Total Users: 241 | Total Files: 6, 581+

Stefan Bauschard

image

UBI, freedom, and what it means to radically change our idea of “work”

Martin Osborn One important thing for debaters to keep in mind on the Universal Basic Income topic is that the idea of UBI involves a radical change in the concept of “work.” For example, transforming how we view labor has implications for how we view economic growth – can economic growth be considered a good thing if many of the laborers are exploited or forced to work? In this way, UBI may also change how we define “freedom,” a key component of many understandings of justice. First, innovation is already changing how we think of “work.” The further technology advances, the less jobs will even be available. Andy Stern, 2016, Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream, Andrew L. “Andy” Ster is the former president of the then 2.2.million member Service Employees International Union (SEIU). He is now President Emeritus of SEIU, which grew by more than 1.2 million workers during his tenurep. 3019-20 Innovation and the hope that it will spur new economic growth also has its limits . The 2013 Oxford Study is required reading for anyone who believes that technology will not massively disrupt jobs . It concluded that 47 percent of jobs in the US are at risk of being eliminated due to software , robotics , and machines learning artificial intelligence . One of the myths that innovation believers spout is that automation will only replace repeatable tasks . While this is true in the short term , automation is creeping into more complex and white – collar tasks and will soon impact those as well . The entrepreneurs Steven Berkenfeld is funding are creating software that helps companies produce more — and more efficiently — with fewer people in work that once involved brain work like writing , researching , diagnosing , teaching , and investing . The idea that the technologies that we are creating today could be the engine of job growth in the long term seems very unlikely . The current conception of labor cannot solve inequality. Poverty is rampant in the U.S.A – 16 million Americans are trapped in a cycle way below the poverty line. Andy Stern, 2016, Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream, Andrew L. “Andy” Ster is the former president of the then 2.2.million member Service Employees International Union (SEIU). He is now President Emeritus of SEIU, which grew by more than 1.2 million workers during his tenure, p. 2433-5 Despite all the government assistance programs , nearly 16 million Americans fall below 50 percent of the poverty line , according to the US Census Bureau . That’s the equivalent of a family of four living on $ 34.40 per day , or $ 8.60 per person . As New York Times columnist Eduardo Porter writes : “ No other advanced nation tolerates this depth of deprivation . It amounts to one in twenty Americans —

image

In Support of Universal Basic Income — Answering Opposition Economy Arguments

Martin Osborn UBI, as a proposal with a strong socialist flavor, can leverage some special arguments against economy-based disadvantages. A UBI offers a way to have economic growth while also granting people “real freedom” via the power to say “no.” UBI’s new compromise between liberty and growth may also mend a number of holes that make the current economic arrangement far less stable than it appears. We think you should consider more than the short-term when you assess the effects of UBI on the economy. First, there will be a massive economic downturn when a huge unemployment crisis happens. A UBI means that people will have money to support an otherwise poor economy in the future Frances Coppola, October 15, 2017, Forbes, The IMF gives a cautious welcome to UBI, https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/10/15/the-imf-gives-a-cautious-welcome-to-universal-basic-income/2/#6c91e72e98f2 But at the end of its evaluation, the IMF put its finger on the real value of UBI for advanced countries: In an economic environment in which job insecurity is increasing (for example, because of job market disruptions associated with technological progress), expanding available insurance mechanisms may become an important policy objective. A UBI could provide a stable source of income to individuals and households and therefore limit the impact of income and employment shocks. Second, most of their disadvantages will boil down to “deficit spending is bad” but don’t kneejerk react. Deficit spending is both inevitable and not as bad as everyone thinks – economists agree that deficit spending neutralizes recession Lohr 16 (John Lohr is a Pension fund analyst, Securities Lawyer, Fiduciary expert, counseling major wall street investment companies. “The Deficit Doesn’t Matter.” 2016. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4029681-deficit-matter) BW How does the government pay for the deficit? Two ways: (1) Print more money – a bad thing-causing inflation that makes our money worth less. (2) Sell Treasury bonds, notes and bills, on which the government must make interest payments (like we do on our credit cards). The deficit is a bad thing. No. Most economists recommend deficit spending as the best way to stop and keep at bay a recession. In times of high unemployment unlike now, deficit spending stimulates an increase in consumer spending, which creates an increase in the demand for business products, thus raising the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and stimulating employment. Economists believe that if the government’s deficit is spent on things such as infrastructure, public health, and education, the business output will increase. If the government borrows money to stave off a severe recession, and pays for public health, infrastructure like roads (like my unimproved private road uphill to the ranch, where all the snow blows down from Montana and drifts), or better schools, the vast majority of economists agree that the deficit is beneficial. Paying down on the deficit is a desirable thing. No. Operating at a surplus or paying off a deficit reduces consumer and business spending and raises unemployment. Although the inflation rate may decline, we would generally have less disposable income. Deficit spending creates higher inflation. Not entirely. Third, a UBI

