Skip to content
June 25, 2013 / compassioninpolitics

The Privates Counterplan on the Economic Engagement Topic

Privates counterplan does avoid US action:
1) Spending (USFG or agency specific)
2) Politics
3) Your agency action is bad
4) Your agency is bad
5) Just government action bad [also 95% of Ks]
6) Trade bad disads (Optional).
7) Relations bad disads (Optional)/Politics of the Country based on Relations or Signal link (Optional)

I included the last two because they answer the advantages the counterplan doesn’t solve. In some cases they are kind of imapct turns of the advantage.

The privates counterplan won’t really solve the affirmative. The affirmative advantages will be based on
1) relations. trade/economy. and spillover.
2) US hegemony (soft power, signal, we switch our policy to more multi-lateral, treaties)
3) the specific sector stuff.

It might be that Walmart could invest X amount of dollars in X (just due to size). But they don’t the infrastructure to do that type of action probably in the same way the government would. At a minimum they get a timeframe differential.

Smart affs will spend at least 1/2 their time defending 1 or 2….

Privates counterplan won’t solve the aff. It could arguably solve a critical aff–but the perm would solve that back
and DAs to the plan aff would likely be DAs to the counterplan as well–at least I would think.

Advertisements

One Comment

Leave a Comment
  1. Nathan Kets / Jun 25 2013 6:55 am

    PS:
    1) NGOs CP
    2) Ban increases CP
    will both be strategically about the same.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: