The United States federal government should substantially increase communparticipation.
Debate Rounds (5)
A: Poverty is increasing because the job loses continue, greater federal antipoverty spending is vital to confronting it.
Herbert, 09 – New York Times columnist
Half a million jobs have been lost since the recession began. When jobs are lost people are unable to participate in normal everyday life, thus not being productive and putting back into the economy. Observers expect the job loses to continue. The federal government is the key and only player in addressing poverty.
Poverty will undermine the economy in two distinct ways
First – Human capital
B: Poverty prevents the development of skilled labor and reduces workforce participation
Nilsen, 07 – Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security, U.S. Government Accountability Office
Poverty cripples the those who are in it, working to destroy skills necessary to participate in the labor workforce. This devastates the economy because not only will jobs be scarce but people living in poverty won't be capable of work.
D: Poverty utterly destroys metropolitan economies—this will devastate the US economy and US global competitiveness
Cicilline, 08 – Mayor of Providence, Rhode Island
When there is poverty, it usually lives in our big cities. Big city, the metropolitan areas, economies will be devasted with slow rates of growth and a rates of decline.
Big city economies are what make up the GDP and will be the controlling factors of the overall economy.
E: Short term stimulus packages are not enough. The Government needs a permanent spending balloon that is created by permanent jobs. This is the only way to stop and prevent recession.
Spending is always going to occur and in fact permanent government spending is necessary to keep poverty down and the economy booming. There is no harm in the belief of "spending money to make money". Government spending is needed to prevent another deflationary led depression.
F: The impact is economic collapse which risks global war.
Mead, 09 - Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations
Bad economic times can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression, what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born?
Contention 2 is Leadership:
A: Poverty utterly destroys US influence globally, it's perceived as a vital human rights issue requiring federal action. The Plan boosts the viability of the US model and enhances overal leadership.
Edwards 07 - US Senator and director for the Center for Poverty
America is the preeminent power of the world. This title is threatened by our inabilities to successfully or even attempting to solve for poverty. We must try and show the world that we care about more than ourselves and the communities in which we live.
B: US influence with other powers is vital to solving all global problems, including terrorism and proliferation
Soft power will be needed to deal with global problems America Faces today: terrorism, proliferation, disease, demographic shifts and environmental degradation.
C: Proliferation leads to extinction
proliferation leads to shoot outs with nuclear weapons. We must stop proliferation by passing affirmative plan.
D: Terrorism causes extinction
The president, members of congress, the military, and the public at large all suspect another attack by our known enemy. Hints the attempt on Christmas Day. Again pass the plan and we avoid terrorism.
Contention 3 is Racism:
A: PROSPERITY HAS PASSED BY THE INNER CITY, AND EVEN THE BEST OF TIMES IGNORED BLACKS IN AMERICA. THE DOMINANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN TO CALL THOSE IN POVERTY LAZY AND IMMORAL FOR NOT WORKING THEIR WAY BEYOND RACISM. A FULL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE AIMED AT THOSE IN POVERTY CREATES A NECESSARY PARADIGM SHIFT THAT COMBATS THE POLITICS OF SEGREGATION AND DISPOSAL THAT RESULT IN RACIAL GENOCIDE.
B: EVEN IF WE CAN'T SOLVE ALL RACISM, WE HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION TO BEGIN THE FIGHT.
The United States federal government should substantially increase block grants to state and local governments that expand and create permanent employment for persons living in poverty.
Contention 4 is Solvency:
A: Federal funding of antipoverty plans that boost employment, job training and economic justice are most effective
Volz et al, 06 – Executive Director of the Community Economic Development and Resource Center
B: Empirical examples prove that targeting those in poverty creates the most effective jobs programs, and the cost is comparable to already existing social services.ELR = EMPLOYER OF LAST RESORT]
TCHERNEVA AND WRAY, 5
The block grants plan does not directly create jobs so therefore the Affirmative cannot claim to solve the Economy. With or without the Affirmative's plan, job losses will continue which will cause poverty to increase. The Affirmative does not solve. This point extends to the Human Capitol argument as well as the Metropolitan Economy argument.
