Kipp Neg

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

1/20

Arbitrary Numbers Neg

1

Henry/ Taylor Titan Debate

Kipp NegKipp Neg .........................................................................................................................................................................1

T - Substantially 10% ...................................................................................................................................................2

T Poverty .....................................................................................................................................................................3

Cap K L (1/3) .............................................................................................................................................................. .4

Cap K ! (2/3) .................................................................................................................................................. ...... ........5

Cap K Alt (3/3) ...................................................................................................................................................... ......6

Universal CP (1/3) ..........................................................................................................................................................7

Universal CP (2/3) ..........................................................................................................................................................8

Universal CP (3/3) ..........................................................................................................................................................9

Tradeoff DA U&L (1/3) .............................................................................................................................................10

Tradeoff DA I/L(2/3) .................................................................................................................................................12

Tradeoff DA - ! (3/3) ....................................................................................................................................... ...... ...... .13

Solvency N/U - Tech .....................................................................................................................................................14

Solvency Heg .............................................................................................................................................................15

Universal CP - Stigma L&! (1/2) ..................................................................................................................................16

Universal CP Stigma S (2/2) ...................................................................................................................................17

Ext: Stigma - Education Link ........................................................................................................................................18

Ext: T Poverty (1/2) .............................................................................................................................. ...... ...... .........19

Ext: T Poverty (2/2) .............................................................................................................................. ...... ...... .........20

1

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

2/20


2


T - Substantially 10%

A. Interpretation: Substantially means at least 10%

McKelvie, 99, Justice, United States District Court for the District of Delaware, 90 F. Supp. 2d 461; 1999 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 21802

Claim 1 of the '092 patent and claim 1 of the '948 patent contain the phrase "a die of substantially uniformcross-section." KXI contends the term "substantially" means "at least a 10% change in size." KXIcontends that as applied to the claim, the phrase "substantially uniform cross-section" means "the die shouldnot change in diameter by more than 10%." Culligan contends the phrase "substantially uniform cross-section" in the '092 and '948 patents means the internal cross-section of the die must vary less than about0.010 inch along the length of the die.

B. Violation The plan only increases social service to 3% of persons in poverty

C. Reasons To Prefer:

1. Ground The Aff only affects a small minority of people in poverty. This allows them tospike out of our DA and Ks. This kills competition.

2. Education There cant be a debate when the aff claims they can have are substantially

enough to gain solvency but not enough to the link of anything.

D. Voter for Competing Interpretations and education.

2

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

3/20

Arbitrary Numbers Neg 3


T Poverty

A. Interpretation: US has a specific dollar amount to define poverty

Fass 9(Sarah, Masters of Public Health degree from the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and a Bachelors degree inAmerican Studies and French from Georgetown University, Measuring Poverty in the United States April 2009http://www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_876.pdf AD: 7/9/9) LS

How does the U.S. measure poverty? The U.S. government measures poverty by a narrow income standard that does notinclude other aspects of economic status, such as material hardship (for example, living in substandard housing)or debt, nor does it

consider financial assets(including savings or property).The official poverty measure is a specific dollar amount thatvaries by family size but is the same across the continental U.S.According to the guidelines,the poverty level in 2009 is $22,050 a

year for a family of four and $18,310 for a family of three (see table). The poverty guidelines are used to

determine eligibility for public programs. A similar but more complex measure is used for calculating poverty rates. The current poverty measurewas established in the 1960s and is now widely acknowledged to be flawed.

B. Volition: The Aff helps persons that are not in poverty by the USFG Definition, not everyone in the

schools are impoverished.

D) Reasons To Prefer:

1. Predictability: Using the USFGs poverty guideline is the most predictable

2. Education: The Neg interpretation allow for education because it allows the debate to be about the

resolution, poverty

3. Limits: The USFG guideline sets the best limits because it allows for the debate to be centered around

the agents poverty guideline

E) Voting Issue for Fairness and Ground

3

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

4/20



Cap K L (1/3)

A. Link Educational institutions serve the function of reproducing hegemonic capitalist ideology andconstructing student into capitalist subjects conducive to the established division of labor and relations of

production and exploitation.

Althusser, Professor of Philosophy Ecole Normale Supereure, 1970

(Louis, Marxists Internet Archive, Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses, 1970,http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htm, Accessed: 7-9-9, JMP)

The development of the productive forces and the type of unity historically constitutive of the

productive forces at a given moment produce the result that the labour power has to be (diversely) skilled and

therefore reproduced as such. Diversely: according to the requirements of the socio-technical division of labour ,its different jobs and posts. How is this reproduction of the (diversified) skills of labour power provided for in a capitalist

regime? Here, unlike social formations characterized by slavery or serfdom this reproduction of the skills of labour

power tends (this is a tendential law) decreasingly to be provided for on the spot (apprenticeship within production itself),

but is achieved more and more outside production: by the capitalist education system, and by other instancesand institutions. What do children learn at school? They go varying distances in their studies, but at any rate they learnto read, to write and to add i.e. a number of techniques, and a number of other things as well, including elements (which maybe rudimentary or on the contrary thoroughgoing) of scientific or literary culture, which are directly useful in the differentjobs in production (one instruction for manual workers, another for technicians, a third for engineers, a final one for highermanagement, etc.). Thus they learn know-how. But besides these techniques and knowledges, and in learning them, children atschool also learn the rules of good behaviour, i.e. the attitude that should be observed by every agent in the division of labour,

