You are on page 1of 20

SDI 2008

Arjun Vellayappan
WW(J)D LV
Max Lesser

2AC Blocks
2AC Blocks..................................................................................................................................................................................................1
States CP 2AC (1/2).....................................................................................................................................................................................2
States CP 2AC (2/2).....................................................................................................................................................................................4
Elections 2AC (1/2).....................................................................................................................................................................................5
Elections 2AC (2/2).....................................................................................................................................................................................7
2AC Solvency Blocks..................................................................................................................................................................................8
AT: T-Incentives Can’t Be Mandatory.........................................................................................................................................................9
India Deal Bad 2AC (1/2)..........................................................................................................................................................................10
India Deal Bad 2AC (2/2)..........................................................................................................................................................................11
Federalism 2AC (1/2)................................................................................................................................................................................12
Federalism 2AC (2/2)................................................................................................................................................................................13
Lopez CP 2AC (1/2) .................................................................................................................................................................................14
Lopez CP 2AC (2/2)..................................................................................................................................................................................15
Russian Oil 2AC........................................................................................................................................................................................16
OPEC Flood 2AC......................................................................................................................................................................................17
Capitalism 2AC (1/2).................................................................................................................................................................................18
Capitalism 2AC (2/2).................................................................................................................................................................................19
DA SLAYER..............................................................................................................................................................................................20

1

SDI 2008
Arjun Vellayappan
WW(J)D LV
Max Lesser

States CP 2AC (1/2)
1. Perm do both

2. Multi-Actor Fiat Bad

A) Reciprocity – as affirmative we can only advocate the USFG, so the neg should be held to a single
advocacy

B) Not real world – policies are never implemented in unison and uniformly in the real world

C) Justifies Intrinsic Perms – in a world where the neg can use any agent and fiat multiple actors,
intrinsic perms are key to check abuse

D) Vote them down - its not about what you say, but what you justify

3. Perm – have the states and the federal government cooperate to solve

It solves alternative energy best

Sanya Carleyolsen, PhD candidate Public Policy @ UNC, Summer 2006, “Tangled in the Wires”, 46 Nat. Resouces J. 759, lexis

A transition to wide-scale RE development will require continued government efforts to develop feasible and consistent economic incentives, comprehensive
national- and state-level energy plans, and a stronger regulatory environment. State governments need to enhance their energy plans with tighter environmental targets and
more extensive initiatives. Local governments need to expand the scope of planning initiatives to include policies that protect, legitimize, and advance RE development. All levels of
government and public actors need to coordinate RE efforts in order to advance a more effective, cohesive movement.

4. States won’t get modeled internationally – they aren’t perceived and are unconstitutional under the
Compacts Clause

5. CP can’t solve
A) Federal action is key to avert state patchwork regulations that create uncertainty for the auto industry

Business Week 02 (“Clean-Air Standards: An End Run around Washington”, http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_20/b3783047.htm)
Detroit was blindsided. Expecting an assault of environmental legislation from Washington this spring, the auto industry dispatched troops of lobbyists to the banks of the Potomac to make a stand, successfully defeating a
After environmental lobbyists worked their own contacts in California, the
push for stricter national fuel-economy standards. But the real threat came from the other coast.
state senate approved a bill on May 2 that would force auto makers to sell cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars in the state by 2008. "I was elated,"
says Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope. "This was such a sharp contrast from how Congress has reacted to environmental legislation." The California battle isn't over yet: The state
assembly still needs to approve a final version of the measure, and Governor Gray Davis hasn't indicated whether he'll sign it. But if--as expected--the environmental lobby wins this skirmish,
it may ultimately prove just as significant as a victory in Washington would have. Why? California is the only state that can create clean-air standards, since its laws predate federal regulations.
Butother states have the option of adopting California's rules. So the environmentalists plan to take the same legislation to like-minded Northeastern states and then deeper into the heartland, ultimately
It's a strategy that could work--and
targeting key states such as Texas and Florida. "We have accepted the fact that environmental leadership is not coming from Washington," Pope says. "We will focus on consumers and the states."

that has Detroit hopping mad. After defeating the federal measure that would have required auto makers to boost fuel efficiency in March, the industry thought it had wrapped up the issue. Now, though, Detroit may have to wrestle with the environmentalists in state capitals. In the past,
California's clean-air and low-emissions laws have gotten a warm reception in New York and New England, where legislators have adopted California's existing limits on carbon monoxide, smog-causing nitrous oxide, and soot from cars. "Our biggest fear is that this becomes the battle we already fought and won at the federal level,"

Since the auto industry doesn't want the stricter
says Gregory J. Dana, vice-president of environmental affairs for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers in Washington. That's likely to happen, which could ultimately bring the battle right back to Washington.

California standards adopted state by state, it might agree to somewhat tougher federal fuel economy and emissions laws. Says one
General Motors Corp. insider: "We can't have 50 different states telling us how to build cars. That would be chaos." And that's exactly what the
environmental lobby is counting on.

2

SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser 3 .

