SAMPLE WEST COAST EVIDENCE

Kevin Fagan, Staff Writer, April 6, 2009, “Ranks of homeless swell as middle class teeters,” San Francisco Chronicle, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/06/MNVH16A0PI.DTL, ACC. 4-6-2009.

Instead, it's families that are suffering the most, he said. The national Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported in January that the number of homeless families seeking shelter is believed to have shot up in double digits in most major cities - official counts will be taken later this year - and it predicts that 1.1 million more families will fall far enough below the poverty line during the current economic crisis to be at high risk of homelessness.

2. Homelessness Is On The Rise In America, Including Whole Families

Randy Jurado Ertll, Staff Writer, April 1, 2009, “Homelessness must be given top priority,” The Progressive, ACC. 4-3-2009, http://www.progressive.org/mpertil040109.html.

We need to do more to address the problem of homelessness. Homeless rates continue to rise in the United States now more than ever due to our severe economic crisis. Last week, President Obama was asked about the problem at his press conference. To his credit, he gave a compassionate response. “Part of the change in attitudes that I want to see here in Washington and all across the country,” the president said, “is a belief that it is not acceptable for children and families to be without a roof over their heads in a country as wealthy as ours.” But today families make up 34 percent of the homeless population, and one in every 50 children is homeless in America, according to the National Center on Family Homelessness.

3. Despite Recent Declines, We Need A Long-Term Strategy To Reduce Homelessness

Brian Sullivan, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, July 29, 2008, “HUD Reports Drop In Number of Chronically homeless persons,” HUD New Realease No. 08-113, ACC. 3-7-2009,

http://www.hud.gov/news/release.cfm?content=pr08-113.cfm.

In an address before the National Alliance to End Homelessness, HUD Secretary Steve Preston said, "We can all be encouraged that we're making progress in reducing chronic street homelessness in America and with more resources and better reporting, we can continue this trend. But we must also recognize that we have a long way to go to find a more lasting solution for those struggling with homelessness every day."

4. We must act now! The economic dowturn risks escalating the problem to where no assistance could solve

Douglas A. McIntyre, Staff Writer, April 06, 2009, “When Joblessness Becomes Homelessness,” Time, ACC. 4-6-2009, http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1889610,00.html.

If the economic downturn is as long or longer than many pessimistic experts believe, it may well lead to a sort of widespread tribalism within the United States that has never been experienced before, at least not in anyone's memory, and that may be imperative to the government's ability to render assistance to people who have absolutely no place to live. At some point, the federal welfare system could become insolvent because of the demands of those in need. The fact that people have bonds beyond their nuclear families may be the only thing that prevents that.

5. The Coming Crisis Will Overwhelm Current Levels Of Social Services

Conroy, 54, is one of what many social service providers are calling the newly homeless - people who would never be destitute, without a place to live, if the national economy were not collapsing. "Usually, with a lot of middle-income families, if you hit hard times, you just move out of the area," said Diane Linn, director of the Ritter Center in San Rafael, one of Marin's emergency aid agencies. "So seeing middle-class people come here - that's big. It tells me things are very bad. "We would have never seen this in the past." Conroy is just the tip of the iceberg, experts say. Come next year, there will be a lot more like him on the streets of Bay Area communities. And with social services everywhere bursting at the seams, experts and program managers expect to be overwhelmed.

Lack of Affordable Housing is Key

1. The Lack Of Affordable Housing Is A Driving Force Behind Homelessness

Mark R. Rank, the Herbert S. Hadley Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University, St. Louis, One Nation, Underprivileged: Why American Poverty Affects Us All, 2005, p. 215.

In addition to the proliferation of low-wage work, the private sector's failure to build an adequate stock of lower-end housing units and the fed¬eral government's decreasing expenditures on programs designed to address the housing needs of low-income families have made affordable housing even scarcer over the past two decades. The result is that more Americans, particularly those in the bottom quintile of the income distribution, are find¬ing themselves without access to decent-quality affordable housing. Given these patterns, it is no wonder that homelessness has became such a visible issue over the past two decades.

2. The Gap Between Income And Housing Costs Is The Primary Cause Of Homelessness

Beyond Shelter, 2008, “Responding to America's Challenges, The Problem: Ending & Preventing Family Homelessness,” http://www.beyondshelter.org/aaa_initiatives/ending_homelessness.shtml ACC. 4-6-2009.