according to the job he is destined for: rules of morality, civic and professional conscience, which actually means rules of

respect for the socio-technical division of labour and ultimately the rules of the order established by class

domination. They also learn to speak proper French, to handle the workers correctly, i.e. actually (for the future capitalistsand their servants) to order them about properly, i.e. (ideally) to speak to them in the right way, etc. To put this more

scientifically, I shall say that the reproduction of labour power requires not only a reproduction of its skills, but

also, at the same time, a reproduction of its submission to the rules of the established order, i.e. areproduction of submission to the ruling ideology for the workers, and a reproduction of the ability to manipulate theruling ideology correctly for the agents of exploitation and repression, so that they, too, will provide for the domination of the

ruling class in words. In other words, the school (but also other State institutions like the Church, or other apparatuses

like the Army) teaches know-how, but in forms which ensure subjection to the ruling ideology or the mastery

of its practice. All the agents of production, exploitation and repression, not to speak of the professionals of

ideology (Marx), must in one way or another be steeped in this ideology in order to perform their tasks

conscientiously the tasks of the exploited (the proletarians), of the exploiters (the capitalists), of the exploitersauxiliaries (the managers), or of the high priests of the ruling ideology (its functionaries), etc.

4
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htmhttp://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htmhttp://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1970/ideology.htm

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

5/20



Cap K ! (2/3)

B. Impact Capitalisms drive for material makes crisis and extinction inevitable.

Meszaros, prof Philosophy & Political Theory, 95

Istvan Meszaros, 1995, Professor at University of Sussex, England, Beyond Capital: Toward a Theory of Transition

With regard to its innermost determination the capital system is expansion oriented and accumulation-drivenSuch a determination constitutes both a formerly unimaginable dynamism and a fateful deficiency. In thissense, as a system of social metabolic control capital is quite irresistible for as long as it can successfully extract andaccumulate surplus-labour-whether in directly economic or in primarily political form- in the course of the given societys

expandoed reproduction. Once, however, this dynamic process of expansion and accumulation gets stuck(fowhatever reason) the consequences must be quite devastating. For even under the normality of relatively limitedcyclic disturbances and blockages the destruction that goes with the ensuing socioeconomic and politicalcrises can be enormous, as the annals of the twentieth century reveal it, including two world wars (not to mentionnumerous smaller conflagrations). It is therefore not too difficult to imagine the implications of a systemic, truly structural crisis; i.e. onethat affects the global capital system not simply under one if its aspects-the financial/monetary one, for instance-but in all its fundamental dimensions,

questioning its viability altogether as a social reproductive system. Under the conditions of capital's structural crisis itsdestructive constituents come to the fore with a vengeance, activating the spectre of totauncontrollability in a form that foreshadows self-destruction both for this unique social reproductivesystem itself and for humanity in general. As we shall see in Chapter 3, capital was near amenable to properand durable control or rational self-restraint. For it was compatible only with limited adjustments, andeven those only for as long as it could continue to pursue in one form or another the dynamics of self-expansion and the process of accumulation.Such adjustments consisted in side-stepping, as it were, the encountered obstacles andresistances when capital was unable to frontally demolish them. This characteristic of uncontrollability was in fact one of the most important factors thatsecured capitals irresistible advancement and ultimate victory, which it had to accomplish despite the earlier mentioned fact that capital's mode of metaboliccontrol constituted the exception and not the rule in history. After all, capital at first appeared as a strictly subordinate force in the course of historicadevelopment. And worse still, on account of necessarily subordinating 'use-value' - that is, production for human need - to the requirements of self-expansionand accumulation, capital in all of its forms had to overcome also the odium of being considered for a long time the most 'unnatural' way of controlling the

production of wealth. According to the ideological confrontations of medieval times, capital was fatefully implicated in 'mortal sin' in more ways than one

and therefore had to be outlawed as 'heretic' by the highest religious authorities: the Papacy and its Synods. It could not become the dominant force of thesocial metabolic process before sweeping out of the way the absolute - and religiously sanctified -prohibition on 'usury' (contested under the category o'profit upon alienation', which really meant: retaining control over the monetary/financial capital of the age, in the interest of the accumulation process, andat the same time securing profit by lending money) and winning the battle over the 'alienability of land' (again, the subject of absolute and religiouslysanctified prohibition under the feudal system) without which the emergence of capitalist agriculture -a vital condition for the triumph of the capital system

in general would have been quite inconceivable." Thanks to a very large extent to its uncontrollability, capital succeededin overcoming all odds - no matter how powerful materially and how absolutized in terms of theprevailing value system of society - against itself, elevating its mode of metabolic control to the powerof absolute dominance as a fully extended global system. However, it is one thing to overcome andsubdue problematical (even obscurantist) constraints and obstacles, and quite another to institute thepositive principles of sustainable social development, guided by the criteria of humanly fulfillingobjectives, as opposed to the blind pursuit of capital's self-expansion. Thus the implications of theselfsame power of uncontrollability which in its time secured the victory of the capital system are far

from reassuring today when the need for restraints is conceded - at least in the form of the elusivedesideratum of 'self-regulation' - even by the system's most uncritical defenders.