not greenhouse gas emissions. even though direct regulation of fuel economy would dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions. But there is another question. so the negative should not be able to kick their CP – stick them to a stable advocacy B) Kills Education and Fairness – with conditionality we only learn the surface of a variety of things instead of learning in-depth about key issues on the topic and the neg wins every round since they can kick out of our best arguments. To date. The California Air Resources Board has responded to that problem in part by changing the mix of what can meet the zero emissions vehicle [(ZEV)] regulatory choices has been struck down by a federal district court on grounds that an entirely different federal requirements. which is the issue that the court struck down. Although several of these fuels have a long history of production. This decision by federal district court judge is now being appealed. However. California historically has been allowed to regulate emissions that are related to air pollution. A key issue.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser States CP 2AC (2/2) B) Regulatory uncertainty undermines investment in alcohol fuels Parker and Smith 08 (Geoffrey and Eric. the Clean Air Act is about regulating air pollution emissions. Professor of Law. since potential legal challenge to anything that CARB does is federal preemption by federal statutes regulating fuel economy standards. and auto manufacturers are going to argue first that EPA should not grant California the waiver--that California doesn't have the legal authority to do it. such as ethanol. they have not been widely adopted in the absence of significant government mandates or subsidies.Federal courts will strike down state attempts to regulate ANYTHING related to fuel Carlson 03 (Ann. C) Destroys Argument Responsibility – it causes negatives to solely go for undercovered flows which is both terrible for in-depth education and independently skews 2AC strategy. there is a renewed focus on alternate fuels. as has been true in European markets for several years. UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy. however.academickeys. and consumption. lexis) Carlson: As I said in my introductory remarks.] "Look. UCLA School of Law.S. 7.php?dothis=download&job_file%5BIDX%5D=32) As nations search for methods to reduce green house gas emissions. There have been a lot of problems with that program. and butanol. The move to institute markets for carbon dioxide emissions makes it possible that some previously omitted costs will be included in future energy prices in the U. California every year has gotten a waiver from federal emissions standards to establish its own emissions standards. is the timeline in which such markets are implemented and the resulting CO2 prices. That may be a different question. Freeman School of Business. So if they are regulating emissions in a way that relates to fuel efficiency--according to this court--that is preempted by federal law. Why do I tell you all this? It has bearing on California's regulatory alternatives under AB 1493. So California has to take different regulatory approaches. One of the things California has done that differs from other states is to force auto manufacturers to develop a certain percentage of zero emission vehicles. The Impact of Carbon Emissions Policy and Transportation Costs on Alternative Transportation Fuel Supply Chain Economics. 12/23. Quantifying the exact cost of any emission is likely to remain impossible." 4 .com/seeker_job_attachments. but incorporating some non-zero cost has the potential to significantly change the economics of the transportation fuel industry.” engineering. California has to be one careful not to directly regulate fuel economy. bio- diesel. One of its statute--the one that controls fuel economy standards--preempts California from engaging in anything that relates to fuel efficiency. Given the regulatory uncertainty. Secondly. one cost that has long been absent in energy prices is the cost of environmental emissions. Empirically proven . One of the regulations in the ZEV regulatory scheme briefly discusses fuel efficiency. there must be a reasonable probability that the fuel can become competitive in total costs. even if the waiver is granted. no alternative fuels have passed this test in the United States. For an alternate transportation fuel to displace conventional oil derivatives such as gasoline and diesel. including production. however. but there have also been a lot of advances. Conditionality/Dispositionality Bad A) Not Reciprocal – The aff can’t just kick their plan. 6. [the manufacturers will argue. it is difficult to justify major capital investments to reduce CO2 until a clearer picture of costs and benefits emerges. there is a question under the Clean Air Act about whether California will receive a waiver for trying to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. distribution.

He held a second press conference just a few hours later to clarify his comments. Meanwhile. By selling flex-fuel vehicles. "Now that Barack Obama has changed course and proven his past positions to be just empty words. Despite claims that Obama is making in-roads in the Red States. That position has not changed. 5 . It allows Mr McCain to argue that he. North Dakota. "Twelve percent of Democrats say they will support McCain in the general election. Republican Senator John McCain. said: “Since announcing his campaign in 2007. according to an article on the Washington Post. "If he had visited Iraq sooner or actually had a one-on-one meeting with General (David) Petraeus. we would like to congratulate him for accepting John McCain’s principled stand on this critical national security issue. it gives Republicans evidence to use to depict Mr Obama as just another cynical politician prepared to change his position to win votes. "When I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground.” The charge stung Mr Obama into a swift response. So by making vehicles that accept flex-fuel." he said. 2. http://www. Your DA is non-unique – federal government already giving incentives for FFVs Car Talk 07 (“Flex-fuel vehicles and E85”. Obama has won 14 red states and over half of them have not voted for a Democrat to be president in the general election in over 40 years. Utah and Virginia. I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies. he would have changed his position long ago. The same article goes on to point out that McCain leads Obama by 8 votes among registered Independent voters. No Links – A) Extend our Zubrin Fall 07 card from the 1AC which says that Bush opposes FFV mandates now. He accused the McCain camp of suggesting "we were changing our policy when we haven't". so he wouldn’t get credit for the plan. the central premise of Barack Obama’s candidacy was his commitment to begin withdrawing American troops from Iraq immediately. Missouri (1996).uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2243536/US-election-Barack-Obama-wobbles-on-withdrawing-Iraq-troops. http://www. Finally. The charge that he is changing his mind is toxic for three reasons. Kansas. the numbers seem to prove otherwise. 3.html) Here's one reason: the federal government has started giving manufacturers a financial incentive to produce flex-fuel vehicles. http://www. Nebraska." Mr Obama said.cartalk. as the Florida primary exemplifies (Despite the fact that it was not counted).telegraph. "I've always said the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. Barack Obama reversed that position proving once again that his words do not matter. That's higher than the 8 percent of Democrats who defected to President Bush in 2004. "I've given no indication of a change in policy. but higher-profit SUVs without incurring penalties. Obama five states have backed a Democratic presidential candidate sometime in the past 20 years: Colorado (1992)." will certainly have a tough time getting a majority of the Latino vote as well. Non-Unique: A) McCain will win election – independents. who have grown uneasy at some more moderate positions he has struck in recent weeks. Today.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Elections 2AC (1/2) 1.html Senator Barack Obama has rushed to clarify his position on the Iraq War after he appeared to wobble on a commitment to withdraw US ground troops within 16 months. Mr Obama promises he "will remove one to two combat brigades each month. Ultimately. that McCain will win the 2008 election. and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months". Nearly a quarter of Clinton supporters say they will back McCain instead of Obama in the general election". I have not equivocated on that position. editor for the Political Bull. Georgia (1992). any shift on Iraq risks alienating the left-wing of his own party. Idaho. Latinos and red states prove Perce 7/4/08 (Joseph. I am not searching for manoeuvering room with respect to that position. B) Obama will lose – Iraq Telegraph 7/4/08. I intend to end this war. especially with a Democratic Congress. On his website. they earn credits towards their mandatory CAFE fuel economy requirements. According to a recent article on CBS News. not Mr Obama. a central plank of his candidacy.com/content/features/alternativefuels/flexfuel. The article states. But he told journalists in North Dakota that those policies could be "refined" in the light of what he finds in Iraq.co. "Lyndon Johnson in the 1964 campaign was the last Democrat who won Alaska. a spokesman for Mr McCain. a supporter of the Iraq War who has taunted Mr Obama over his failure to visit Iraq for more than two years.html) Help for McCain will come from former Clinton supporters that will come to his side during the November Election. The Democratic presidential nominee used a press conference to say that the timetable was not set in stone and that he would adjust his plans based on conditions on the ground when he visits Iraq later this month. Two other important factors to consider in November are the Latino vote and the vote from the so-called "Red States". Louisiana (1996) and Iowa (2000). Brian Rogers.net/why_i_believe_mccain_will_win_the_election. Secondly." The comments were immediately seized upon by his rival. has a better understanding of what now needs to be done in Iraq.politicalbull. Hillary defectors. they can sell more gas guzzling. it is my opinion for the reasons stated above.