image

Universal Basic Income Argument Outline

Pro Framework – government needs to provide basic human needs, government should protect positive rights, veil of ignorance (Rawls), human rights, free market morally unjust (it doesn’t protect the least disadvantaged, it redistributes wealth upward), the government has an obligation to reduce gender inequality and protect women in the private sphere General poverty – people are poor now, Automation means more people will lose their jobs and end up poor Inequality – it’s generally rising, UBI transfers some wealth from the rich to the poor — Relative inequality is bad – social tensions and frustrations, unrest — Absolute inequality/poverty is bad Racial inequality – wealth currently unequally distributed among races Reparations – UBI should be given as a corrective for past injustices Gender inequality – means for women to escape abusive spouses, UBI is a way to value work in the home, UBI is way to equalize wages/offset generally lower wages for women, UBI means many women do not have to rely on sex work, women are more likely to be poor Reduced criminal activity (though this is more of an impact to poverty, see above) Economic stimulus – If the government interjected this much money into the economy, it would stimulate it Entrepreneurship – if people have $ to fall back on, they will be able to take risks to start businesses Education – more money is available to be invested into education Welfare bad – some (though) not all argue that a UBI will replace welfare and that welfare is bad for these reasons – Stigmatizing – people who are on welfare are labeled as “poor” Poverty trap – to stay on welfare, you cannot make much $, which encourages people to stay poor Working conditions. If people have at least some basic funds, they won’t have to take jobs with really poor working conditions. Work-life balance. UBI means individuals will not have to work as much, enabling a better work-life balance and a higher quality of life UBI encourages work – (a) increased education, (b) people can concentrate on work when they don’t have to worry about their basic needs, people don’t develop skills when they have to focus on feeding their families and surviving Environment – people are more willing to protect the environment when they don’t have to focus on daily survival  Con Framework – greatest good for the greatest number (utilitarianism), pragmatism – should look at the pragmatic consequences, economic resource distribution is morally wrong (it’s theft) Inflation – if the government puts that much $ into the economy it will trigger high inflation, especially when global economic growth is pretty strong (as it is now) Taxes – funding a UBI will require higher taxes. Higher taxes hurt economic activity. Some Pro literature argues for a carbon tax, so Con teams can be prepared with carbon tax bad Military spending cuts – funding a UBI will (also) require military spending cuts, military spending good Deficit spending – funding a UBI will (also) require more