5

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

6/20



Cap K Alt (3/3)

C. The Alternative Reject the affirmative in order to radically resist capitalism through a process of

revolutionary persuasion. The realistic proposals of the 1ac cannot provide a systemic alternative to

the capitalist political framework inherent in the plan. This debate is the key cite of resistance our

ability to use persuasion and show the antagonism between capitalism and the environment is uniqueto starting a revolution.

Wallis, Professor at UC Berkeley, PhD. at Columbia U., 08(Victor Wallis, Liberal Arts Professor at UC Berkeley, PhD. at Columbia U, November 2008: The Monthly Review Capitalist andSocialist Responses to the Ecological Crisishttp://monthlyreview.org/081103wallis.php)

Where the private and the civic dimensions would merge would be in developing a full-scale classanalysis of responsibility for the current crisis and, with it, a movement which could pose a systemicalternative. The steps so far taken in this direction have been limited. Exposs like Gores have called attentionfor example, to the role of particular oil companies in sponsoring attacks on scientific findings related to climate change, but

the idea that there could be an antagonism between capitalism and the environment as such has not yetmade its way into generalpublic debate. Until this happens, the inertial impact of the prevailing ideology

will severely limit the scope of any concrete recuperative measures.37 The situation is comparable to thasurrounding any prospective revolution:until acertain critical point has been reached, the only demands thatappear to have a chance of acceptance are the moderate ones. But what makes the situationrevolutionary is the very fact that the moderate or realistic proposals will not provide a solution. Whatgives these proposals a veneer of reasonableness is no more than their acceptability to political forceswhich, while unable to design a response commensurate with the scale of the problem, have not yet beendisplaced from their positions of power. But this very inability on the part of those forces is also an expressionof their weakness. They sit precariously atop a process they do not understand, whose scope they cannotimagine, and over which they can have no control. (Or, if they do sense the gravity of the situation, they view iwith a siege mentality, seeking above all to assure their own survival.38) At this point, it is clear that the purchase on

realism has changed hands. The moderates, with theirrelentless insistence on coaxing an ecological cure

out of a system inherently committed to trampling everything in its path, have lost all sense of realityThe questionnow becomes whether the hitherto misgoverned populace will be prepared topush through theradical measures (by now clearly the only realistic ones) orwhether its members will have remained so encasedwithin the capitalist paradigm that the only thing they can do is to tryfollowing the cue of those who plungedus all into this fixto fend individually for themselves. This is the conjuncture that all our efforts have been building for; itwill provide the ultimate test ofhow well we have done our work. In order for the scope of the needed measures to begrasped by sufficient numbers of people, an intense level of grassroots organizing will already have to be underway.However, the measures themselves, if they are to accomplish their purpose, will have to advance further the very process tha

put them on the agenda to begin with. A characteristically revolutionary mix ofpersuasion and coercion will necessarilyapplythe balance of these two methods depending partly on the effectiveness of prior consciousness-raising and partly on

the window of time available for the required steps. No dimension of life will be untouched. From our present vantagepoint we can only begin to envisage the specific changes, which will primarily involve a reversal or undoing ofthe more wasteful and harmful structures bequeathed by prior development. Fortunately, however, it will not be a matter ofstarting from scratch. Many historical lessons have already been learned, and not all of them are of things to avoid. There arepositive models as well.

6
http://monthlyreview.org/081103wallis.phphttp://monthlyreview.org/081103wallis.phphttp://monthlyreview.org/081103wallis.php

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

7/20

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

8/20



Universal CP (2/3)

C. Biopolitics allows the government to determine who is worthy of life and who can be killed.

Dean 2001 (Mitchell, Dean is is a Professor of Sociology and Dean of the Division of Society, Culture, Media and Philosophy atMacquarie University, Australia, Demonic Societies in States of Imagination p. 57-58)

National Socialism is one contingent, historical trajectory of the development of the biopolitical dimension ofthe social, medical, psychological, andhuman sciences that occurs tinder a particular set of historicalcircumstances.One should not underestimate the factors operative in German society, thehistorical legacy ofwar and revolutionary movements, the nature of Germanpolity, or the economic crises of the early twentiethcentury. Nevertheless,Peukert and Foucault would both agree that the kind of state racism practicedby the Nazisthat would lead to the Final Solution was quite different fromtraditional anti-Semitism insofar as it took theform of a "biological politics."as the German historians call it, that drew on the full resources of thehuman,social, and behavioral sciences. In this regard, Peukert's retrieval of the process by which the human sci-ences movefrom a concern with "mass well-being" to acting as the instrument of "mass annihilation" remains extremely interesting. In the ease

of"social-welfare education," he identifies a number of phases (1993: 243- 45) . First there was a formulation of the problemof the control of the youth in the late nineteenth century within a progressivist discourse in which every childhad a right to physical, mental, and social fitness. This was followed by a phase of a phase of routinization and acrisis of confidence exemplified by the failureof legal schemes of detention or protection of those who were"unfit" or"ineducable." The third phase, coinciding with the final years of the WeimarRepublic, has disturbingovertones for our own period. Here there were aseries of scandals in young people's homes and a debate aboutthe limits ofeducability coupled with welfare stare retrenchment. This debate introduceda new cost-benefitstrade-oft with services allocated on the basis of immediate return, and the criterion of "value" was brought intothe calculative frame-work. Value at this stage may or may not be determined on the basis of raceor genetics, but the ineducablewere excluded in 1932 from reform schooleducation. After ig those who opposed the racial version of determiningvalue were forcedinto silence, compulsory sterilization of the genetically Un-healthy was practiced, and concentration camps for the racially inferior