one environmental policy won’t completely change the political spectrum and Bush’s popularity. 6 .SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser B) The election is still 5 months away.

it's a nonissue. "If you ask people what's the major problem facing the country today.. Sen. national political director at the Sierra Club. GOP pollster Bob Moore argues that their minds. D-Ill. John McCain. The DA is not intrinsic – there is no reason why a policy maker can’t do the plan and also not (insert impact).com/articles/071012nj1. however." The Democratic candidates generally agree that the United States should dramatically reduce national greenhouse-gas emissions. Only Sen. D-Conn.S. Some of the contenders occasionally target climate change in their speeches." Republican pollster Steve Lombardo said. No internal link: A) No coat-tails – Bush is super unpopular now so he can’t gain enough popularity to help McCain B) 2000 race proves – Bush ran against McCain in 2000 and they weren’t buddies then. Christopher Dodd.. has criticized President Bush for failing to do voters have other things on more to curb global warming. "The issue agenda plate is very full from the perspective of the voters. using energy and environmental issues to catch voters' attention. environment is pretty low on the list. and they espouse a menu of environmental controls. recently warned the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation that global warming could have a disproportionately high impact on minority communities. are Oil prices are soaring and a procession of studies is calling for immediate action to prevent the most catastrophic effects of climate change. 7 . frankly. The GOP contenders are playing to the party's conservative wing. dependence on foreign oil." 4. so they won’t be now 5. Political analysts debate whether energy and the environment will emerge as hot issues in the general election." said Cathy Duvall. The top Democratic and Republican contenders pepper their campaign speeches and ads with promises to promote new energy technologies and lessen U. http://news. The Republicans rarely go beyond promises of energy security and the advanced energy technologies. on the Democratic side and on the Republican side. But political analysts say that energy and climate change are not defining issues in the 2008 presidential primaries. has run ads in New Hampshire touting his proposal to tackle global warming with a tax on corporate carbon dioxide emissions.. R-Ariz. Sen. "They're clustering around the same bottom line.nationaljournal.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Elections 2AC (2/2) C) Alternative energy isn’t a key issue – voters perceive candidates as too similar National Journal 07 (10/6/07. "It's not yet a voting issue because. Barack Obama. <<Read Impact Defense>> 7. <<Read Impact Turns>> 6.htm) Few of the presidential candidates. voters who are generally not motivated by environmental issues. the candidates are all clearly similar." he said. "Compared to health care.

the incentive will be to make more pumps because every car will be flex fuel compatible. flex fuel pumps will jump up across the nation. Hybrid seeds are being used now. but: After the mandate there will be an international market for flex fuels. They say not enough ethanol. there is still diversity in the wild: the crops grown by farmers are not the ones in nature. but: extend our Zubrin in 6 card that says after a flex fuel mandate is passed. 8 . There are not a lot of flex fuel pumps now because there are not a lot of flex fuel cars. so it doesn’t matter if they are monoculture. 2. and we will be able to buy from them. Plus. but: There is no internal link between increased use of hybrid seeds and the destruction of the biosphere.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser 2AC Solvency Blocks 1. They say hybrid seeds. More of our crops will be used to make flex fuel. After the plan. 3. and other countries will be able to make ethanol. and none of your impacts have happened. They say no oil pumps.

Limits. negative incentives might be viewed as penalties or costs associated with a given activity. 2. We Meet . It makes non-compliance more expensive for a business which therefore works to avoid the threat. Environmental and Natural Resources Practice Group. Not FX T – all plans include steps and we don’t spike any of your alternative energy links. Environmental Protection Agency. an incentive to implement these policies is achieved. Our definition intends to define whereas their interpretation is taken out of context.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser AT: T-Incentives Can’t Be Mandatory A. 3. Winter. Walter and Mary Ellen. Counter interpretation – Incentives can be positive or negative and we’re both a positive and negative incentive – we’re positive because we promote regulatory uncertainty and negative because we use regulations Jones.” 201 C. Arkansas. lexis) Economic incentives 197 can be either positive or negative. D. so its not a voter for fairness or ground. Wright and Ternes 99 (Timothy. Chairman. 198 They are analogous to the proverbial “carrot and stick”. 2. Our evidence is in the context of economic incentives for environmental regulation. 4. Our Standards are Best 1. Reasons to Prefer: 1. may save-or provide additional money. One author states: “In the purest form. Enforcement of environmental regulation is a negative incentive.they limit our half of the affirmative cases including cases core to the topic like cap-and-trade and carbon tax. Reasonability. The un-underlined section of their Toomey definition concedes that incentives can be both positive and negative. Ground. 200 In contrast. Rev.we increase both the affirmative and negative ground because they get new DA’s based of regulatory action and we get more plans that are core to the topic. 21 U. This agrees with out counter interpretation. and keeping a company’s image from becoming tarnished in the public eye. or produce other kinds of tangible benefit and government subsidy. negative incentives include avoiding liability for cleanup costs or private damages.Auto makers benefit from our plan meaning we are a positive incentive since they can avoid penalties and gain regulatory certainty about the auto industry from flex-fuel vehicles. We will concede that contextual definitions are best. whereas theirs talks about alcohol retail establishments. Assistant Regional Counsel. E. 191. Little Rock L. don’t vote on T since it is a no-risk position for the neg and the death penalty for us. Positive incentives such as free compliance advice and technical assistance. Topicality is not a voter for fairness and education 9 . B. Region VI. escaping punitive enforcement actions.if we are anywhere close to being topical. 3.