Homelessness is one of our nation's most serious social problems. While it is often the result of interwoven systemic and personal problems, the primary cause of homelessness among families is the growing gap between housing costs and income. The emergency shelter system is able to accommodate only a small fraction of the growing number of homeless families in need. Families are forced to live in their cars, in garages, in other places unfit for human habitation or to move from place to place with their children, staying intermittently with friends and families.

3. The Lack Of Affordable Housing Undermines The Quality Of Life In Four Ways

Mark R. Rank, the Herbert S. Hadley Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University, St. Louis, One Nation, Underprivileged: Why American Poverty Affects Us All, 2005, p. 215.

The lack of affordable housing affects individuals in several ways. First, households that are already strapped for cash have much less to spend on food, clothing, health care, transportation, and other necessities because they are spending a significant amount of their income on housing. Second, not having decent, affordable, and stable housing has been shown to dramati¬cally increase the levels of stress within families. Third, a household's lack of stable housing negatively affects children's development, in particular their academic performance and overall health. Finally, affordable and de¬cent quality housing is critical in maintaining the vitality and sustainability of neighborhoods.

4. Permanent Housing Assistance Is The Best Way To Reduce Homelessness

Christine Vestal, Staff Writer, April 4, 2009, “States coping with unprecedented homelessness,” Richmond Times-Dispatch, http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/lifestyles/health_med_fit/article/I-HOME0319_20090402-232410/247924/, ACC. 4-4-2009.

Experts agree that the only effective method of reducing homelessness is to quickly move people into permanent homes and pay their rent until they regain their footing. Without stable housing, people's lives continue to unravel, no matter how much state support they get. But paying a family's rent is an expensive proposition. "You need a lot of cash to help these families pay for housing because they're so poor and rents are still very high, and many need a year or more to find jobs," said Robyn Frost, director of the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless.

Shelters/Tranisitional Housing Approach Fails

1. Shelters Are Unable To Provide Long-Term Housing Assistance

Even a short period of homelessness can lead to depression, mental illness and child neglect, yet increasing numbers of families are homeless for months and sometimes years. Emergency shelters are unable to provide the intensive long-term assistance which homeless families require in order to stabilize their lives. While transitional housing programs do provide such assistance, families are more responsive to service interventions from a stable, permanent housing base.

2. Permanent Housing First Improves The Entire Homeless Shelter Sytem

National Alliance to End Homelessness, November 27, 2006, “Frequently Asked Questions about Housing First for Individuals and Families,” http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/1424, ACC. 4-8-2009.

For individuals and families who are moved back into permanent housing quickly, bypassing long stays in emergency shelter and/or transitional housing, many of the services traditionally provided in “transitional housing” programs are instead provided during a “transitional period of time” after the move to permanent housing. Housing First providers develop an expertise that is valuable for individuals and families who are preparing to exit transitional housing programs. This includes helping individuals and families overcome barriers to housing, navigate the transition into their new home and neighborhood and shoring up supports available to household members over the long-term. As a result, developing a strong relationship between transitional housing providers and Housing First providers can help the whole homeless shelter system work better.

3. Housing First Is A Clear Break From The Current Transitional Housing Focus

Tanya Tull, President/CEO of Beyond Shelter, Institute for Research, Training & Technical Assistance, March 4, 2004, “Beyond Shelter’s “Housing First” Program for Homeless Families Recognized as a “Solution for America” by the Pew Partnership,” http://www.beyondshelter.org/aaa_the_institute/Pew%20Abstract.PDF, ACC. 4-6-2009.

Public and private solutions to homelessness have historically focused on providing homeless families with emergency shelter and/or transitional housing, which alone neither end homelessness nor prevent a recurrence of homelessness for a significant segment of the homeless population. “Housing First” is an alternative to the current system of emergency shelter/transitional housing, which tends to prolong the length of time that families remain homeless.

4. Current Programs Focus On Temporary Housing, Not Permanent Housing Aid

For most of the past two decades, public and private solutions to homelessness have focused on providing homeless families with emergency shelter and/or transitional housing. While such programs may provide vital access to services for families in crisis, they often fail to address the long-term needs of homeless families. Families need help in finding affordable housing, negotiating leases and developing the skills to stay housed. Once a family becomes homeless, it is extremely difficult to get back into rental housing. There is a shortage of affordable housing available, particularly for larger families with children, and most property owners will not rent to a family that has a poor credit history or a previous eviction.