established. However, even this program faced a crisis of confidence and the utopian goals came up against theirlimits and the catalogue of deviance becamegreater and more detailed. The positive racism of youth welfare

provision110W met the negative radicalization of a policy of eradication of those who,in the language of theorder that represents the crucial step in the Final Solution, are deemed "unworthy of life" (lebensunwertesLeben). The biopoliticalgovernment of life had arrived at the point at which it decided who was worthliving.With the technology of murder up and running, the social and humansciences "are engaged in a parallel process of theoretical andinstitutionalgeneralization that is aimed at an all-embracing racist restructuring of socialpolicy, of educational policy, and health andwelfare policy'' (Peukert 1993:245). The term Gemeinschaftsfremde (community alien) came to embrace failures, ne'er-do-wellsparasites, good-for-nothings, troublemakers, and thosewith criminal tendencies and threatened all these with detention, imprisonmentor death.

8

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

9/20


9


Universal CP (3/3)

D. Social Services for all is the policy that the United States should adopt addressing all

peoples needs on one level is the key to integration and destroying classism.

Waxman, prof sociology Rutgers, 77(Chaim I. Waxman, professor of sociology at Rutgers University, 1977, The Stigma ofPoverty)

To effect basic change in the stigma of poverty, to really integrate the poor, requires, as we have suggested, thedesigning and implementation of policies and programs in which the non-poor can see clearbenefits for themselves and with which they can themselves identify . This means the creation ofprograms that are designed for the benefit of all in the society, as a right of citizenship, if you will, and notbecause of membership in a particular class (the lower class) which experiences economic "problems." This means theavailability and extension of services to all, as members of the society, rather than as members ofa particular segment of the society. Along these lines, Alfred J. Kahn and Sheila B. Kamerman (1975) have recently

argued that in the United States we must cease thinking of social services and public welfare as being limited solely to the poorand trou-bled. Rather, we must recognize that there are essentially only two categories, "social services and benefits connected to

problems and breakdowns (and these are not limited to the poor), andsocial services and benefits needed by average peopleunder ordinary circumstances"(p. x, emphasis in original). After surveying a variety of European social services, they suggestthat we carefully develop an adequate system of"public social utilities"(p. 172) which, like other public utilities, are available to

all in the society. It is not only the poor who have needs and problems, and the United States should,therefore, emphasize the need of "social services for all" (pp. 171ff). We would add that by doingso, not onlywould the needs of a much broader segment of the population be addressed but, simultaneously, there would be servicesavailable that would serve to integrate, in place of those that currently isolate, the poor

9

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

10/20


10


Tradeoff DA U&L (1/3)

A. Uniqueness Funding for the Militaryis on the rise.Leo Shane, Stripes Central, May 7th2009, http://blogs.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/breaking-winners-and-losers-dod-budget

Personnel Overall, Pentagon militarypersonnel funds will see nearly a 9 percent increase infunding. Along with at least a 2.9 percent pay raise, the budget includes a 6 percent raise in BasicAssistance for Housing, a 5 percent raise in Basic Allowance for Subsistence.

Special Ops The budget adds more than 2,400 spots in the services special operationscapabilities, and includes new money for special forces aircraft.Intell Ops -- They'll see a $2 billion increase in the base budget, which includes money for 50 Predator-class UAVs by 2011 and more "experimental platforms" for surveillance and reconnaissance.

Combat helicopter pilots -- Along with more money for training, the Pentagon plans to add $500millionto repair aircraft in use in Iraq and Afghanistan and add new ones.

B. Link Education spending trades off with the defense budgetDuval,03(Robert D. Duval, Associate Professor of Political Science, West Virginia University, Ph.D., Florida State University, conducts research oninternational politics, national security policy, quantitative research methods, and computer applications in political science and has publishedarticles in the American Journal of Political Science, the British Journal of Political Science, and the Journal of Conflict Resolution 9-29-03,Trading Bases: Resolving the Guns vs. Butter Tradeoff Puzzle via Full Specification, submitted to the American Political Science Review,www.polsci.wvu.edu/duval/tradeoff.pdf)

The implications of the tradeoff identity are far-reaching. We now know categorically the basic interrelationship between changes insectors of the federal budget across time which we have called budget tradeoffs. We also know from the budgetary literature that

many sectors of the budget are driven by factors exogenous to the other programs in the budget. We find strongsystematic tradeoffs between defense and health and income security, but rather weak ones foragriculture and veterans affairs. The identity expresses an interrelationship, but it does not address the fundamentally more