auto fuel efficiency standards could soon kick into high gear.loe. After sitting in neutral for two US automakers have effectively resisted attempts in Congress to increase decades. http://www. lawmakers from Michigan. Associated Press. I'm Bruce Gellerman. Link Turn: A) The auto industry opposes the plan Machacek 06 (John. which is all but ignored by the Democratic-controlled Congress.General Motors. "But you're still the president of the United States. as required by the fuel choices bills. Lawmakers blew right by him in approving a massive farm bill. GELLERMAN: From the Jennifer and Ted Stanley Studios in Somerville. director of policy and communications in GM's Washington office. But automakers and their Democratic allies are pushing back. Non-Unique: A) Your DA is non-unique  the federal government is already giving incentives for FFV’s Car Talk 07 (“Flex-fuel vehicles and E85”. 10 .announced in late June plans to double their production of flex-fuel vehicles that can use E-85 ethanol or biodiesel by 2010.cartalk.html) For example. U. because they can have a catastrophic economic effect on industry. That would mean that 20 percent of cars built by them that year would be capable of running on alternative fuels. oppose a tax credit for accelerating production of flex-fuel cars or gas-electric hybrids. he served notice of how much sway he still holds on matters of national security. they earn credits towards their mandatory CAFE fuel economy requirements. When Bush signed a law Thursday to broaden the government's eavesdropping power.com/content/features/alternativefuels/flexfuel. Yes. from offshore drilling to tax cuts to a trade deal with Colombia. He also has won fight after fight to keep the Iraq war going without a timeline for withdrawal of U. He vetoed a bill that would have banned waterboarding for terror suspects. To do more in a short period of time. http://seattlepi. Ford and DaimlerChrysler -.S. Living on Earth's Jeff Young reports from Washington. President Bush still has some juice.S. could prevent "We cannot support mandates that are not founded on sound science domestic automakers from picking the right technology for alternative fuel cars. B) The auto industry has a strong influence on Congress Living on Earth 07 (“Fuel Economy Fight”.com/articles/81996.nwsource.S. For years standards for what's called CAFE. So by making vehicles that accept flex-fuel. Staff of Gannet News Service. troops. By selling flex-fuel vehicles.html) For an unpopular guy on his way out of his office. But Detroit is betting on powerful allies on Capitol Hill to put up some roadblocks. He keeps pushing for items that seem to be going nowhere.lohas. Living on Earth's Jeff Young tells us some powerful motor city lawmakers want to weaken mileage standards and prevent states from regulating the greenhouse gases coming out of cars. Now. Why the difference on security? …[continued 21 paragraphs later]….SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser India Deal Bad 2AC (1/2) 1. in for Steve Curwood. but higher-profit SUVs without incurring penalties. they can sell more gas guzzling. They fear it would increase the lead that Toyota and other foreign companies already have over American companies in alternative fuel cars. concerns about high gas prices and global warming are pushing Congress to act. “On National Security. then watched as Democrats failed to override him. Bush Still Has Juice”.org/shows/segments. fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks could soon get a jump-start.” http://www. The Big Three automakers -." Ornstein said. The message: I'm still in charge here. even with anemic public approval ratings and much of the country tuning him out. B) India Deal won’t pass C) Bush has political capital now – FISA passage Feller 7/10/08 (Ben. Congress appears poised to raise requirements forcing automakers to offer more high-mileage cars and trucks. Bush got the anti-terrorism spying legislation largely on his terms. "Being a lame duck means you have less clout. GM officials said. Massachusetts—this is Living on Earth. home to the U. Contrast this to Bush's domestic agenda. auto industry.com/national/1151ap_bush_still_has_juice." 2.html) Here's one reason: the federal government has started giving manufacturers a financial incentive to produce flex-fuel vehicles.htm?programID=07-P13-00023&segmentID=1) After decades of idling in neutral. he is relevant in the twilight of his second term." said Greg Martin. http://www. “Demand for fuel-efficient cars puts pressure on Congress. short for corporate average fuel economy.

currently. has no interest in becoming part of any coalition aimed at containing China. let me say parenthetically. changes in demographic structure. towards constructing a stable geopolitical order in Asia that is conducive to peace and prosperity. coupled with the relatively high though still marginally declining growth rates in China. and possibly China are likely to decline in comparison to the latter half of the Cold War period. as the Administration currently intends. I do not believe that a policy of containing China is either feasible or necessary at this point in time. 5. will propel Asia's share of the global economy to some 43% by 2025. diminishing returns to capital. There is little doubt today that the Asian continent is poised to become the new center of gravity in international politics. first and foremost. and the maturation of the economy all suggest that national growth rates in several key Asian states in particular Japan. No Link: A) No spillover – there is no reason why one domestic alternative energy policy will cause Democrats to change their mind on the India Deal because it is still bad 4. at "containing" China. thus making the continent the largest single locus of economic power worldwide.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser India Deal Bad 2AC (2/2) C) Plan would be a flip-flop for Bush – extend our Zubrin Fall 07 evidence from the 1AC which says that Bush currently hates mandates 3. reduced export performance. DA is non-intrinsic – we can do the plan and still reject containment of China 11 . “US-India Partnership”. that alleged. (India too. as many critics have If I am permitted to digress a bit. A Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. the Administration's strategy of assisting India to become a major world power in the twenty-first century is directed. South Korea. the spurt in Indian growth rates. Although lower growth in the labor force.) Rather. 11/16/05) advancing the growth of Indian power. is not directed. No Impact: A) India deal isn’t key to US-China relations  alternative causalities like Taiwan and Olympics B) India won’t contain China – it has strategic interests in Chinese relations Tellis 05 (Ashley.