image

UBI, The Protection of Gender Equality, and the State Interest

Stefan Bauschard One important area for debaters to explore on the universal basic income topic is the relationship between UBI and the promotion of gender equality. There are a number of reasons a UBI could promoted gender equality. First, UBI enables women to leave abusive relationships, because they will have income to rely on if they need to leave. Amelia Womack is deputy leader of the Green Party, March 17, 2018, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/domestic-violence-abuse-bill-theresa-may-financial-independence-a8260736.html   How a universal basic income could help women in abusive relationships There are no easy solutions. But there are bold ideas which might help women, like a universal basic income (UBI) to give financial independence. According to research by Women’s Aid, one in five women interviewed said they couldn’t leave an abusive relationship because they had no money of their own, and the same number said financial abuse had left them unable to manage money. Meanwhile, research by Shelter found almost half of homeless women say domestic violence has contributed to their homelessness. Last week, Theresa May unveiled plans to protect women under the Government’s new Domestic Abuse Bill. The promise to legally recognise economic and other forms of non-physical abuse is very welcome. The Green Party has long championed a UBI, which is a non-means tested payment for every citizen, providing the essential financial support we all need. The benefits of UBI have been well discussed; from rewarding unpaid work to giving people opportunity and options in a fast changing world, it would transform society. But UBI would also transform life for women. By giving everyone financial independence, UBI would ensure no woman is ever dependent on her partner to meet her basic needs. And for those in abusive relationships, one of the barriers against leaving would be removed. Unlike benefits or wages, UBI payments would be attached to and follow individuals, irrespective of life circumstances or employment status. For women leaving an abusive relationship, there would be no endless forms or waiting for benefit payments in order to access financial help. The UBI payments would still be there, as they always had been. As well as being practically liberating, this would psychologically free women to even think about leaving in the first place. Recent research by Refuge and the Co-op bank found 60 per cent of adults in Britain who have experienced financial or economic abuse were women. Of course, financial abuse takes many forms and does not always go hand in hand with dependency. Perpetrators are adept at manipulating survivor’s income and resources, and there is still the risk that an abusive partner could exploit and misuse this independent income. But in relationships where there is control and abuse of money, UBI payments would be distinct in that they are attached to the individuals. Women’s centres and refuges could be equipped to assist women in ensuring that when they leave a relationship, their UBI payments leave with them. Enabling women to independently rebuild their lives should be at the core of domestic abuse policy. UBI

image

Helen Xu @ MIT on Policy Debate v. Research

Applying high school debate skills to PhD research, JUNE 2018 Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Diversity That’s so MIT Unlike many of my fellow graduate students in computer science who have been doing programming and math competitions since high school (or potentially earlier), I spent six years in middle and high school in policy debate. This usually meant I was traveling around the country almost every weekend to argue about the government and international relations at hundreds of words per minute. Although debate may not have prepared me for Computer Science (CS) research, it might have been better preparation for becoming a grad student. For those who do not know, policy debate is a fast, technical, competitive speech-based activity comprised of “rounds” where two teams of two students argue different sides of a proposition (called the resolution) about a specific type of policy that the United States government could enact. The activity looks completely different from the presidential debates we see on TV, with debaters racing to say as many relevant words as possible in the time allotted. I enjoyed my time in debate and seriously considered continuing the activity in college and studying something related like political science or international relations, but I wanted to try something completely different to see if debate was really what I wanted to do with my future. In my first semester of college I took a computer science class because it seemed like a change of pace. I quickly found that research in CS and debate were related. Read the rest of the article.

image

Prepare for the High School Policy Debate Season with Dave Arnett and Amar Adam! Ten Classes only $150