important question of causation. In order words, education spending is not necessarily inherently drivenby defense spending, but it is constrained by it. It may well be that the budget is a fixed pool sequential choice process, and that defense spending does indeed constraineducation, but the fact that they are systemically traded against each other has now beendeductively and empirically demonstrated. Ultimately both are constrained by the overall budget system ofwhich education, defense, etc. are a part. Budgetary needs (demands) for education, defense, etc. are no doubt determined by avariety of external factors. Inclusion of these exogenous influences can be incorporated into attempts to model the determinants ofthe budget categories themselves. We need not spend time searching for the determinants of the tradeoffs we observe. We need onlylook for the determinants of the spending categories themselves. Further specification will ultimately require those of us whocontinue studies of defense spending or any other sector of the budget to look at the budget as a full multi-equation system.Identities provide a powerful tool for further model specification, and the models of the budget have seen their use before (Fischerand Kamlet 1984; Kamlet and Mowery 1987; Auten, Bozeman and Cline 1984). These specifications of the budget system employthe accounting identity of Equation 2 in the sense that the total spending implied by the system matches that implied by the sum ofthe components of the system. Fischer and Kamlet (1984) produced an early such structural system in the literature. Interestinglyenough they also include a tradeoff term in their model without realizing that Crecines Great Identity, which they also include toconstrain estimation, provides all of the constraint necessary to compensate for tradeoffs. Their models thus appear over-constrainedwhere they have also tried to incorporate tradeoffs as exogenous factors. The research presented here has implications for much of

the discipline of political science. First, a long-standing empirical puzzle has been explained and resolved. Indeed thequestion of tradeoffs is ultimately resolved by ascertaining whether the ratio of the twosectors is stochastic or varies systematically. And indeed systematic variation in varying degrees is the norm,not the exception. This opens the door for much more important studies of the determinants of these tradeoffs. Lastly, the nature ofthe model lends itself to broadening the base of budgetary inquiry in general. First, through enhanced estimation due to theincorporation of the accounting identity as constraint, and then secondly through suggesting that we must begin to see the federal

budget as a system - and a thoroughly interrelated one - which must be estimated with simultaneous equations. It is apparentthat budgetary tradeoffs exist, now let us begin to ascertain exactly why and how.

10
http://blogs.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/breaking-winners-and-losers-dod-budgethttp://blogs.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/breaking-winners-and-losers-dod-budgethttp://blogs.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/breaking-winners-and-losers-dod-budgethttp://blogs.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/breaking-winners-and-losers-dod-budget

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

11/20


11


11

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

12/20


12


Tradeoff DA I/L(2/3)

C. Internal Link DOD budget is frayed now additional reductions in pentagon budget

will come out of missile defense

John M.Doyle. Staff writer for Aerospace Daily & Defense Report. March 30,2009 Monday. DOD Budget CutsCould Affect Missile Defense Testing Aerospace Daily & Defense Report News; Pg. 3 Vol. 229 No. 59

IfPentagon budget cuts come as expected, the reduced funding could spellless testing for the U.S. ballistic missile defense system, despiteoutside criticism and congressional calls for even more, especially of theGround-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) element. Most observers believe the MissileDefense Agency (MDA) will face cutbacks of as much as $2 billion, afifth of the annual missile defense portfolio, when President Barack Obama announces his fiscal 2010

defense budget. Obama told a White House press conference last week hisstaff already has found $40 billion in long-term savings across theDefense Department and expects to find more. MDA has spent $56 billiondeveloping and fielding a ballistic missile defense system since 2002 and is expected to spend an

additional $50 billion through 2013. But Peter Verga, principal deputyundersecretary of defense for policy, said March 23 he expects the entiredefense establishment to be operating in a more fiscallyconstrained environment for some time..

D. Internal Link - Missile defense key to ally credibility and prolif deterrence

John McHugh , U.S. House of Representatives' Armed Services Committee ,3/23/2009MCHUGH:Cutting Defense Too Deeply, American Chronicle, accessed online July 10, 2009

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/95655

Missile defensepolicy offers a good example. Many anticipate deep cuts into these programs, yet strategic deterrence

is precisely what will be required to bolster our allies and friends. A weakened globaleconomy is unlikely to lead competitors and adversaries to decrease their strategiccapability as some may hope. In fact, the opposite is more plausible. Faced with fiscalconstraints, Iran will likely double down on its ballistic missile program, while Russiansupport in halting Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile ambitions would run counter to itseconomic interests. Perceived reversal of U.S. commitment to missile defense runs the riskof threatening our credibility with our allies and may encourage others to proliferate aswell.

12
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/95655http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/95655

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

13/20


13


Tradeoff DA - ! (3/3)

E. Impact - Failure to deter prolif causes escalatory global nuclear warUtgoff in 02(Victor, Deputy Director for Strategy, Forces and Resources at the Institute for Defense Analyses, Survival,

Proliferation, Missile Defense and American Ambitions, Volume 44, Number 2, Summer, p. 87-90)

First, the dynamics of getting to a highly proliferated world could be very dangerous.

Proliferating states will feel great pressures to obtain nuclear weapons and delivery systems

before any potential opponent does. Those who succeed in outracing an opponent may

consider preemptive nuclear war before the opponent becomes capable of nuclear

retaliation. Those who lag behind might try to preempt their opponent's nuclear programme or defeat the opponent using conventional forces. And those whofeel threatened but are incapable of building nuclear weapons may still be able to join in this arms race by building other types of weapons of mass destruction, such

as biological weapons. Second, as the world approaches complete proliferation, the hazards posed by

nuclear weapons today will be magnified many times over. Fifty or more nations capable of launching nuclearweapons means that the risk of nuclear accidents that could cause serious damage not only to their own populations and environments, but those of others, is hugelyincreased. The chances of such weapons falling into the hands of renegade military units or terrorists is far greater, as is the number of nations carrying out hazardous