State officials continued to take the lead on a number of issues in 2007-2008. The Nation. The introduction of ethnic-based 'quasi-regionalism' in post-Mengistu Ethiopia has fuelled the conflict over the proposed Oromia state by members of the Oromo ethnic population.” lexis) States have long been the primary policy innovators in the US federal system. states are still in need of more power. No Link . Publius. Executive Director of the Kenya Human Rights Commission. voting rights and public education. despite its federal miracle still bleeds from secessionist movements. and at times proceeding independently of federal policy-makers (Greenblatt 2007b. 6/22/2008.Despite high state action and activity. they can sell more gas guzzling. http://www. Rather than ensuring economic equity.FFV’s not key to Federalism  we don’t change RPS or anything that is uniquely key to fism. It lacks uniform policies on such issues of national concern as laws regulating marriages. Executive director of the National Governers Association. 4.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Federalism 2AC (1/2) 1. liquor. they earn credits towards their mandatory CAFE fuel economy requirements. particularly by Kenyan Somalis in North Eastern Province and the clamour for an autonomous "Mwambao" on the Coast. abortions. at times acting when federal policy was not forthcoming. Impact Turns – A) Federalism sparks ethnic conflict Willy Mutanga. As Kincaid and Cole 2007 survey saw a continued drop in the percentage of individuals responding that state governments "gave them the least for their money" and a notable report. There is no guarantee that this time around. it sets those regions.com/content/features/alternativefuels/flexfuel. capital. as many proponents of majimboism assume. but higher-profit SUVs without incurring penalties. at times expressing disagreement with federal policy. In fact. Unsurprising the United States and Nigeria are living survivors of debilitating separatist wars between their regions. “The state of American Federalism 2007-2008: resurgent state influence in the national policy processes and continued states policy innovations. 462). the feasibility of a well-financed transition is highly doubtful. majimboism will not trigger ethnic recidivism and separatist movements. At a time when the country's economy is on its knees. India. 12 . public awareness andsupport for continued state policy innovation may well account for the post-2005 uptick in public support for state governments recorded in their annual opinion surveys. So by making vehicles that accept flex-fuel. Federalism promotes localism." 3. as John Kincaid and Richard Cole suggest in their article for this issue. By selling flex-fuel vehicles. 2001. Non-Unique . It subjects local governments to double subordination-by the central and regional governments-and the citizens to triple taxation. Tubbesing 2008). 2. May 20. ethnic and racial xenophobia and undermines the sense of nationhood. and resources down the spiral of economic decline. divorce. Coast and Eastern province where the Oromo population may lean towards the movement for an Oromia state. Majimboism in the early 1960s had let off the lid of secessionist movements. especially in North Eastern. Federalism's main weakness is that it is a very expensive system that duplicates services and office holders at the regional and federal levels. state policy activism "appears to be increasing at an accelerating pace" during the Bush presidency (Krane 2007. states or cantons with a weak market-base. and as Dale Krane has noted. Dinan 08 (John Dinan.cartalk. their increase in the percentage of survey respondents saying that state governments "need more power.html) Here's one reason: the federal government has started giving manufacturers a financial incentive to produce flex-fuel vehicles. Your DA is non-unique – feds already giving incentives for FFVs Car Talk 07 (“Flex-fuel vehicles and E85”.

No Internal Link – One issue is not key to overall state balance of power 6. Strong ethnic bonds promoted by shortsighted Soviet policies may motivate non-Russians to secede from the Federation. As the central government finds itself unable to force its will beyond Moscow (if even that far). civil war is likely. krais. republics feel less and less incentive to pay taxes to Moscow when they receive so little in return. since the structure of the Russian Federation makes it virtually certain that regional conflicts will continue to erupt. Russia's 89 republics. Three-quarters of them already have their own constitutions. 5. however.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Federalism 2AC (2/2) B) Russian Federalism Bad. Chechnya's successful revolt against Russian control inspired similar movements for autonomy and independence throughout the country. With the economy collapsing. nearly all of which make some claim to sovereignty. No Impact: American federalism isn’t modeled – multinational states prove <<insert ev>> 13 . If these rebellions spread and Moscow responds with force. Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University. David. and oblasts grow ever more independent in a system that does little to keep them together.Russian devolution will lead to secession and civil war Stephen R. power devolves to the periphery. Foreign Affairs Jan 1999 Divining the military's allegiance is crucial.

The optimal remedy for a constitutional rights violation in New York may well be different from the optimal remedy for one that occurs in Mississippi. Russia isn’t just going to model our federalism just because we passed a FFV mandate. “A Floor. Federalism is high now – states are winning court battles over rights Somin 08 (Ilya Somin. 2. I provide a doctrinal justification for the Supreme Court’s decision. Minnesota. 6/23/08. State courts are in a better position to weigh the relevant tradeoffs in a state legal system than federal courts are. Part III explains the potential policy advantages of allowing interstate diversity in remedies. George Mason University. the Court decided that state courts could indeed provide victims of constitutional rights violations broader remedies than those mandated by federal Supreme Court decisions. State courts can legitimately conclude that these policy grounds are absent or outweighed by other considerations within their state systems. Minnesota. but are instead based on policy grounds. Part I briefly describes the facts and It makes sense to allow state courts to provide background to Danforth. most importantly inter-jurisdictional competition and an increased ability to provide for diverse citizen preferences and local conditions across different parts of the country.School of Law. more generous remedies than those mandated by the federal courts in cases where restrictions on the scope of remedies are not imposed by the Constitution itself.”) Few doubt that states can provide greater protection for individual rights under state constitutions than is available under the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Federal Constitution.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Lopez CP 2AC (1/2) On the net benefit: 1. I contend that this outcome is correct. however. But there is no reason for it to also mandate a ceiling. despite the seeming incongruity of allowing state courts to deviate from the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Federal Constitution. Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy. In Part II. Not a Ceiling: Federalissm and Remedies for Violations of Constitutional Rights in Danforth V. More difficult issues arise. Link Turn – <<insert Calabresi ev>> 3. when state courts seek to provide greater protection than the Court requires for federal constitutional rights. even if they are compelling justifications for restricting the scope of remedies available in federal courts. The Supreme Court should establish a floor for remedies below which states cannot fall. In a 7-2 decision required by joined by an unusual coalition of liberal and conservative justices. 14 . Can state courts impose remedies for violations of federal constitutional rights that are more generous than those the Federal Supreme Court? That is the issue raised by the Court’s recent decision in Danforth v. The plan is not the issue that is uniquely key to federalism.