The Affirmative's claimed "permanent spending balloon" will not help the status quo.
Therefore, the Affirmative's plan does not prevent nuclear war.
Racism is an unfortunate ideal that has been in the fabric of our nation since its creation. It is ignorant to believe that simply solving poverty will wipe it from our very dirty slate.
Also, Racism occurs with the wealthy as well. Even if solving poverty would solve racism against the poor which it wouldn't, the Affirmative cannot make a significant dent in Racism in the US without combating it in all cases.
Block grant woes go from bad to worse. http://blogs.buffalonews.com...
"The block grant program may be more screwed up than ever."
How does a "screwed up program" solve anything? Easy: It doesn't.
U: The economy is fragile, but it is improving.
L: Social Services and Block Grants are wildly expensive. Any new spending will knock us off the brink and cause economic collapse.
!: Economic Collapse leads to global nuclear war.
U: Right now, a large portion of our army is made up of people in poverty who join for benefits.
L: Giving more social services deters these recruits from joining up.
!: Less army = less hegemony = global nuclear war.
*This is a direct link to the leadership flow. By increasing social services the affirmative is decreasing our hegemony/world leadership which they concede leads to horrendous impacts.
Correction the affirmative plan is going to directly create jobs. Jobs provided by the government are endless: Green Jobs, Infrastructure, International Relationships, Community Development.
Job loses are slowly dropping and will completely and permanently halt after the passing of affirmative plan, because more people will have jobs provided through the plan and will be putting money back into the economy. When people are putting and investing more money into the economy then more businesses will develop, putting more jobs back on the market. FYI We do solve.
The "permanent spending balloon" will solve for the economy because we have already spent so much stimulus as it is that we can only get out of this recession with further spending and stimulation.
Extend the 1AC's Impacts of Global Nuclear War causing extinction by econ. Collapse.
Yes, racism has been in our DNA since the beginning of time and no………. solving for poverty wont completely solve for DISCRIMINATION but it is a step in the right direction. FYI main reasons for continued racism is because of social inequality and lack of opportunity. Pass our plan and everyone is assured a chance at success and opportunity given by the plan erases racism in that area. The plan would solve for racism. Racism is discrimination against race not social classes.
The solvency presented by the Negative are arguments made for general block grants, not government block grants, not block grants used to fix the economy, just plain block grants by CITIES. And those block grants do not measure the success of a government operated plan.
Pull through the 1AC's solvency stating that FEDERAL BLOCK GRANTS ARE SUCCESSFUL when the provide employment.
NON-Unique: Spending is occurring in the status and further expenditures by the federal government are inevitable.
LINK TURN: Spending is inevitable now, we must now spend to keep from double dip recession. Your Impacts are now inevitable as well.
NO IMPACT FOR NEG: Spending doesn't cause econ collapse.
AFF IMPACT: Only lack of jobs will collapse an economy. No jobs mean no investments which means no new businesses for jobs which means no consumer spending. No consumer spending is the equivalent of a fail economy.
No-Link: 3 quarters of current recruit come from above the poverty line, therefore people join the military for other reasons.
NO-IMPACT: Military recruits are lowering terminal defense in status quo. So if we get people out of poverty then there is no impact due to people not being in poverty.
We must lead with soft power not hard. China is ever close to our hard power but lacks in our soft power. We need to excel in that area to maintain leadership.
Just because the government creates jobs doesn't mean your plan creates jobs.
Also, let the record show that your exact words were "Jobs provided by the government are endless." This implies that there is no job crisis and therefore we should not need the affirmative plan.
Also, giving more social services does not allow for economic growth. The people are just giving money back that was spent on them, therefore creating a balance which does not create growth.