5. Current Temporary Housing Focus Is A Major Barrier

Particularly single mothers face enormous obstacles in finding affordable, appropriate rental housing. Most property owners require security deposits along with first and last month's rent, and there are often deposits required to obtain utility service, especially if the renter has a history of nonpayment. Additionally, emergency shelters and transitional programs rarely assist families in overcoming the tremendous barriers they face in accessing permanent housing, such as poor credit and eviction histories, unemployment and lack of move-in funds. Left unaddressed, these factors can result in a family crisis leading to renewed homelessness.

Sobriety / Treatment Requirements Only Deny Homeless Access to Housing

1. Sobriety Requirements Leave Many Homeless Alcoholics On The Streets

Caroline Cassels, Staff Writer, April 1, 2009, “Supportive Housing Without Conditions Reduces Drinking, Health Costs in Homeless Persons with Severe Alcoholism,” Medscape, http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/590490, ACC. 4-6-2009.

The researchers also found that individuals who were housed significantly reduced their alcohol use over time, with the study results indicating that the total amount of daily alcohol consumption was reduced by approximately one-third over a 1-year period. In addition, residents also drank to the point of intoxication on significantly fewer occasions after they were housed vs. when they were homeless. "The take-home message is that the housing-first program for current public inebriates costs taxpayers less money than leaving these individuals on the streets — the savings are substantial and continue for at least 12 months," principal investigator Mary E. Larimer, PhD, told reporters attending a press conference where the study results were presented.

2. Sobriety And Treatment Requirements Deny Current Options To Homelessness

Florence Graves, founding director of Brandeis University's Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism and Hadar Sayfan, a senior research assistant at the institute, June 24, 2007, “First things first,” Boston Globe, ACC. 4-6-2009, http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/06/24/first_things_first/.

Another open question is how much housing-first helps the homeless with their underlying problems. But advocates say that this is a very high bar; addiction, for example, is a notoriously difficult problem, and even modest goals make the idea worthwhile. "If you measure success as complete abstinence, success rates are very low," said Culhane. "Many people relapse." But "in the public health field, there is a countervailing view, sometimes characterized as harm-reduction." In this view, minimizing harm -- as in the case of clean-needles programs to reduce the spread of HIV -- is every bit as important.

3. Housing First Reverses The Current Focus On Temporary Shelters And Sobriety

Joseph Shapiro, Staff Writer, March 31, 2009, “For Homeless, A Home May Be The Best Rehab,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102563819, ACC. 4-8-2009.

The traditional way to help chronically homeless people has been to get them into a temporary shelter where they can work on getting sober or dealing with a psychiatric illness. Only once that hard work is done are they considered ready for permanent housing. Housing First turns all that upside down. It finds the permanent place to live first. It doesn't matter if the homeless person is still drinking or using drugs, because having a home is considered therapeutic by itself. Case workers are then around to help the person address the problems that caused him or her to be homeless.

4. Sobriety requirements fail. Abuse is more common in treatment

Deborah K. Padgett, New York University School of Social Work, Et al, January 2006, “Housing First Services for People Who Are Homeless With Co-Occurring Serious Mental Illness and Substance Abuse,” Research on Social Work Practice, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 79-80.

The above results extend those cited earlier (Tsemberis et al., 2004) to an additional 2 years of data collection. We note the continued absence of group differences in alcohol and drug use, though with a nonsignificant trend toward lower alcohol use by the housing first group. The lack of compliance with sobriety requirements by a significant proportion of the treatment first group—now extending to 4 years’ duration—is an indication that such strictures fall short in bringing about abstinence among consumers whose primary need is for housing. Although substance use was almost certainly underreported by members of both groups, it is likely to be greater among those in treatment first because the adverse consequences of any admission of substance use are greater for them.

NEGATIVE VS HOMELESS AFF

The Status Quo is Reducing Homelessness

1. Hud Grants Reduce Homelessness Through Permanent Housing In The Status Quo

Brian Sullivan, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 19, 2009, “OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AWARDS NEARLY $1.6 BILLION IN HOMELESS GRANTS TO THOUSANDS OF LOCAL HOUSING AND SERVICE PROGRAMS NATIONWIDE,” HUD News Release No. 09-010, http://www.hud.gov/news/release.cfm?content=pr09-010.cfm, ACC. 4-8-2009.