Prepare for the Policy debate season with Dave Arnett, Amar Adam, and others.   The classes are only $25/piece and you can purchase all ten for only $200! Register for all classes and pay by July 31st, 2018 @12pm ET and pay only $150 for all 10 classes. Note: This $150 offer is only valid for the first 10 students to register. Questions? [email protected] On 14 occasions, Dave Arnett’s Policy teams have been ranked in the top 16 (US), including 10 top five teams, and 3 overall number one rankings. His teams have won almost every major college tournament in the US including Dartmouth, Harvard, Northwestern, and Wake Forest. He has coached a national championship team as well as two runner-ups. Dave was selected the National Coach of the Year on two separate occasions (2009, 2015). POLICY August 1 8-10pmET: Lecture on all cases and advantages on the Policy debate topic and discussion of all major cases and related arguments. Teacher: Dave Arnett August 2 8-10pmET: Topicality – Everything you need to know about topicality on the topic and how to debate it on both sides. Students will learn how to write, extend and answer topicality arguments on the immigration topic. Teacher: Dave Arnett August 6 9-11 pm ET: Negative Strategy. An Advanced strategy lecture for those seeking to improve their debating on the negative. How to construct the best 1NC. Giving an effective block. How to choose and execute in the 2NR. Teacher:  Dave Arnett August 7 9-11PM ET: Affirmative Strategy. How to build and defend an affirmative from the ground up. Selecting the best affirmative, writing blocks, and defending in the debate. Will include tips for improving on all of the affirmative speeches. Teacher: Dave Arnett August 8 9-11 pm ET: This lecture and discussion will cover the midterm elections and their relevance to PF, Policy, and LD topics Teacher: Stefan Bauschard August 9 9-11 pm ET: Counterplan strategy and tricks. Covers the major counterplan areas on the topic, how to write them and debate them on both sides.  Will explore advanced theory arguments related to all facets of counterplan debating including competition and legitimacy issues across the range of counterplans. Teacher: Dave Arnett August 10 8-10 PM ET: Framework – A lecture on framework, with a specific focus on how to go for framework on the negative against different varieties of k affs, as well as how to answer common affirmative arguments. Students will both learn arguments specific to the immigration topic, and generic arguments that could be made from topic to topic. Teacher: Amar Adam August 11 9-11 pm ET:  Advanced Debate Theory. This class will demystify debate theory and teach students a process for breaking down concepts and executing in the debate. Learn a way of thinking about theory and how to apply it across the spectrum of arguments including Topicality, Counterplans, and Kritiks. Teacher: Dave Arnett August 14 9-11 pm ET:Debating the ins and outs of the Capitalism kritik Teacher: Dr. Sydney Pasquinelli Stanford University Debate August

image

Points of Information

This is a lecture, delivered by Sarina Selleck at the North America Debate Academy 2013, recorded by Alfred Tuna Snider. Today I’m going to talk to you about points of information, because they are good ways to stay engaged in the debate, to be engaged in the debate for the second bench before you get a chance to speak, and generally they can be sometimes a bit neglected, or kind of misused, or abused, so we are going to try and make sure that… A lot of this is going to be quite basics, but we want to make sure that you have the basics in place or they may serve as reminders in case you have been doing things that you’ve forgotten, and they would be much more effective to use as points of information. Where we are going to start with points of information this morning is actually coming up with POI’s, how should that process work. When you are actually in a debate, the first thing you should keep in mind when you come up with POI’s is that you should definitely write them down. This has been a major problem that I’ve seen throught this week, that oftentimes people stand up and they are called upon to give a point of information, and this gurgly, mess comes out that is like “but maybe, right, guys, and you know that example that I said maybe”… And you go like ermmmm, NO. One way to actually avoid that is to actually write down what you are going to say, write it down on a paper, and this serves two purposes. 1. It avoids the mess, that ends up not making sense to the speaker or to the judge, and it is also a good way to confirm with your partner. Because sometimes in a debate you and your partner have different ideas on where you would like to take POI’s, but if you write them down and share them with one another, your partner can potentially cut them a bit down, so they are a bit shorter, and to the point. Or can say or point out that you guys really need to get back to the point of that argument, rather than coming up with some sort of rebuttal as a POI to give to that team. So when you write it down it is important to make sure, that they are short, and because you only have 15 seconds maximum to give this POI, but generally people expect them to be much less and they come off as much shorter and snappier and much stronger if you are able to make them much less than 15 seconds. So this is the first thing that you should keep in mind. Prepare your points of information in advance The second thing you should keep in mind when you are coming up with POI’s, is that sometimes it is a great idea to come up with POI’s in your prep

image

Inches and Seconds: How to Get the Most out of Prep Time

Games are one of the most integral parts of our modern society. Between sports, video games, and even the many applications of game theory to business, politics, and various social issues, many problems can be solved by examining how best to use the rules of the game to your advantage. Debate is no different. One of the most integral parts of debate is taking advantage of your time. Of course, while conveying points to the judge takes time, so does crafting and phrasing those points in an effective and persuasive manner. Because of that, and because I constantly see the issue of prep time being avoided in discussions of debate strategy, I wanted to take some time today to discuss the various ways to maximize those vital two minutes of prep time. Take All of Your Prep This one is self-explanatory, but I see a lot of teams avoiding it for one reason or another. Every second of prep time not taken is another second that could have been used to write out responses, read evidence, communicate with your partner, or just collect your thoughts before a speech. Don’t get me wrong, teams have won rounds with a minute of prep left on the clock, but those rounds were never particularly close. Rather, effective and complete use of prep is one of those small skills that separate the octo-finalists from the champions, and the 45th speaker from the 9th. When you get past a certain skill threshold, these things start to matter. Flip Second (Yes, Every Time) One of the most important aspects of prep time in debate is that, while teams have their own individual timers and are each allotted prep time that they can use whenever they want, both sides of the debate are allowed to work during either side’s prep time. This is important, and one of the reasons why going second is truly so powerful in debate. Aside from the myriad of other benefits that Caspar recently covered, flipping second means that every time your opponents take prep, you get to use that prep too, and so every second that benefits them also benefits you. In contrast, your opponents don’t get to take full advantage of all your prep time. Speaking of which… Always Take Prep Before Second Case If You’re Speaking Second This one is weirdly uncommon, despite how truly broken it is. The symmetry of prep time being usable by both teams gets destroyed when, as soon as your first-speaking opponents read their case, you take 20-40 seconds of prep. During this time, your team can decide upon your strategy for the second half of the debate, communicate responses, and call for evidence, while your opponents have absolutely nothing to do. They don’t know what you’re running yet, so they can only twiddle their thumbs and make awkward eye contact with the judge while you plot their downfall. Muahahaha. Take Prep Before Second Final Focus In the same vein, waiting until right before your

image

Background: Affirmative Action

Full article by Tom Price @ CQ Researcher The Supreme Court has upheld the use of race in college admissions, but affirmative action is facing new challenges. Many whites continue to oppose giving preference to minorities to compensate for discrimination and to diversify campuses, and the Trump administration says it may sue universities practicing “intentional” discrimination. Several critics question affirmative action’s effectiveness, citing minorities’ continued under-representation at elite universities. But affirmative action’s defenders say it has helped raise minority representation on campuses, and that most universities rely on a “holistic” admissions approach that looks at applicants’ public service, creativity and other attributes, as well as race. Georgetown and other schools are pursuing innovative ways to diversify their student bodies, such as admitting the descendants of slaves owned by their institutions. Meanwhile, activist Edward Blum has filed numerous suits challenging laws and policies that favor minorities over whites. Overview Abigail Fisher is an unassuming 27-year-old from Sugar Land, Texas, who played the cello and dreamed of attending the University of Texas at Austin, the alma mater of her sister and father. She also is at the center of a legal storm involving affirmative action. For the past nine years, Fisher has maintained that the university rejected her application in 2008 because she is white, in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Her lawsuit twice landed at the U.S. Supreme Court, most recently producing the landmark 2016 ruling that the school could treat “race as a relevant feature within the broader context of a candidate’s application.”1 Nevertheless, Fisher and an advocacy group backing her, Students for Fair Admissions, filed a new lawsuit in late June in state court, arguing that the university’s use of racial preferences in admissions violates state law and the Texas Constitution.2 Critics of affirmative action — policies that seek to compensate for racial and ethnic discrimination and to diversify campuses by admitting more African-Americans, Hispanics and other minorities — have long complained that giving preference to minorities in college admissions is a form of reverse discrimination against whites. But the debate is resurfacing, again, in an era of heightened racial tensions in which white supremacists feel emboldened to air their ideology in public, and football players kneel during the National Anthem to protest racial injustice. The United States also is struggling with a contentious transition from America’s first black president to a chief executive whose political base includes whites who feel aggrieved because they believe their values are under siege in a nation where minorities will soon constitute a majority of the population. Abigail Fisher has been challenging University of Texas affirmative-action policies since 2008, when she says the school rejected her application because she is white. Her suit led to the Supreme Court’s landmark 2016 ruling that the school could consider race as one of several factors in evaluating a candidate’s application. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) The Trump administration also worries supporters of affirmative action. The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division is preparing to investigate and possibly sue