The Instigator
mmurph123
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
childfornicator
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Higher Education (Full Resolution in R1)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
mmurph123
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 4/10/2016 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 397 times Debate No: 89433
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

mmurph123

Pro

The Resolved for this debate shall be


    • Resolved, On Balance, in the United States, it is in the best interest of the people for the Federal Government to guarantee affordable higher education.


==Rules and Voting==
This debate will use a "Select Winner" Voting method. This means you evaluate arguments and evidence above all else and should vote solely off of that. Now onto the rules
    1. Each Debater will get 4 rounds. For the Opposition, this means they can begin round 1 and waive round 5, or can waive round 1 and finish round 5. Violation of this rule is an automatic loss.

    1. When possible, links must be provided to the full, original source within the body of the argument. However, that is not always possible. In the event that either party forgets, they should begin their next case by telling voters that their evidence is in the comments. The first time this happens, voters should note is as a misconduct. The second time voters should give the offending party a loss.

    1. Counterplans, Ks, etc. are all permitted but discouraged. If one side wishes to run a CP or K, they must explain why it is the best/only possible way for them to win the round.

    1. Whether the final speech is presented in Round 4 or Round 5, No new arguments or evidence should be presented. Voters should make note of an offending party and drop them for it. You may provide new analysis, but it must be based on pre-existing arguments and/or evidence.

    1. Have fun, be civil, and maintain some degree of professionalism.


Any questions may be presented in the comments and I will answer them.
childfornicator

Con

Good luck
Debate Round No. 1
mmurph123

Pro

I stand for a solid affirmation of the resolved 3 key reasons. First, Necessity. The second, Societal benefits, and the third, economic benefits. With that I will begin on 4 pieces of overview which will lay the framework for the affirmative case.
  1. The sole burden of the affirmative is to prove in a cost benefit analysis that the people of the United States would be bettered by the Federal Government ensuring higher education is affordable.
  2. It is not my burden to prove solvency at any point in this debate. If I am being held up at gun point, it would be in my best interest to stop my attacker because then I live and keep my stuff the attacker is trying to rob me of. But just because it is in my best interest doesn't mean it is possible. However, if it becomes needed I reserve the right to introduce a plan for solvency later in the debate.
  3. Higher education refers to any education above the high school level. Whether it is technical certification, an associates, bachelors, masters, or doctoral education. All of them are applicable.
  4. There is a divide between what is best for the people of a nation and the government of a nation. For example, if the Neg proves that the government loses soft power or that a certain party is weakened by affirming, unless they tie is back to the people of the United States, they get no offence. With that I will begin.
==Contention One: Necessity==

===Subpoint A: Costly Colleges have Limits and harms===

According to a study backed by the Lumina Foundation, 29% of Low Income, High Scoring 8th graders finished college compared to 75% of their high income counter parts. (1) Furthermore, the US department of Education finds that when students are worried about the costs of college, they are less likely to attend (2) The Economist Reports that college graduates make more money than their peers with just a high school diploma. (3) When you negate, you maintain the status quo and you allow these costly colleges to continue to have their limits. This perpetuates income inequality, because as the Washington Post reports, increased access to higher education would allow the growing income inequality to be moderated. This is going to be important because the Washington Post outlines that income inequality increases tuition costs, increases spending, and increases the needed amount of financial aid. This puts the negative world into a viscous cycle. By voting aff, you break this cycle. (4)

===Subpoint B: The Government Must intervene===

Before I get into the evidence and analysis, lets look at this logically. The Federal Government is the only actor who has total jurdisticion, and despite any current economic woes, no other actor willing to take action has the same amount of funding as the federal government. Furthermore, the government is obligated by the Social Contract to act in a way that is best for its citizens. Now lets look at some evidence here.

In the Status Quo, market forces are allowed to dictate prices. These market forces are more geared towards profits and higher fees than what the people need. (1) Secondly, the federal government is the best actor in this situation. According to a study published by Harvard and the Brookings institute, the federal government is the superior actor to provide educational subsides. State Governments, when choosing to provide educational subsides, they must directly take funding from another area. The federal government doesn't have the same drawback, and even if the negative convinces you that they do, because they are so much larger than any of the 50 state governments, the federal government could better mitigate the costs. (5)


==Contention 2: Higher Education benefits Society==

By exposing people to new events and experiences, higher education provides several benefits to society. First, The Bedford Group finds that those with higher education are more racially tolerant. (6) Racism decreases social cohesion and leads to numerous harms. The Australian Human Rights Commission finds that racism decreases physical and mental health, reduces productivity, and reduces life span. (7) Going further, those with higher education are healthier. Studies from the National Bureau of Economic Research have found similar results, with their findings concluding that, on average, every additional year of schooling extends one’s life by roughly half a year. (8) Finally, according to a study published by the College Board, those with college certifications are more likely to get proper exercise than those without. (9).And finally, those with higher education are less likely to be depressed and have better mental health. (10) What this means is that by increasing access to higher education, you better society. On that you vote pro based off the fact that we better the people directly.