HUD's homelessness grants have made a measureable difference in reducing long-term or chronic homelessness in America. Based on the Department's latest homeless assessment, chronic homelessness has declined an average of 15 percent annually from 2005 to 2007. This decline is directly attributed to HUD's homeless grants helping to create significantly more permanent housing for those who might otherwise be living on the streets.

2. $25 Million Was Allocated Last Year For Re-Housing Assistance

National Alliance to End Homelessness, July 8, 2008, “Rapid Re-housing,” www.endhomelessness.org/files/ 2032_file_Rapid_Rehousing_final.pdf, ACC. 4-9-2009.

Congress appropriated $25 million in the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Grants for 2008 to demonstrate the effectiveness of Rapid Re-housing programs to reduce family homelessness. How will the federal Rapid Re-housing Demonstration funds be awarded? Communities can apply for Rapid Re-housing funds as part of the Homeless Assistance Grants competition process (Continuum of Care). Determining the effectiveness of Rapid Re-housing programs is an important part of the initiative and $1.25 million is reserved for evaluation.

3. Hud Just Announced Over A Billion In Grants To Reduce Homelessness

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), February 19, 2009, “Obama Administration Awards Nearly $1.6 Billion in Homeless Grants to Thousands of Local Housing and Service Programs Nationwide,” http://www.endlongtermhomelessness.org/press_center/obama_administration_awards_ nearly.aspx, ACC. 4-8-2009.

Hundreds of thousands of homeless individuals and families will find a stable home and be offered critically needed services as a result of nearly $1.6 billion in homeless assistance announced today by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan. This week, President Obama also signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 into law, which will provide an additional $1.5 billion in funding for homeless prevention. The grants announced today are being awarded through HUD's Continuum of Care programs and will assist approximately 6,300 local homeless assistance projects throughout the U.S., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. For a local summary of the grant funding announced today, visit HUD's website.

4. Data on homeless children is skewed. Over one million are double-counted

Joshua Rhett Miller, Staff Writer, March 13, 2009 What's In a Number? That Depends on How You Define 'Homeless',” Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,509139,00.html, ACC. 4-10-2009.

The report — released Tuesday by the National Center on Family Homelessness and reported by numerous news organizations, including FOXNews.com — estimated that one out of every 50 children in America experienced "homelessness" during that two-year span. But rather than using the definition of homelessness established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Massachusetts-based organization used a standard adopted by the Department of Education that includes children who are "doubled up," or children who share housing with other persons due to economic hardship or similar reason. The difference? About 1,170,000 children.

Re-Housing / Housing First is Ineffective and Solved By the Status Quo

1. Hud Just Dramatically Increased Rapid Re-Housing Within Communities

HUD is awarding $24 million to create new pilot programs in 23 local communities to rapidly re-house homeless families with children, which will be critical during these difficult economic times. These local pilot programs (see attached chart) will become the basis of a significantly expanded $1.5 billion federal effort, through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, to offer quick housing assistance to homeless families and to prevent homelessness among those facing a sudden economic crisis. The additional funding provided in the recovery plan is a dramatic increase in funding to support local programs to keep persons and families from becoming homeless, including the large number of low-income renters who are at high-risk of becoming homeless because their landlords' properties are foreclosed upon.

2. Obama’s Homeless Funding Was $1.5 Billion In Services And Permanent Housing

Continuum of Care Grants provide permanent and transitional housing to homeless persons. In addition, Continuum grants fund important services including job training, health care, mental health counseling, substance abuse treatment and child care. More than $1.5 billion in Continuum of Care grants are awarded competitively to local programs to meet the needs of their homeless clients. Continuum grants fund a wide variety of programs from street outreach and assessment programs to transitional and permanent housing for homeless persons and families. Half of all Continuum funding awarded today, more than $783 million, will support new and existing programs that help to pay rent and provide permanent housing for disabled homeless individuals and their families (see attached summary of the funding awarded today).

