homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:53 pm
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Forum locked  This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 1:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 1300
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Zealous1 wrote:
Ethanol Subsidies = great place to take money from.


And, conveniently for the OP, they amount to almost exactly $6 billion

_________________
Middlebury Class of '15


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:37 am
Posts: 767
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region 2, Washington
FRANK wrote:
Zealous1 wrote:
Ethanol Subsidies = great place to take money from.


And, conveniently for the OP, they amount to almost exactly $6 billion


8 billion.

_________________
Potent Speaking: the only debate website exclusively dedicated to speaking tips. http://potentspeaking.com


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 1394
Home Schooled: Yes
Zealous1 wrote:
FRANK wrote:
Zealous1 wrote:
Ethanol Subsidies = great place to take money from.


And, conveniently for the OP, they amount to almost exactly $6 billion


8 billion.


They shift every time because it's a tax credit that's contingent on how much is produced. For 2011: "[t]he ethanol incentives will cost $7 billion" ( http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/ ... XY20101215 )

_________________
Andrew Min
ahmin@princeton.edu
Arete Speech & Debate, NCFCA, Class of 2011


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 4:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 1300
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Zealous1 wrote:
8 billion.


$6 Billion in ethanol subsidies through 2011
Jean Folger, “5 Financial Bills That Snuck In For 2010,” The San Francisco Chronicle, 19 January 2011, (web, sfgate.com)

“Ethanol producers will continue to receive 45 cents for every gallon of ethanol blended into the gasoline supply. This subsidy, which the bill states will last throughout 2011, is expected to cost approximately $6 billion.”

_________________
Middlebury Class of '15


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:37 am
Posts: 767
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region 2, Washington
Not sure who's right... ^^

I know I'm not :D

_________________
Potent Speaking: the only debate website exclusively dedicated to speaking tips. http://potentspeaking.com


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:49 pm
Posts: 1394
Home Schooled: Yes
Zealous1 wrote:
Not sure who's right... ^^

I know I'm not :D


It's a tax credit, so the estimate probably varies :). The AFF probably will have a plank saying any other funding, if necessary, comes from GFR or whatever.

_________________
Andrew Min
ahmin@princeton.edu
Arete Speech & Debate, NCFCA, Class of 2011


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:37 pm 
Offline
melancholy milkshakes. no straws.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:31 pm
Posts: 3986
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Hinnom, TX
I need to have my say and be done. So here's my $0.25
(2 cents is getting old)

If you've ever debated at Liberty, you'd know that there are several ways to attack a Neg DA without directly saying they're wrong. Because those college debaters love to tell you. ;) The two that stuck out to me were uniqueness (of course) and magnitude. A 6 billion increase in funding isn't going to add anything to our debt. At all. You can even do the math and show how tiny an increase it is for the average American. That would make your argument a little more powerful, and you can go so far as to tell the judge that he can skip McDonald's sometimes ;)

I'd also point to the trend of spending cuts. The problem is fixing itself, or at least trying to fix itself.

And lastly, point to your advantages. Don't argue the round on Neg's ground with this argument. Make a quick response to their argument (it's so darn tiny, judge) and then outweigh it with your advantages. Your plan really is worth a couple dollars extra a year (say that).

There ya go. Go and win, because this is a ridiculous argument

_________________
Joe Hughey
joehughey24@gmail.com

Two roads diverged in a wood and I -
I took the one less traveled
And that has made all the difference


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Funding!
PostPosted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 6:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:37 am
Posts: 767
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Region 2, Washington
lookingforangels wrote:
I need to have my say and be done. So here's my $0.25
(2 cents is getting old)

If you've ever debated at Liberty, you'd know that there are several ways to attack a Neg DA without directly saying they're wrong. Because those college debaters love to tell you. ;) The two that stuck out to me were uniqueness (of course) and magnitude. A 6 billion increase in funding isn't going to add anything to our debt. At all. You can even do the math and show how tiny an increase it is for the average American. That would make your argument a little more powerful, and you can go so far as to tell the judge that he can skip McDonald's sometimes ;)

I'd also point to the trend of spending cuts. The problem is fixing itself, or at least trying to fix itself.

And lastly, point to your advantages. Don't argue the round on Neg's ground with this argument. Make a quick response to their argument (it's so darn tiny, judge) and then outweigh it with your advantages. Your plan really is worth a couple dollars extra a year (say that).

There ya go. Go and win, because this is a ridiculous argument


Don't you hate when the negative team says stuff like "if you're going to do this, you should do this!" In other words, saying what could be better about your plan and somehow saying that that means they shouldn't for Aff even though the SQ doesn't have those things. In other words, pretending the status quo has certain benefits that it doesn't. For some reason, I have a hard time explaining it to the judge. If I could just explain that better, I would harvest more aff wins.

_________________
Potent Speaking: the only debate website exclusively dedicated to speaking tips. http://potentspeaking.com


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked  This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited