Notes

Cats should not be put outside because it is dangerous for other animals.
According to nature.com, "Free-ranging cats on islands have caused or contributed to 14% of the modern bird, mammal and reptile extinctions"
This can be bad for the food chain because of the amount of species extinct
A ssertion
R easoning
E vidence
! mpact



stock issues

inherency - there is an issue and the issue is continuing (affirmative: the issue is continuing; negative: the issue is not continuing)
significance - the size of an issue (affirmative: great significance; negative: little significance)
topicality - the policy is under the resolution (affirmative: plan is under the resolution; negative: plan is NOT under resolution)
solvency - the ability of a plan to solve the issues (affirmative: the plan solves the issues; negative: the plan DOESN'T solve the issues)

-not a stock issue-
disadvantages- the negative result of a plan(affirmative: there are no negative results to the plan; negative: there are negative results to the plan)
(8) (8) (8) (8)
1AC 1NC 2AC 2NC

(5) (5) (5) (5)
1NR 1AR 2NR 2AR


How to build a case:
Background: context
Harms: Bad things happening now
Plan: Our solution to the Harms
Mandates: What the actions of the plan are
Agency/Enforcement: Who does the plan
Timeline: When you do the plan/how long it takes
Funding: Where does the money come from/how much
Solvency: How our plan solves the problems/good things our plan causes

The United States Federal Government should invade Wakanda.
Background: Where Wakanda is, what Wakanda has
Harm 1: Not Enough Masks
Harm 2: We have no food
Harm 3: Coronavirus
Mandate 1: Find them
Mandate 2: Nuke them
Mandate 3: 330 million US citizens kamikaze
Agency/Enforcement: The government, every human being in the US
Timeline: now
Funding: borrow money from Wakanda
Solvency 1: Take their mask factories
Solvency 2: Wakanda has food
Solvency 3: We get Vibranium (the cure)

Good Negative Arguments:
-must have a link to their case
-have a tagline(stock issue, then short powerful name): Disadvantage 1:Nuclear War
-have a source with good credentials: read those credentials
-Dr. Wakanda Invader
-evidence: read the underlined parts or what you think is important
-impacts: why it matters
Impact: nuclear war makes life hard
5 Stock Issues:
Inherency
Significance
Topicality
Solvency
Disadvantages

Inherency
Inherency 1: Explain that harms are being solved already
Inherency 2: Secret Stash of Food
source: the CIA
"teehee uwu we have food"
impact: we don't starve; we don't need Wakanda's food

Significance
-problem not big enough to warrant solving
Significance 1: Only 2% Die
source: WHO (World Health Organization: they're in charge of our health-ish)
"only 2% die :)"
Impact: not enough deaths to warrant all-out war

Solvency: Ability of plan to solve the problems
Solvency 1: No More Factories
source: Wakanda(lol)
"all-out nuclear war destroys our factories"
use links to argue with logic
Impact: no masks

Disadvantages: bad things caused by the plan
DA 1: everybody dies
Link 1: we kamikaze them
source: the plan says so
Link 2: kamikazes don't survive
source: Japan, definition
Japan: "we can confirm that kamikazes do in fact die"
empiric evidence: history agrees with us
Impact: No more country :(

Topicality: Is the policy under the resolution?
Structure:
Standards: provide a definition
USFG: the legislative, executive, and judicial branch
Source: the US Constitution
Reasons to prefer 1: Constitution creates US Government
Violation: Every human being in the United States
Impact 1: no jurisdiction
Impact 2: fairness

Inherency 1: Secret Stash
Significance 1: Only 2% Die
Solvency 1: Mask Factories Destroyed
Disadvantage 1: Nobody Left
Topicality: Every human in US


Cross Examination
ethos & pathos = cross examination
logos = speeches


When responding to an argument
They said: that we need ants
We say: Ants are annoying
Because: reasoning + evidence
they eat our food: according to antseatmyfood.com
Impact: less food
Impact: we don't need ants
Therefore:


Flowing
Taglines/Tagging: 3-4 word summary of the argument (repeat)