3. Obama Just Gave Out Almost $20 Million To Colorado Alone For Stable Housing

Jane Goin, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 19, 2009, “OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AWARDS NEARLY $19.5 MILLION IN HOMELESS GRANTS TO LOCAL HOUSING AND SERVICE PROGRAMS IN COLORADO,” HUD News Release 09-CPD-01-DEN, http://www.hud.gov/local/co/news/pr2009-02-19.cfm, ACC. 4-8-2009.

U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan today announced the Obama Administration is awarding $19,449,598 in grants to 77 local homeless providers throughout Colorado. HUD grants offer homeless individuals and families a wide range of housing and support services. "With the foreclosure and unemployment crisis looming, millions of families - both homeowners and renters - are in danger of losing their homes so we must focus substantial resources to help those families find stable housing," said Donovan. "The grants being awarded today, along with the recovery plan's additional $1.5 billion, will offer a critical lifeline to those persons and families who, after a foreclosure or job loss, might otherwise be faced with homelessness.”

4. Lack Of Sobriety Requirements Fosters Violent Outbreaks

Pearson CL, Et al, 2007, “The Applicability of Housing First Models to Homeless Persons With Serious Mental Illness: Final Report,” Washington, DC: US Dept of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, http://www.huduser.org/publications/homeless/hsgfirst.html, ACC. 4-6-2009.

While housing problems may not be frequent, some are serious enough to jeopardize a client’s housing in a less tolerant setting. For example, across all three Housing First programs, there were 62 incidences of problem behavior linked to alcohol or drug use, 80 incidences of other behavioral issues, 24 incidences of abusive behavior toward others, and 25 incidences of property damage or failure of clients to upkeep their apartments.

Increasing Social Services Will not Solve Homelessness

1. Increasing Social Services Is A Short-Term Band Aid That Fails

Donald Whitehead, Executive Director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, 2009, “Poverty Versus Pathology: What's "Chronic" About Homelessness,” ACC. 3-2-2009, http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/ chronic/full.html.

The initiative to end "chronic homelessness," especially as articulated in policies to shift federal resources to certain kinds of targeted homeless assistance programs, assumes that there is a static population of people who are homeless with disabilities. While targeted homeless assistance programs may help to stabilize people who are currently homeless, they do nothing to prevent future homelessness among low-income people with or without disabilities.

2. The Plan Could Only Reduce Homelessness By 20% At Max

But a new approach, called "housing first," is gathering momentum. The idea is to target the most difficult cases -- the chronically homeless who make up between 10 and 20 percent of the homeless population and spend years cycling between the streets, shelters, jail cells, and emergency rooms -- and give them apartments without requiring them to get sober, in the hope that having a place to live will help them address their other problems.

3. Permanent Housing Social Services Lead To Ghettoization

Robert Rosencrans, Staff Writer, August 17, 2007, “Gilded Age Crime: Poor Go Homeless, Wealthy Get Bailouts,” The Hill, http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/08/17/gilded-age-crime-poor-go-homeless-wealthy-get-bailouts/, ACC. 4-10-2009.

The point is should the government hand out free housing? Look what happened when the government created public subsidized housing. In almost every instance it turned into a crime ridden ghetto. People who earn their way usually treat the property they pay for with more respect. As far as fair wages, your education determines that. While you're complaining about the plight of people you should be first in line to complain about public schools. They obviously fail to give students the skills they will need later in life and the worst schools of all are usually located in inner cities, controlled by democrats. Instead of blaming it on the financial system and Erin Burnett, put the blame where it belongs.

4. Social Services Won’t Solve Without Reforming The Entire System

Kim Horner, Staff Writer, March 30, 2009, “Battling homelessness in Dallas requires more housing, mental health services, advocates say,” The Dallas Morning News, ACC. 4-10-2009, http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/ dws/dn/latestnews/stories/032909dnmethomeless.34d3691.html.

The system designed to help – psychiatric hospitals, drug and alcohol treatment centers, mental health clinics and housing programs – isn't working for most of them. That failure not only perpetuates homelessness but ends up costing taxpayers millions for law enforcement, emergency care and other expenses that could be avoided.

"The system is just not there for them," said Ron Cowart, assistant manager of the city's Crisis Intervention Unit, which has a team that focuses on the most difficult cases on the streets. "I look at many of these [homeless] encampments as being monuments of our failure to properly address the mentally ill homeless."