The Affirmative's statement that we have already spent so much spending actually negates their case. Since we are still in a recession even though they have spent a multitude of stimulus, it can be assumed that stimulus doesn't help.
The Affirmative themselves stated "Racism is discrimination against race not social classes." Therefore making people not poor does not change their race and therefore racism will continue.
The state model for my solvency attack does apply. If block grants cant even work on a small scale, there effect on a large scale would be catastrophic.
Uniqueness- Saying spending is occurring now does not make the plan non unique. The uniqueness I presented only said the economy is fragile but it is recovering.
Also, claiming that something is going on now so we can do it more and it will be ok is invalid. Suppose we applied this theory to murder. People are committing murder now and the continuation of this is inevitable. However, committing more murders with this an excuse would be unacceptable.
Link-Turn: Unless the affirmative presents a warrant to this claim it should not be considered in the debate.
Impact: Again, a warrant is needed. Until it is presented, the negs still win on impacts.
1/4 of the military is still a large amount. To be exact, that percentage makes up about 575,629 soldiers. A loss of that large amount would be devastating to our hegemony.
Impact- Once again, the Affirmative has failed to present a warrant for its claims. Unless he presents evidence that recruitment is down, the negatives still have their impact.
Also, here is some evidence that shows recruitment is UP. http://www.google.com...
This article also says that it is up because the economy is down.
When it comes down to it, hard power matters most.
It is obvious to say that no one messes with China, and that can be attributed to its significant hard power.
The plan is specifically going to create jobs through funding of the federal government. If the plan were to not provide jobs as stated then the plan would be vetoed. I hope the negation is not questioning the ability of U.S.F.G. to pass plans that are doing what they were or are meant for. The trend of illegitimacy that you accuse the plan of being is bizarre and should be taken from the record.
If you know anything about the economy, creating jobs will cause growth. Consumer spending brings more money to banks and investors. This allows loans to be given for the creation of business which will increase the number of jobs. When People have money, they spend. When people are assured of a job, consumer confidence will be at an all time high, making the cycle continue. Spend, loan, more jobs, repeat. That's the definition of a booming economy.
That's not true stimulus has helped keep the banks and the whole capitalism model from falling apart. Affirmative plan is the last step before the turn around comes.
People are racist not because of skin color, but because of social classes. These social classes have been stereotyped to certain races. If we eliminate the class where poverty presides(crime, violence, and non-success) we will solve for racism because the stereotype that causes racism will be eliminated.
Solvency: Does not apply because the states were doing both the implementing and the funding. This allows for to much power in one source which is the reason why the plan was not successful. If we allow federal government to fund and states implement then the plan will solve without a doubt.
Spending is inevitable, why not spend to solve for the root cause of the economy stagnation? There is no reason no to. Economy is not fragile Obama has thrown billions in stimulus and we have seen a slight turn around. Again if we pass aff plan then the a complete turn around in the economy is inevitable.
Link Turn Valid: Maulding 8' 29, best selling economist.
Warrant provided impacts of not passing plan now stands.
NO- Impact Soft Power key to hegemony. Military has only increased spending to fight unnecessary wars. Hard power in the U.S. is currently dominating in military might and we have been getting attacked by terrorist. It is now time to let soft power lead. TO allow soft power lead we must solve our moral obligation of poverty and racism. Even if we don't solve we must try.
3 quarters of current recruits come from above the poverty line. DMN 8-25 The Dallas Morning News
Military is cutting recruits in the status quo to lower end strength and terminal defense Lee 8-17 Intelligence Analyst for the ARMY NATIONAL GUARD.
Pull through aff impacts because they have been successfully defended.
MaddieJBudnyRKHS forfeited this round.
MaddieJBudnyRKHS forfeited this round.
Stokesmarv1 forfeited this round.
MaddieJBudnyRKHS forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by zachrkhs 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||0|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.