College Policy Debate Forums
November 22, 2017, 07:39:06 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: IF YOU EXPERIENCE PROBLEMS WITH THE SITE, INCLUDING LOGGING IN, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY.  EMAIL ME DIRECTLY OR USE THE CONTACT US LINK AT THE TOP.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register CEDA caselist Debate Results Council of Tournament Directors Edebate Archive  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Relevance and timeliness  (Read 2733 times)
Malgor
Full Member
***
Posts: 220


« on: April 27, 2011, 07:05:18 PM »

When i got home from the office I of course checked the forums and my email like any good dork would do.  One thing struck me in a post today that is kind of the elephant in the room for a lot of the topics proposed this year.  It's something that we always assume is true, state as fact, yet never study.  here is the quote:

"...expense (believe it or not, this is the central controversy to any infrastructure change. It might be generic across some of the controversy areas, but given the economic climate, it's a particularly timely controversy given that Obama call for infrastructure development as an economic stimulus and all of these issues have been pushed off the table due to the budget debates)"

Democracy assistance, foreign assistance to India, prison reform, aid to failed states, new education policies, critical infrastructure-what is one of the primary reasons the government has to cut back on all of these things?  Because the USFG is starting to realize that it is broke.  Some people have even identified it is the central controversy of their topic-we ain't doing this now because we don't have the money.

They aren't lying, the USFG doesn't have the money to spend without racking up huge deficits.  Thirty years of funding military expansion, growing populations of citizens in need of assistance programs, economic de-regulation, and offshoring have meant that for thirty years spending has gone up while tax revenue has gone down. 

This doesn't mean America is on the verge of immediate disaster, but the doomsday predictions are racking up now because it's a structural problem, that will take years to fix. 

All of the topics are relevant, because domestically and internationally there are a lot of problems to tackle.  But in any society, with any government, it takes money to fix those problems. 

There is a topic that will force us to actually debate where the money comes from, and how it affects our society.  It is the backdrop to nearly every other issue proposed for debate next year.  It also goes hand in hand with another issue that is deeply hurting our society-the vast increase in economic inequality since the mid 80s (the last time there was major tax reform was 1986....). 

These are real, important issues that effect the well being of government and society.  It's also the rare opportunity to give the aff a structural mechanism for change, not a temporary policy proposal.  I hear a lot of talk about relevance, but frankly any of us can make a topic relevant.  For too long, we have all these topics about how billions of dollars should be spend on x country or y problem, but we (much like Congress) never bother to debate about how we get that cash.  This topic allows the aff to argue that we get that cash from the most economically vulnerable populations and transfer it to those at the top.  REAL TALK!

malgor
Logged
kelly young
Full Member
***
Posts: 237



WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2011, 07:14:57 PM »

When i got home from the office I of course checked the forums and my email like any good dork would do.  One thing struck me in a post today that is kind of the elephant in the room for a lot of the topics proposed this year.  It's something that we always assume is true, state as fact, yet never study.  here is the quote:

"...expense (believe it or not, this is the central controversy to any infrastructure change. It might be generic across some of the controversy areas, but given the economic climate, it's a particularly timely controversy given that Obama call for infrastructure development as an economic stimulus and all of these issues have been pushed off the table due to the budget debates)"

Democracy assistance, foreign assistance to India, prison reform, aid to failed states, new education policies, critical infrastructure-what is one of the primary reasons the government has to cut back on all of these things?  Because the USFG is starting to realize that it is broke.  Some people have even identified it is the central controversy of their topic-we ain't doing this now because we don't have the money.

They aren't lying, the USFG doesn't have the money to spend without racking up huge deficits.  Thirty years of funding military expansion, growing populations of citizens in need of assistance programs, economic de-regulation, and offshoring have meant that for thirty years spending has gone up while tax revenue has gone down. 

This doesn't mean America is on the verge of immediate disaster, but the doomsday predictions are racking up now because it's a structural problem, that will take years to fix. 

All of the topics are relevant, because domestically and internationally there are a lot of problems to tackle.  But in any society, with any government, it takes money to fix those problems. 

There is a topic that will force us to actually debate where the money comes from, and how it affects our society.  It is the backdrop to nearly every other issue proposed for debate next year.  It also goes hand in hand with another issue that is deeply hurting our society-the vast increase in economic inequality since the mid 80s (the last time there was major tax reform was 1986....). 

These are real, important issues that effect the well being of government and society.  It's also the rare opportunity to give the aff a structural mechanism for change, not a temporary policy proposal.  I hear a lot of talk about relevance, but frankly any of us can make a topic relevant.  For too long, we have all these topics about how billions of dollars should be spend on x country or y problem, but we (much like Congress) never bother to debate about how we get that cash.  This topic allows the aff to argue that we get that cash from the most economically vulnerable populations and transfer it to those at the top.  REAL TALK!

malgor

I apparently missed the "cut salaries and increase benefits contributions for public employees" controversy paper...
Logged

Director of Forensics/Associate Professor
Wayne State University
313-577-2953
kelly.young [at] wayne.edu
www.wsuforensics.org
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMF customization services by 2by2host.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!