==Contention 3: Jobs and Wages==

As already stated, those with a higher education make more money. But to go further. A report by Georgetown University states that by 2020, 55 million new jobs will be created. Of those Jobs, 35% of these will require at least Bachelor's Degree and 30% of jobs will require an associates degree or some college. This means that a grand total of 65% of jobs will require at least some higher education. (11) Going further, Women who finish 2 years of college have 37 to 39% more income than those with a high school degree. A similar, but less extreme trend was observed with men. (12) In the status quo, the Atlantic reports that 600,000 jobs went unfilled because of a lack of skilled labor. (13)

To break the cycle of income inequality, to better society, and to fill the current and future job gap, I can only see an affirmative ballot. I wait patiently for the negative case.
childfornicator

Con

My opponent posted sources in the comments instead of in the debate, I ask that he be penalized source points and conduct points for doing so
Debate Round No. 2
mmurph123

Pro

My sources for the previous round are in the comments. I apologize for any inconvenience or trouble this has caused. I will also link those sources again at the bottom.

My opposition drops my entire case and presents no arguments of his own. His only argument is that he asks the voters to dock me conduct and source points. recognize a few things here. First, the rules clearly outline that this debate will use a "Select Winner" system, not a 7 point system that he seems to be alluding to. Secondly, as outlined in the rules, this offense is not enough to justify a loss, I have underlined the relevant parts

When possible, links must be provided to the full, original source within the body of the argument. However, that is not always possible. In the event that either party forgets, they should begin their next case by telling voters that their evidence is in the comments.
The first time this happens, voters should note is as a misconduct. The second time voters should give the offending party a loss. (14)
Now let me further explain why you are voting aff in this debate. First, Governments need to act. Costly Colleges have their limitations and clearly limit lower income students. Secondly, higher education provides societal benefits. If the government can expand access to higher education, the government will better society. Third, their exist job gaps in the status quo, and in the future more and more jobs will require higher education. For these reasons, this is going to be a clean affirmative ballot.

1:https://www.luminafoundation.org...
2:http://files.eric.ed.gov...
3:http://www.economist.com...
4:https://www.washingtonpost.com...
5:http://www.brookings.edu...
6:https://drive.google.com...
7:https://itstopswithme.humanrights.gov.au...
8:https://drive.google.com...
9:https://trends.collegeboard.org...
10:https://www.gov.uk...
11:http://scs.georgetown.edu...
12:http://intranet.niacc.edu...
13:http://www.theatlantic.com...
14:http://www.debate.org...


childfornicator

Con

My opponent did a bad thing. Please votebfor me
Debate Round No. 3
mmurph123

Pro

The Neg fails to provide any actual arguments. Vote Aff.
childfornicator

Con

Cheating is an automatic forfeit. Vote con
Debate Round No. 4
mmurph123

Pro

In this Round I'm going to write your ballot for you.

Lets start on what he just argued in his last round. Recognize that by accepting this debate, he accepts all of the rules I lay out. Look to the second rule of this debate. I have bolded and underlined the relevant parts.


    • When possible, links must be provided to the full, original source within the body of the argument. However, that is not always possible. In the event that either party forgets, they should begin their next case by telling voters that their evidence is in the comments. The first time this happens, voters should note is as a misconduct. The second time voters should give the offending party a loss. (1)
    • I committed said violation once. I acted in the manner that the rules have outlined I should. Therefore, I still extend all arguments from my R2 through the round.
    • I am the only one who presented arguments throughout this round that link back into the resolution. Realize that even if you drop all of my sources, despite the fact that I follow the rules through out the debate in regards to my sources, I'm the only side with clear, uncontested logic when I tell you in my R2 that logically, only the federal government is the only actor who can act to fix the current problems with costly colleges.


Extend every single piece of evidence, every warrant, every impact. At this point, this is a very clear Affirmative ballot. Thank you all for reading.
childfornicator

Con

Pro does not make the rules
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Kitchen_Sink 1 year ago
Kitchen_Sink
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Emmarie // Mod action: Removed<

Con trolled this debate. Con didn't provide any arguments or sources and had terrible conduct.

[*Reason for removal*] The way white people is.
************************************************************************
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Emmarie 1 year ago
Emmarie
mmurph123childfornicator
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Con trolled this debate. Con didn't provide any arguments or sources and had terrible conduct.