4. including production. however. Given the regulatory uncertainty. there is a renewed focus on alternate fuels.com/magazine/content/02_20/b3783047.academickeys. and Governor Gray Davis hasn't indicated whether he'll sign it. "Our biggest fear is that this becomes the battle we already fought and won at the federal level." It's a strategy that could work--and that has Detroit hopping mad. the auto industry dispatched troops of lobbyists to the banks of the Potomac to make a stand. but incorporating some non-zero cost has the potential to significantly change the economics of the transportation fuel industry.htm) Detroit was blindsided. Why? California is the only state that can create clean-air standards. more fuel-efficient cars in the state by 2008.” engineering.businessweek. California's clean-air and low-emissions laws have gotten a warm reception in New York and New England. Freeman School of Business." says Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope. 3. Perm do the plan and all mutually exclusive parts of the CP. they have not been widely adopted in the absence of significant government mandates or subsidies. To date. it is difficult to justify major capital investments to reduce CO2 until a clearer picture of costs and benefits emerges." Pope says. where legislators have adopted California's existing limits on carbon monoxide. and butanol. distribution. it might agree to somewhat tougher Washington. For an alternate transportation fuel to displace conventional oil derivatives such as gasoline and diesel. there must be a reasonable probability that the fuel can become competitive in total costs. Perm do the plan and have the Supreme Court strike down another unrelated federal legislation on federalism grounds based on the Lopez precedent. since its laws predate federal regulations. Expecting an assault of environmental legislation from Washington this spring.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Lopez CP 2AC (2/2) ON THE CP: 1. federal fuel economy and emissions laws. Now. vice-president of environmental affairs for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers in Washington. successfully defeating a After environmental lobbyists worked their own contacts in California. as has been true in European markets for several years. and soot from cars. In the past. The move to institute markets for carbon dioxide emissions makes it possible that some previously omitted costs will be included in future energy prices in the U. That would be chaos. ultimately targeting key states such as Texas and Florida. is the timeline in which such markets are implemented and the resulting CO2 prices. insider: "We can't have 50 different states telling us how to build cars. But the real threat came from the other coast. state senate approved a bill on May 2 that would force auto makers to sell cleaner. The Impact of Carbon Emissions Policy and Transportation Costs on Alternative Transportation Fuel Supply Chain Economics. the push for stricter national fuel-economy standards. such as ethanol. and consumption." The California battle isn't over yet: The state assembly still needs to approve a final version of the measure. bio- diesel.S. the industry thought it had wrapped up the issue. So the environmentalists plan to take the same legislation to like-minded Northeastern states and then deeper into the heartland. which destroys fairness and doesn’t test the opportunity costs of the plan D) Vote them down – it not about what they say. Although several of these fuels have a long history of production. "We have accepted the fact that environmental leadership is not coming from Washington. Quantifying the exact cost of any emission is likely to remain impossible. http://www. smog-causing nitrous oxide. A key issue. "I was elated. 2. "This was such a sharp contrast from how Congress has reacted to environmental legislation. no alternative fuels have passed this test in the United States. A) Federal action is key to avert state patchwork regulations that create uncertainty for the auto industry Business Week 02 (“Clean-Air Standards: An End Run around Washington”. After defeating the federal measure that would have required auto makers to boost fuel efficiency in March. Detroit may have to wrestle with the environmentalists in state capitals. though. Lopez CP Bad for Debate: A) Reciprocity – as the affirmative we can only advocate USFG. However. one cost that has long been absent in energy prices is the cost of environmental emissions.com/seeker_job_attachments. but what they justify 15 . Dana. But if--as expected--the environmental lobby wins this skirmish. so the neg should be held to a single advocacy B) Not Real World – policies are never implemented uniformly between the 50 states and the courts C) Artificial Competition .The counterplan gains artificial competition through banning the plan. it may ultimately prove just as significant as a victory in Washington would have. But other states have the option of adopting California's rules. "We will focus on consumers and the states.php?dothis=download&job_file%5BIDX%5D=32) As nations search for methods to reduce green house gas emissions. which could ultimately bring the battle right back to Since the auto industry doesn't want the stricter California standards adopted state by state. That's likely to happen. Says one General Motors Corp. B) Regulatory uncertainty undermines investment in alcohol fuels Parker and Smith 08 (Geoffrey and Eric." says Gregory J." And that's exactly what the environmental lobby is counting on.

" he told journalists in St. The ruble collapsed and debt payments to foreigners were frozen. international investors yanked their capital out of all emerging markets— from Latin America to East Asia — causing world interest rates to spike . Impact Defense - A) Russian economy is resilient Stokes 08 (Barry.html) A little less than a year ago. yet they haven’t used their nuclear weapons. high prices do ensure an inflow of financial resources into the sector of the Russian economy engaged in production. he said. he said. So. Because growth is spread more evenly through the economy. The whole economy begins to grow at two-digit rates. “Russia does not fear drop in oil prices”) Russia would be able to withstand a drop in oil prices to $55 per barrel without any serious consequences. continued fear of Russian nuclear proliferation and concern about Russia's internal political stability— demonstrates that Russia still remains too important for the world to ignore. B) Oil is not key to the Russian economy Russia & CIS Finance Weekly 6/20 (June 20. The Russian economy proved far more resilient than anticipated. In order for them to win a link to this DA. The Russian government has devoted a great deal of work to preparing the country for such a reduction in oil prices. Council of Foreign Relations. other sectors of the Russian economy which employ about 98 percent of the working-age population and produce 80 percent of GDP become more competitive. The global economy teetered on the edge of depression. Presidential Economic Adviser. world oil prices suspends the growth of the real exchange rate of the ruble. 4. one of the world's biggest hedge funds. 16 .org/publication/3225/dont_ignore_the_russian_bear. Long Term Capital Management. “Don’t Ignore the Russian Bear”. 5. On the other hand. but it wouldn't be very significant. "Such a reduction would have a small effect on economic growth. The lessons of this "crisis that wasn't" are now clear: Russia is not too big to fail (the volume of its debts do not dictate special treatment by its creditors).SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Russian Oil 2AC 1. they need to win that we decrease oil prices substantially meaning that at the least they spot us our oil prices advantage which independently outweighs the DA. the financial world can cope with such failure. Russian GDP is currently growing on the back of other industries besides oil and gas. Wall Street lost billions of dollars. Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said. no unique reason why FFV’s destroy Russian economy." he said. 6.7 percent of the working population (2. had to be taken over by its bankers. much to the surprise of most economic pundits.cfr. and the Russian economy can bounce back without much overt help from the West. But. http://www. Petersburg on June 7. No Link – A) US oil consumption is not the key to the Russian economy. 1998 were little more than a very large bump in the road. As a result. <<Insert DA SLAYER>> 2. in retrospect. Non-Unique – Russian economy tubing now <<insert ev>> 3. 2008. This is what is happening in many CIS countries that are not oil exporters: their growth rates are 1. the average growth rates ends up being higher. the events of August. Once burned. But the impending $4. And. international markets quickly righted themselves. B) Their impact is empirically denied – oil prices have been low in the past. Link Turn – low oil prices are key to the Russian economy Illarionov 04 (Andrei. the high growth rate begins to spread to sectors other than oil.5-2 times higher than in Russia.5 billion loan to Russia by the International Monetary Fund— reflecting Washington's gratitude for Moscow's help in Kosovo. transportation a fall of and export of oil and petroleum products. the post-Cold War Russian economic experiment imploded. August 17 to be precise. lexis) A: The impact of high oil prices on the rate of economic growth is twofold. On the one hand.1 percent if one counts in the pipelines). That sector generates about 20 percent of the GDP and employs 1. Other importers will check US withdrawal from the oil market. "Russia is prepared for oil prices to drop to $55 per barrel.