manufacturing and storage activities. Increased prospects for the occasional nuclear shootout Worse still, in a highly proliferated

world there would be more frequent opportunities for the use of nuclear weapons .And morefrequent opportunities means shorter expected times between conflicts in which nuclear weapons get used, unless the probability of use at any opportunity is actuallyzero. To be sure, some theorists on nuclear deterrence appear to think that in any confrontation between two states known to have reliable nuclear capabilities, theprobability of nuclear weapons being used is zero.' These theorists think that such states will be so fearful of escalation to nuclear war that they would always avoid orterminate confrontations between them, short of even conventional war. They believe this to be true even if the two states have different cultures or leaders with veryeccentric personalities. History and human nature, however, suggest that they are almost surely wrong. History includes instances in which states known to possessnuclear weapons did engage in direct conventional conflict. China and Russia fought battles along their common border even after both had nuclear weapons.Moreover, logic suggests that if states with nuclear weapons always avoided conflict with one another, surely states without nuclear weapons would avoid conflictwith states that had them. Again, history provides counter-examples. Egypt attacked Israel in 1973 even though it saw Israel as a nuclear power at the time. Argentinainvaded the Falkland Islands and fought Britain's efforts to take them back, even though Britain had nuclear weapons. Those who claim that two states with reliablenuclear capabilities to devastate each other will not engage in conventional conflict risking nuclear war also assume that any leader from any culture would not choosesuicide for his nation. But history provides unhappy examples of states whose leaders were ready to choose suicide for themselves and their fellow citizens. Hitlertried to impose a 'victory or destruction' policy on his people as Nazi Germany was going down to defeat.' And Japan's war minister, during debates on how to respondto the American atomic bombing, suggested 'Would it not be wondrous for the whole nation to be destroyed like a beautiful flower?" If leaders are willing to engagein conflict with nuclear-armed nations, use of nuclear weapons in any particular instance may not be likely, but its probability would still be dangerously significant.In particular, human nature suggests that the threat of retaliation with nuclear weapons is not a reliable guarantee against a disastrous first use of these weapons. Whilenational leaders and their advisors everywhere are usually talented and experienced people, even their most important decisions cannot be counted on to be the productof well-informed and thorough assessments of all options from all relevant points of view. This is especially so when the stakes are so large as to defy assessment and

there are substantial pressures to act quickly, as could be expected in intense and fast-moving crises between nuclear-armed states .6 Instead, like other human beings,national leaders can be seduced by wishful thinking. They can misinterpret the words or actions of opposing leaders. Their advisors may produce answers that theythink the leader wants to hear, or coalesce around what they know is an inferior decision because the group urgently needs the confidence or the sharing ofresponsibility that results from settling on something. Moreover, leaders may not recognise clearly where their personal or party interests diverge from those of theircitizens. Under great stress, human beings can lose their ability to think carefully. They can refuse to believe that the worst could really happen, oversimplify theproblem at hand, think in terms of simplistic analogies and play hunches. The intuitive rules for how individuals should respond to insults or signs of weakness in anopponent may too readily suggest a rash course of action. Anger, fear, greed, ambition and pride can all lead to bad decisions. The desire for a decisive solution to theproblem at hand may lead to an unnecessarily extreme course of action. We can almost hear the kinds of words that could flow from discussions in nuclear crises orwar. 'These people are not willing to die for this interest'. 'No sane person would actually use such weapons'. 'Perhaps the opponent will back down if we show him wemean business by demonstrating a willingness to use nuclear weapons'. 'If I don't hit them back really hard, I am going to be driven from office, if not killed'. Whetherright or wrong, in the stressful atmosphere of a nuclear crisis or war, such words from others, or silently from within, might resonate too readily with a harried leader.Thus, both history and human nature suggest that nuclear deterrence can be expected to fail from time to time, and we are fortunate it has not happened yet. But thethreat of nuclear war is not just a matter of a few weapons being used. It could get much worse. Once a conflict reaches the point where nuclear weapons areemployed, the stresses felt by the leaderships would rise enormously. These stresses can be expected to further degrade their decision-making. The pressures to forcethe enemy to stop fighting or to surrender could argue for more forceful and decisive military action, which might be the right thing to do in the circumstances, butmaybe not. And the horrors of the carnage already suffered may be seen as justification for visiting the most devastating punishment possible on the enemy.' Again,history demonstrates how intense conflict can lead the combatants to escalate violence to the maximum possible levels. In the Second World War, early promises notto bomb cities soon gave way to essentially indiscriminate bombing of civilians. The war between Iran and Iraq during the 1980s led to the use of chemical weaponson both sides and exchanges of missiles against each other's cities. And more recently, violence in the Middle East escalated in a few months from rocks and small

arms to heavy weapons on one side, and from police actions to air strikes and armoured attacks on the other. Escalation of violence is also basic human nature. Oncethe violence starts, retaliatory exchanges of violent acts can escalate to levels unimagined by the participants beforehand.' Intense and blinding anger is a common

response to fear or humiliation or abuse. And such anger can lead us t0 impose on our opponents whatever levels of violence are readily accessible. In sum,

widespread proliferation is likely to lead to an occasional shoot-out with nuclear weapons,

and that such shoot-outs will have a substantial probability of escalating to the maximum

destruction possible with the weapons at hand. Unless nuclear proliferation is stopped, we are headed toward a worldthat will mirror the American Wild West of the late 1800s. With most, if not all, nations wearing nuclear 'six-shooters' on their hips, the world

may even be a more polite place than it is today,but every once in a while we will all gather on a hill to burythe bodies of dead cities or even whole nations.

