Ending Corporate Welfare could fit the definition of "tax increases," since it ends tax breaks for corporations. Check out this article for more on the issue and PRO ammo.
Corporate Welfare
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Monday, November 19, 2012
Dec. PF topic analysis
Resolved: The United States should prioritize tax increases over spending cuts.
Taxation has been a hot partisan issue for the past few decades. It's never not been a hot issue, but it has become increasingly contentious as most Democrats advocate for higher taxes (mainly on the "wealthy") and Republicans counter with supporting government spending cuts. Let's look at an analogy that takes place at home:
Your family takes in about $100,000 a year. Something happens and for whatever reason the income drops from $100K to $75K a year. You can do one of two things: Get more income from other jobs or reduce your spending. Most families in a situation like this will start reducing their spending. They'll reduce/eliminate their spending on luxuries before cutting into more important expenses like mortgage, car-note, etc.
Our government has seen a reduction in the amount of money it has available. Fighting two wars, expanding the size government (thank Bush and Obama for that), spending money on natural disasters and other outlays will deplete the money pile pretty quickly. The government can definitely cut spending and raise taxes but this debate is about which one should the government do first.
Taxation is mostly done through personal income, so a tax increase would obviously take effect there. We have a progressive (or graduated) tax rate; the more you make the more you pay. The IRS offers tax deductions for any number of things such as children, eco-friendly purchases, etc. which reduces the amount we're taxed.
Government spending is outlined in the annual budget the President submits to Congress for approval. The bulk of the spending is in defense. There are many pie-charts and graphs depicting the government's budget where you can see where your tax dollars go.
PRO - tax increases
Your increases can go one of several ways...
Letting the Bush tax-cuts expire. This would repeal the tax cuts that Bush Jr. enacted at the beginning of his Presidency. You will want to look at letting them expire specifically for the upper-income earners. Here's a good article on the benefits of letting those tax cuts expire:
Benefits of letting tax cuts expire
There are other types of taxes that could be increased:
gas tax
soda tax - also called an excise tax
Of course any sort of tax plan you offer should argue that the U.S. economy is now strong enough to weather the increase.
CON - "taxes" are you insane?!
Raising taxes is an idea that is never received well, even less so when the economy is in the toilet. Typical Con strategy can go one of two ways: Both/neither should be prioritized or spending cuts should be prioritized. I don't think the former is really worth it, so here's how you argue for spending cuts.
8 ways to cut government spending
CATO institute proposal
cutting defense spending
This should get you started. I'll help you with showing the DISADS for both sides later on.
Taxation has been a hot partisan issue for the past few decades. It's never not been a hot issue, but it has become increasingly contentious as most Democrats advocate for higher taxes (mainly on the "wealthy") and Republicans counter with supporting government spending cuts. Let's look at an analogy that takes place at home:
Your family takes in about $100,000 a year. Something happens and for whatever reason the income drops from $100K to $75K a year. You can do one of two things: Get more income from other jobs or reduce your spending. Most families in a situation like this will start reducing their spending. They'll reduce/eliminate their spending on luxuries before cutting into more important expenses like mortgage, car-note, etc.
Our government has seen a reduction in the amount of money it has available. Fighting two wars, expanding the size government (thank Bush and Obama for that), spending money on natural disasters and other outlays will deplete the money pile pretty quickly. The government can definitely cut spending and raise taxes but this debate is about which one should the government do first.
Taxation is mostly done through personal income, so a tax increase would obviously take effect there. We have a progressive (or graduated) tax rate; the more you make the more you pay. The IRS offers tax deductions for any number of things such as children, eco-friendly purchases, etc. which reduces the amount we're taxed.
Government spending is outlined in the annual budget the President submits to Congress for approval. The bulk of the spending is in defense. There are many pie-charts and graphs depicting the government's budget where you can see where your tax dollars go.
PRO - tax increases
Your increases can go one of several ways...
Letting the Bush tax-cuts expire. This would repeal the tax cuts that Bush Jr. enacted at the beginning of his Presidency. You will want to look at letting them expire specifically for the upper-income earners. Here's a good article on the benefits of letting those tax cuts expire:
Benefits of letting tax cuts expire
There are other types of taxes that could be increased:
gas tax
soda tax - also called an excise tax
Of course any sort of tax plan you offer should argue that the U.S. economy is now strong enough to weather the increase.
CON - "taxes" are you insane?!
Raising taxes is an idea that is never received well, even less so when the economy is in the toilet. Typical Con strategy can go one of two ways: Both/neither should be prioritized or spending cuts should be prioritized. I don't think the former is really worth it, so here's how you argue for spending cuts.
8 ways to cut government spending
CATO institute proposal
cutting defense spending
This should get you started. I'll help you with showing the DISADS for both sides later on.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Westfield Results
| Extemporaneous Speaking | Lincoln-Douglas | ||
| 1st | Lekha Sunder | 1st | Stephanie Oyolu |
| 2nd | Bowen Song | 2nd | Zuhayr Ali |
| 3rd | Erin Sheena | SF's | Robert Brown |
| 4th | Tommy Hayes | SF's | Travis Craig |
| 5th | Robert Brown | ||
| 6th | John Dagley | Public Forum | |
| 1st | Vinny Misra & Hugh Hajdik | ||
| Dramatic | 2nd | Olivia Cardenas & Erin Sheena | |
| 1st | Ali Potthast | SF's | Maddie Muhlherr & Michael Hoyal |
| 4th | Maddie Van Brunt | SF's | Lyle Derden & Lekha Sunder |
| 5th | Maddie Spence | Q's | Jeong Woo Han & Bowen Song |
| Q's | Matthew Fontenot & Martin Logan | ||
| Junior Poetry | Q's | Aaron Jasso & Armon Tabibzadegan | |
| 1st | Adele Lauzon | Q's | Marcos Coronado & Miguel Covarrubias |
| 2nd | Athene DelVecchio | ||
| 5th | Ally Sun | Humorous | |
| 6th | Navya Sharma | 1st | Jeong Woo Han |
| 3rd | Nikki Goldin | ||
| Senior Poetry | 5th | Larry Zhang | |
| 1st | Michelle Tang | ||
| 2nd | Maddie Van Brunt | Oratory | |
| 3rd | Amy Yao | 1st | Mina Nam |
| 4th | Dikla Taylor | 2nd | Rukmini Kalamangalam |
| 5th | Elise Lanier | 3rd | Abby Eastman |
| 4th | Lyle Derden | ||
| TV Commercial | 6th | Michelle Tang | |
| 1st | Max Nathan | ||
| 3rd | Jeong Woo Han | Senior Prose | |
| 1st | Dikla Taylor | ||
| Readers Theatre | 2nd | Maddie Muhlherr | |
| 6th | Wayside School | 3rd | Michelle Tang |
| 4th | Elise Lanier | ||
| Duet Improv | 5th | Nikki Goldin | |
| 1st | Athene DelVecchio & Vega Shah | 6th | Amy Yao |
| 2nd | Zibi Gugala & Jeong Woo Han | ||
| Senior Duet Acting | |||
| Storytelling | 1st | Maya Waterland & Amy Yao | |
| 3rd | Stephanie Sonik | 4th | Katherine Nyquist & Ally Sun |
| 5th | Nikki Goldin & Kaitlyn Kelly | ||
| Impromptu Acting/Speaking | |||
| 1st | Lekha Sunder | Junior Duet Acting | |
| 2nd | Nikki Goldin | 8th | Nicholas Abraham & Nathan Dunbar |
| 3rd | Noah Scantlebury | ||
| 4th | William Acheampong |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)