F. 3. B) Refinery capacity is low now and can’t expand fast enough if OPEC floods the market Zhou 6/6/08 (Moming. but higher-profit SUVs without incurring penalties. It will take years before new refineries start operating. Doesn’t turn case – there is no way that OPEC has the capacity or the refinery ability to drop oil prices below 50 dollars a barrel which would be necessary to compete with our plan. only a world recession that cuts demand will bring oil prices down sharply. while demand is around 86 million barrels a day." said A. The underlying demand and supply balance is tight.html) Here's one reason: the federal government has started giving manufacturers a financial incentive to produce flex-fuel vehicles. Alhajji. http://www. 17 . Unfortunately. and we are expecting delays on all fronts. "The refineries [in Saudi Arabia] won't be ready in five years. Your DA is non-unique – feds already giving incentives for FFVs Car Talk 07 (“Flex-fuel vehicles and E85”. The oil price is There is very little spare capacity.cartalk. By selling flex-fuel vehicles. World oil demand growth. including rising consumption in Saudi Arabia itself. they can sell more gas guzzling. could easily outstrip additional capacity.com/content/features/alternativefuels/flexfuel. an energy economist at Ohio Northern University and a long-time observer of Saudi Arabia. analysts say. Most of this spare capacity is heavy crudes and refiners want lighter crudes to produce diesel where demand is booming. Demand is too lofty to be accommodated by the planned increase in capacity. The kingdom's plans to increase its refining capacity won't necessarily alleviate high oil and gasoline prices. spare capacity available. “Saudi Arabia plans royal treatment for heavy crude”. a world recession is looking increasingly likely. they earn credits towards their mandatory CAFE fuel economy requirements.” THE recent oil price jump is due to rising demand in developing countries and the lack of spare supply capacity. So by making vehicles that accept flex-fuel. 2. he said. Non-Unique: A) Spare production capacity is tight and that capacity is largely unusable Melbourne Herald Sun 6/7/08 (“Global demand sees oil on fire. Given the slow growth in oil supply. Writer at Marketwatch.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser OPEC Flood 2AC 1. That means that even small disruptions to oil output drive prices higher. with only around two million barrels a day of not just being driven by speculators. in prospect.

