different contexts: social and military. Ex: Go to a private college Ex: Zhang and Shi just want a big military, not a well-educated one. If it's really a problem, take everyone out of college and send them off to military school. Please read through this team's "Brave New Aff" as soon as possible--the first part of their first contention pokes fun at traditional hyperbolic impact scenarios and specifically isolates this one as an example. http://wiki.debatecoaches.org/2012-2013+-+Brophy+College+Prep+%28AZ%29+-+Ryan+McCoy+%26+Joe+Skoog#x1AC Harvard- Brave New World
  6. There should be plenty of evidence that FDI is good for relations -- economic relations are often the starting point for political relations, since they spark interdependence. I have that evidence in my mostly home-cut China FDI file and I'll trade you the file if you're interested.
  7. I don't recommend running it (or Ks generally, but that might just be me) as a novice right after your very first tournament...
  8. The tournament or the organization? They run the wiki and Open Evidence...
  9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma It's optional
  10. I'd have to disagree; when I'm reading, watching, or listening to an argument I always appreciate when both sides provide ample explanation of how they reach their ideas -- I'd rather see paragraphs and paragraphs of thoughtful warrants than one short page of "no you're wrong." To me, the beauty of this forum is that it allows people with conflicting ideas (look at this thread) to have their warrants analyzed, refuted, and/or supported by an enormous community. If people stop posting on cross-x or ignore threads just because the comments are too long, they're missing out.
  11. That's true for something with a major one-time investment like the construction of HSR for example, but for a project that needs consistent long-term investment (say, NIB) Congress would probably prefer to have a sunset clause.
  12. Here's my 2 cents: I don't see how this... "The role of the ballot for this debate is to both performatively and methodologically challenge the oppressive structures directly tied to transportation infrastructure policy. Your ballot acts as an endorsement of utilizing the debate space as a safe place for queer political practices in the hard search and struggle for a place to call home." ...is at all mutually exclusive with voting Neg, as long as you don't do anything they critique (as long as you don't do anything that prevents debate from being their home). You might want to try a strategy based around that idea, but it's very risky because you can't run things like framework with it -- those probably make debate less home-like for them. That would include things like a forum counterplan or some offensive reasons why THEIR methodology makes debate LESS home-like.
  13. Do the warrants apply to any kind of dependence, even if the evidence is specific to transportation?
×
×
  • Create New...