13

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

14/20


14


Solvency N/U - Tech

U.S. tech leadership high overall prefer our comparative evidence

RAND 08 (June 12th, 2008, RAND -- National Defense Research Institute, US Competitivenessin Science and Technology P.17)2

We find that the United States continues to lead the world in science and technology. TheUnited States grew faster in many measures of S&T capability than did Japan and Europe,and developing nations such as China, India, and South Korea showed rapid growth in S&Toutput measures, but they are starting from a small base. These developing nations do notyet account for a large share of world innovation and scientific output, which continues to bedominated by the United States, Europe, and Japan. The United States accounts for 40percent of total world R&D spending and 38 percent of patented new technology inventionsby the industrialized nations of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD), employs 37 percent (1.3 million) of OECD researchers (FTE), produces 35 percent,49 percent, and 63 percent, respectively, of total world publications, citations, and highlycited publications, employs 70 percent of the worlds Nobel Prize winners and 66 percent ofits most-cited individuals, and is the home to 75 percent of both the worlds top 20 and top

40 universities and 58 percent of the top 100. A comparison of S&T indicators for the UnitedStates with those of other nations/regions reveals the following: Other nations/regions arenot significantly outpacing the United States in R&D expenditures. China and SouthKorea, which are showing rapid growth in R&D expenditures, are starting from a small base,and the EU-15 and Japan are growing slower than the United States. Othernations/regions are not outpacing the United States in S&T employment, as growth inresearchers in the EU-15 was comparable to, and that of Japan considerably lower than, thatof the United States.

14

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

15/20


15


Solvency Heg

They cant gain there heg solvency until the students graduate. Dont let them win on time

frames. They cant solve for 10 years.

15

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

16/20


16


Universal CP - Stigma L&! (1/2)

CP Text:[Insert plan text without persons living in poverty}

The counterplan solves the case and solves stigma.

A. Link - Educational social services stigmatize the poor.Spicker, Professor and Grampian Chair of Public Policy at the Robert Gordon University,84[Paul Spicker, Professor and Grampian Chair of Public Policy at the Robert GordonUniversity, 1984, Stigma and Social Welfare, pg. 44-45]

But here, as in the health service, there are exceptions to be made. In the US, it hasbeen argued that streaming in schools is stigmatising, because it degrades certainpupils in the lower streams (Pink, Sweeney, 1978, 373). Jensen criticizes minimumcompetency tests for high school graduation: It appears to me to be an unnecessarystigmatising practice with absolutely no redeeming benefits to individual pupils or tosociety. (cited Cookson, 1980.)

B. Impact - Stigmatization creates a cycle of degradation turning case.

Spicker, Professor and Grampian Chair of Public Policy at the Robert Gordon University,

84 [Paul Spicker, Professor and Grampian Chair of Public Policy at the Robert GordonUniversity, 1984, Stigma and Social Welfare, pg. 25-26]

Thirdly, within the context of the service, stigmatized people may be treated as inferiorindividuals. One of the most degrading features of the old peoples homes described byTownsend (1963) found, in a survey of hospitals for mentally handicapped people, noonly a lack of personal possessions and storage space, but a lack of anywhere that wasprivate a proportion and toilets without doors, and others had them without partitions.Institutions affect the behaviour and character of the residents. Goffman suggests, inAsylums, that much of the bahaviour of people in mental institutions can be understoodas a reaction to a situation where sanity seems to have been abandoned rather than pathological madness (Goffman, 1961). And Barton (1959) describes one effect ofinstitutional life as a clinical syndrome, which he terms institutional neurosis. Mayresidential institutions are insufficiently protected from these problems. The buildingsare physically isolated, the staff especially trained staff, who are substantially in themajority tend, for there own convenience, and because they are severely overburdenedto favour methods that facilitate the control of residents rather than their care, and theresidents are not in a position protest (see K.Jones et el. 1967).The provision of services reflects an underlying attitude to the people who use socialservices. They are supposed not to care about the quality of service they receive.Privacy, personal possessions and consideration for personal needs are thought of asdispensable luxuries. The recipient is treated as something less than human, and thistreatment both implies and encourages the degradation.

16

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

17/20


17


Universal CP Stigma S (2/2)

C. Solvency: The only policies that will take a step to reducing poverty stigma are those

that affect not only the poor.

Waxman,prof sociology Rutgers, 77(Chaim I. Waxman, professor of sociology at Rutgers University, 1977, The Stigma ofPoverty)

A basic flaw in the strategies, proposals, and policies that have thus; far been discussedis that they are designed to assist the poor, as such, they invariably contribute to thefurther isolation of the poor and enhance the1; stigma of poverty. So long as they remain"programs in aid of the poor,"! thus calling attention to the recipient's primary role and status as poor, these programswill continue to be seen as programs that burden the" non-poor, that the non-poor are forced to give to the poor andfor which1 the non-poor receive no return. This runs counter to what Alvin Gouldner (1960) has termed "The Norm ofReciprocity" (cf, Offenbacher, I968),and is a basic fallacy in applying a limited conflict-theory approach. As long asthe conflict limits, restricts, in accordance with the rules of the state, as long as those generating the conflict restrainthemselves by precluding political revolution, then the non-poor retain the upper hand. Since they have vestedinterests in retaining their dominance, they have vested interests in maintaining and perpetuating poverty (cf. Gans,

