430 GT Air Force Neg Updated

430 GT Air Force Neg Updated - DDI GT ‘08 1 Ciborowski...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: DDI- GT ‘08 1 Ciborowski Resar Air Force Neg Index Index ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 T AE Not Fossil Fuels 1NC ....................................................................................................................................... 3 T Not Gov-Gov ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 A. Interpretation – Incentives are offered to a separate entity from the provider Ruth Grant professor of political science at Duke University "THE ETHICS OF INCENTIVES: HISTORICAL ORIGINS AND CONTEMPORARY UNDERSTANDINGS," Economics and Philosophy, 18 (2002) 111, proquest) ............................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Limits – the affirmative allows for the targeting of thousands of specific government programs and agencies we can’t expect to predict as well as justifying any direct action or change as an ‘incentive.’ ............................... 5 2. Ground – we lose all specific or generic links to obscure cases that don’t affect the private sector where the disadvantage links are, like natural gas and coal disads .......................................................................................... 5 3. Predictability – the affirmative case destroys our ability to prepare – they can change the agency and incentive combination every round. ...................................................................................................................................... 5 D. Competing Interpretations is the best way to evaluate procedurals. It’s the least arbitrary framework, it’s more predictable than reasonability, and it ensures objectivity in jurisdiction. ............................................................... 5 CP 1NC ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Private Sector solvency ............................................................................................................................................. 8 End Strength Solves Readiness .................................................................................................................................. 9 End Strength Solves Readiness ............................................................................................................................... 10 Troops solve North Korea ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Asian stability Turn .....................................................................................................................................................
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/23/2012 for the course DEBATE 101 taught by Professor None during the Spring '12 term at Berkeley.

Page1 / 38

430 GT Air Force Neg Updated - DDI GT ‘08 1 Ciborowski...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online