Hyper Static Union wrote:
Mr. November wrote:
As for using it as a funding source...I would look for a way else to do it, for the simple reason that it opens a huge can of worms that you have no way to defend against. Think about it: if the Neg wants to, they can run DAs against that plank of your plan all day long. You, however, aren't able to claim advantages springing from an extra-topical mandate of your plan. Thus by using that as a funding source you're opening yourself to an angle of attack that you have no real defense against, while simultaneously being unable to capitalize on any advantage that it would give you. For that reason alone I'd avoid it.
I completely understand and agree with what you are saying...But then, what is a perfect funding source without any added DAs?
It's called the general federal revenue.
That's the mindset that got us a trillion dollars in debt. I HATE spending. It's time to STOP spending... not increase it.
@Kristy: If you're going to spend in your plan, take it from a worthless program. Farm Subsidies are good, but don't cut too much at once. There are hundreds of sources of worthless government spending, and the resolution says that the US can change "it's" policy, as long as it is toward Russia, so find some worthless program, and cut from it
Oh, come now, Daniel. Your mafia playing habits make you a no-good double-crossing manipulative liar. But I would never call you a jerk!