called for government intervention. Rising interest rates induce saving and deter investment. Kudlow also endorses massive airline subsidies as a means of restoring economic prosperity. Savings diverts resources into capital formation. Of course. Who could possibly claim that imperialism grew out of the prosperity of these ancient Imperialism precedes modern industrial capitalism by many centuries. Keynes' claim that animal spirits drive investment has no rational basis. Private markets have enough uncertainties without throwing politics into the fray. Fears about foreigners buying up America are unfounded. but not because this does not happen. but similar. The notion that income gets underspent or maldistributed lies at the heart of most claims that capitalism either needs or produces imperialistic wars. Of course. and other expensive items. obviously. People who do actually inherit. The idea that inequity or underspending give rise to militarism lacks any rational basis. government intervention (especially warfare) generally serves to increase uncertainty. The intertemporal coordination of production through capital markets and interest rates is not a simple matter.B. and history shows this. Kudlow and Krugman have quite an affinity for deficits. Speculators do not hoard cash outside of banks. Robert Higgs demonstrated that the wartime prosperity during the Second World War was illusory[i]. Earlier and stranger still. Capitalists will hire workers up to the point where the discounted marginal product of their labor equals the wage rate.S. Capitalism generates prosperity by creating new products.S. they could do more. Consumer preferences are the basis for investment. Krugman sees debt as a sponge to absorb excess saving. and Hobson. By borrowing funds. But if their thinking is sound. Investors forecast future consumer demand. gathering at alehouses. Keynes feared that the dark forces of time and uncertainty could scare investors. Why hoard cash when you can move money around with your computer? It is common knowledge that people save for homes. and the longer term affect of stimulating the demand for construction workers. This increases future production. meaning we don’t entrench the ideology of capitalism 5. We do not need wars for prosperity. No link – the plan is a regulation. Hobson made the same claim much earlier. This does not cause deficient aggregate demand. but in underestimating the workings of markets and the desires of consumers. who employ false dogmas in pursuit of their own militaristic desires. Alexander. They often claim that history Perhaps the oddest aspect of these various. Marxist arguments about reserve armies of the unemployed and surplus extraction fail. As J. This should come to no surprise to those who lived through the deprivations of wartime rationing. for instance. There is no reason to doubt that consumers will continue to press for ever higher levels of consumption. One would think that such famous economists would realize that competition does work to achieve the goal of optimum growth based on time preference. Destructive acts entail real costs that diminish available opportunities. We save too much to have peace and prosperity. claims is that their shows how capitalism is imperialistic and warlike or at least benefits from war. There is no sound reason to think otherwise. education. but we gain it back many time over when the rebuilding is done. he thought. One should remember that there really is no such thing as saving. He instead favors using the state to tax others to fund what he wants.aspx?Id=1201) proponents appeal so often to historical examples. This would have the immediate effect of stimulating demand for demolition experts. No link – their link evidence assumes climate change legislation and renewable like wind. We are never going to run out of ways to spend money. Brewster's Millions illustrates how creative people can be at spending money. The claims of Marxists. as the world's 'greatest capitalist/imperialist power'. 2003 http://mises. Doomsayers have been downplaying consumer demand for ages. Why does the U. mercantilists claimed that 'wasteful acts' such as tea drinking. expansion. consumers consume at levels that few long ago could have imagined possible. Demand Side economists Hobson and Keynes argued that there would be too little consumption and too little investment for continuous full employment. not because they have some innate urge to squirrel some portion of their income away. If the destruction of assets leads to increased prosperity. and the wearing of ribbons were unnecessary luxuries that detracted from productive endeavors. The Marxist claim that capitalists must find investments overseas fails miserably. either deductive or empirical. Perm: Do the plan and withdraw from the ideologies of capitalism that aren’t competitive with the plan 2. Most money exists in the banking system. Kudlow claims that may lose money and wealth in one way. As Kudlow told some students. is too low. This is not a simple matter. directly contradict the historical record. wealthy individuals usually have more trouble holding on to their fortunes than in finding ways to spend them.K. It comes not from exploitation. This possibility. Uneven wealth distribution or civilizations? underconsumption under capitalism obviously did not cause these instances of imperialism. It does attract much foreign investment. Investors do in fact calculate rates of return on investment. Imperial wars pre-date capitalism by centuries – Capitalism stops wars MacKenzie 03 (D. The dogma of destructive creation fails as a silver lining to the cloud of warfare. they would both initially lose wealth in one way. The idea that we need to find work for idle hands in capitalism at best leads to a kind of Sisyphus economy where unproductive industries garner subsidies from productive people. At worst. But Keynes' marginal propensities to save and Hobson's concentration of wealth arguments fail to account for the real determinants of production through time. but this is not the case. Unfortunately. Prosperity depends upon our ability to prevent destructive acts. and many others of the ancient world waged imperialistic wars. taking snuff. Bastiat demonstrated the absurdity of destructive creation in his original explanation of the opportunity costs from repairing broken windows. He seems to think that his values matter more than any other's. Say's Law of Markets holds precisely because people always want a better life for themselves and those close to them. Kudlow is a war hawk who. Imperialistic tendencies exist due to ethnic and nationalistic bigotries. Say argued. Investment entails some speculation. They can create additional wealth by financing the reconstruction of their homes through debt. He wants to grow the economy to finance the war. much of the third world suffers from too little investment. it serves as a supporting argument for war. investment periodically collapses from 'the dark forces of time and uncertainty. Why should anyone else agree with this? Kudlow tarnishes the image of laissez faire economics by parading his faulty reasoning and his claims that his wants should reign supreme as a pro-market stance. 18 . Keynes denied that the world worked this way. It is that resources should be redirected towards ends that he sees fit. It is simply a matter of people valuing their future wellbeing. Since workers earn the marginal product of labor and capital derives from deferred consumption. The truth is thattheir beliefs are fallacious . Sound theory tells us that it should. April 07. Capitalism supposedly needs a boost from some war spending from time to time. but investors who want to actually reap profits will estimate the returns on investment using the best available data. it is sometimes necessary Capitalism neither requires nor promotes imperialist to defend capitalism from alleged advocates of liberty. Indeed. While these economists have expressed their belief in writing.W. Though it is only a movie. The more recent versions of the false charges against capitalism do nothing to invalidate two simple facts. Indeed. we live in an affluent society. Of course. Here Kudlow's attempts to give economic advice cease completely. Falling interest rates deter saving and increase investment. but does capitalism breed war and imperialism anyway? History is rife with examples of imperialism. None of these propositions hold up to scrutiny. win. However. It is quite odd to worry about capitalists oversaving when many complain about how the savings rate in the U. To do otherwise would mean a loss of potential profit. His argument here is not that capitalism needs a shot in the arm. The difficulty we face is not in oversaving. The Romans.. Nor is capital not extracted surplus value. supply creates its own demand through payments to factors of production. Kudlow and Krugman both endorse the alleged destructive creation of warfare and terrorism. In fact. they draw idle resources into use and stimulate financial activity. they will gain it back many times over as they rebuild. MacKenzie grad student in economics at George Mason University Does Capitalism Require War? Monday. precisely because it has relatively secure property rights. attract so much foreign investment? Many Americans worry about America's international accounts. "The trick here is to grow the economy and let the economic growth raise the revenue for the war effort"[ii]. As economist Eugen Böhm-Bawerk demonstrated. Interest enhanced savings then can purchase these goods as some consumers cease to defer their consumption. not biofuels 4. but cannot afford. Long term investment projects entail some uncertainty.org/article. Capitalism did not create imperialism or warfare. Instead. Today. Kudlow has rechristened the Broken Window fallacy the Broken Window principle. Warlike societies predate societies with secure private property. Kudlow also praises the Reagan Administration for growing the economy to fund national defense. then they should teach this principle by example. Consumers defer consumption to the future only. or earn large sums of money have little trouble spending it. this fact does not prove that modern capitalism lacks its own imperialistic tendencies. and is always available for lending. People do move assets from one part of the financial system to another.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Capitalism 2AC (1/2) 1. This renders half of the market for credit rational. Galbraith claimed. To do this means a loss of interest on assets. The vagaries of political intervention serve only to darken an already uncertain future. he claimed that bond holders hoard money outside of the banking system. As demand side economist J. Perm: do the plan and reject Capitalism in all other instances 3. Many of the complaints about capitalism center on how people save too much. help build the economy by demolishing their own private homes. Kudlow is quite clear about his intentions. America does have a relatively low national savings rate. Kudlow see debt as a short term nuisance that we can dispel by maximizing growth. and consumers save income in a mechanical fashion according to marginal propensities to save. not a “market mechanism” like a subsidy which is what their links assume. Kudlow and Krugman could. cannot fund this or any war personally. This simple logic of supply and demand derives from a quite basic notion of self interest. The prognostications of esteemed opponents of capitalism have consistently failed to predict consumer demand. The Incan Empire and the empire of Ancient China stand as examples of the universal character of imperialism. Larry Kudlow has put his own spin on the false connection between capitalism and war. where most private demands have been met. the advent of e-banking makes such a practice even less sensible. and the want for power. people save according to time preference. We need the War as shock therapy to get the economy on its feet. War inflicts poverty by destroying existing wealth. Interest rates convey knowledge of these demands. Capital markets are best left to capitalists.

Makes the neg a constant moving target that skew 2AC strategy and destroys clash b.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser Capitalism 2AC (2/2) 6. The Kritik doesn’t turn the case – capitalism isn’t the root cause of the case harms which means the specific case impacts outweigh their vague impact claims 10. They have a really long timeframe for their impact to occur 8. Vague alternatives are a voting issue: a. Alternative fails – merely changing our orientation to capitalism utterly DOES NOTHING to challenge it – their Johnson evidence is merely rhetoric 9. Consequentialism is the most ethical act – their ethic allows for infinite violence <<Insert Page 56 of Cap K>> 19 . Destroys our ability to formulate offense like turns and legitimate perms c. Effective progressive action requires specific alternatives – they destroy the ability to compare competing strategies for social change 7.

http://www. they can sell more gas guzzling. they earn credits towards their mandatory CAFE fuel economy requirements.com/content/features/alternativefuels/flexfuel. By selling flex-fuel vehicles.SDI 2008 Arjun Vellayappan WW(J)D LV Max Lesser DA SLAYER All your DA’s are non-unique – the federal government is already giving incentives for FFVs Car Talk 07 (“Flex-fuel vehicles and E85”.html) Here's one reason: the federal government has started giving manufacturers a financial incentive to produce flex-fuel vehicles. So by making vehicles that accept flex-fuel.cartalk. but higher-profit SUVs without incurring penalties. 20 .