1972), and this provides grounds for the non-poor's derivation of stigma-theories thatrationalize their animosity for the poor-"parasites." This is especially likely to occur at times whenthe non-poor are experiencing economic difficulties. As has been shown, the poor are then especially singled out as e

source of problems in the economy. Being so isolated, they are the most vulnerable, easilyaccessible scapegoats. The conclusion to be drawn from our analysis, insofar as social policy concerned, is thatthe most effective means of breaking the vicious circle, ie stigma of poverty, is by creating andimplementing policies and pro grams that will lead to the integration of the poor with thenon-poor, 'rather than to their further isolation. We would not be so bold as to suggest that we have the answer as tohow this integration is to be ^accomplished, for we are quite certain that there are no quick and easy answers; there areno panaceas. However, our analysis does suggest direction, and we will attempt to broadly outline a number of

proposals toward that end.

17

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

18/20


18


Ext: Stigma - Education Link

Link - Educational social services segregate and stigmatize the poor.Spicker, Professor and Grampian Chair of Public Policy at the Robert Gordon University,

84 [Paul Spicker, Professor and Grampian Chair of Public Policy at the Robert GordonUniversity, 1984, Stigma and Social Welfare, pg. 45]

A further source of stigma in education lies in the links of certain schools with deprivedareas. no education authority, Freeman argues (1979), however inspired orresourceful, could have escaped from some of the stigma which inner city derelictionimparts to the public services.Berg (1968) describes how parents from a respectable school objected to a move to adisreputable one: It was a bad district, and they did not want their children to inherit thestigma. (P. 196.)

18

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

19/20


19


Ext: T Poverty (1/2)

A. Extend the Neg Interpretation: Living in poverty is defined as people living below the

poverty line

US Census Bureau, 8 (US Census Bureau, U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and Household Economic StatisticsDivision http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty.htmlPoverty definition)

--- Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the Census

Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to

determine who is in poverty. If a familys total income is less than the familys

threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. Theofficial poverty thresholds do not vary geographically, but they are updated for inflation using

Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and doesnot include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps).

B: Extend the violation: The entire 1AC talks about KIPP in relations to all students, not

just the ones impoverished. This makes them entirely not topical. This also places a double

bind on the Aff, either they are XT because they are helping person that are not consider to

be impoverished, or they cant gain all their solvency.

C) Extend Reasons To Prefer:

1. Predictability: Affirmatives that generate offense from their advocacy outside of the

plan explode the topic because there is an infinite number of things that they could

advocate that are tangentially related to the topic Affirmatives could stand up and read

movie scripts that barely relate to the topic, and negatives would never be able to predict

them.

2. Education: The neg interpretation allow for education because we actually talk about the

topic. The Affs plan hurts education because they dont let us talk about people that are in

poverty.

3. Limits. There are thousands of ways measure poverty. Our interp limits the amount of

cases to those that dont use the federal poverty guideline, which limits affs to a predictable

set of cases in the literature base.

19

8/9/2019 Kipp Neg

20/20


20


Ext: T Poverty (2/2)

4. List of topical cases:

DHHS 9 (Department of Health and Human Services, The 2009 HHS Poverty Guidelines: One Version of the[U.S.] Federal Poverty Measure, AD: 7/9/9) LS

The HHS poverty guidelines are used in setting eligibility criteria for a number offederal programs.Some programs actually use a percentage multiple of the guidelines, such as 125 percent, 150 percent, or 185percent. This is not the result of a single coherent plan; instead, it stems from decisions made at different

times by different congressional committees or federal agencies. Some examples of federal programs

that use the guidelines in determining eligibility are:HHS: Community Services BlockGrant, Head Start, Low-Income Home Energy Assistance, Children's Health

Insurance ProgramDepartment of Agriculture: Food Stamps; Special SupplementalNutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC); the National School

Lunch and School Breakfast programsDepartment of Energy: Weatherization AssistanceDepartment of Labor: Job Corps, Senior Community Service Employment Program, NationalFarmworker Jobs Program Legal Services Corporation: Legal services for the poorCertain relatively recent provisions of Medicaid use the poverty guidelines; however, the rest of that program

(accounting for roughly three-quarters of Medicaid eligibility determinations) does not use the guidelines.Major means-tested programs that do NOT use the poverty guidelines in determining eligibility

include Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (and its predecessor, Aid to Families with DependentChildren), Supplemental Security Income, the Earned Income Tax Credit program, the Department ofHousing and Urban Development's means-tested housing assistance programs, and the Social Services

Block Grant.

5. Extra-Topicality is bad: It allows affirmatives to spike out of links and counterplans. It

gives affirmatives advantages that they would otherwise not have. It disproves the

resolution because it shows that it is not sufficient for the advantages. And, any increased

ground that we get is unpredictable and undebatable.

E: Value Competing Interpretation over reasonability. The Aff either helps people

impoverished or they dont. The Aff cant kind of help them; there is a bright line upon

which they fall to the wrong side.

F) Extend Voting Issue for Fairness and Ground and default CI

20

Kipp Neg

Documents

Transcript of Kipp Neg