CAPITALISM KRITIK

Capitalism Explanation

The capitalism criticism is a structuralist critique that indicts the economic system that serves as a backdrop to the affirmative plan. While there are many different conceptions of what capitalism means, for the purpose of this critique, “capitalism” simply describes America’s current economic system which promotes free markets and wide-spread individual ownership over wealth and the means of producing that wealth. The role of the government in this system is to ensure that private property is protected, goods and services are produced and the markets in which they are traded in are fair and free. While the capitalist system traditionally refers to the economic elements alone, the profit-motive has increasingly become a part of American political life as well.

While most people like capitalism when it works for them, many object to it on principle because of its effect on the poor, disenfranchised and the weak. Because an individual is only successful in a capitalist society if they can make a profit, those that fail to succeed in this arena are cast aside. Anti-capitalist theorists claim that the hierarchy inherent in capitalism guarantees that there will always be winners and losers. As capitalism progresses at an increasingly frenetic pace, the gap between the winners and losers grows larger. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And because there are a finite number of resources to profit off of, as the rich continue to gobble up more money there becomes less for everyone else. This systematic shrinking of available wealth sees millions of Americans fall below the poverty line each year.

It is against this backdrop of destitution that the affirmative on this topic attempts to remedy poverty. This critique argues that the root cause of poverty is the unequal system of capitalism that consolidates America’s wealth in the hands of the few. It is the very way that American’s view money that is the problem. Money may be the root of all ills, but in capitalism it is also seen as the solution. If there’s a problem, just throw money at it. Unfortunately, spending money on social services is merely an attempt to use the tools that started the problem to fix it. The band-aid solutions that the aff will present on this topic are doomed to fail because they don’t stop they continue to operate in a system that has an interest in preventing equality. Not only does the affirmative not fix the root cause of poverty, they bolster the capitalist system. The more that money goes into fixing up capitalism’s problems, the more the capitalist government expands to monitor and distribute that money. This oversight and regulation of wealth is exactly the type of monetary-obsession that capitalism thrives on.

Continuing to support a capitalist system is an endorsement of a vicious system that sacrifices all individuals for the sake of growth. As it continues to expand capitalism necessarily gets more unstable. The end result is wars over resources and conflicts that escalate out of control and consume the globe in nuclear conflict. The only way out is by quickly changing our capitalist system to a Marxist one that embraces principles of equality and dramatically decreases the importance placed on wealth and property.

Executing on the Capitalism Kritik

This Kritik is strategic because it is based on the foundation of conceptually simplicity and great evidence. Unlike other Kritiks which confuse your opponents and judges, this is a criticism is effective because it is intuitive. With this in mind, it is important not to over-think it. Success in debating capitalism is predicated on winning a few, well-developed arguments. First and most important, you should argue that the system of capitalism will inevitably collapse and when it does it will be violent and bloody and horrific. If you win that the collapse of capitalism is inevitable, then you are in a great position to argue that transitioning away from capitalism now is better than all dying in its rapid collapse later. This is strategic for you because many affirmative teams will try to argue that transitioning away from capitalism will cause bloody conflict. If you win that transition is inevitable—it’s only a question of when and how bad that transition is—you are in good shape.

Second, it is important for you to win the fundamental premise of the link that the reform the aff presents is only a band-aid solution that doesn’t fix the underlying problem. In fact, the affirmative makes things worse because it covers over a problem and makes it look like everything is ok. This is an effective masking link argument that is very helpful for the negative to make. This combined with the link arguments about the dangers of relying on the federal government for meaningful change, should put you in good shape.

Finally, it is important to win that a world without capitalism is better than a world with it. While this sounds simple, it is likely to be the crux of most debates you have on capitalism. Many people think that without capitalism we’ll be worse off than we are now. The neg must be aggressive in making “try or die” claims that persuade judges that we are dead no matter what, if capitalism still exists. There is only a chance the world of the alternative will be a more peaceful and harmonious society.

Capitalism Kritik 1NC Shell 1/2

1. The plan misdiagnoses the nature of poverty – single-issue reforms are swamped by overriding economics.

World Socialist Movement, August 13, 2006, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/what_causes_world_poverty.php

So what causes world poverty? Clearly, this is the key question since if you don't get the answer right, you're not going to get the solution right either. According to the WDM, what causes world poverty are the policies currently pursued by governments and multinational companies: "Policies of governments and companies are keeping people poor. Policies that ensure global trade benefits the rich, not the poor—the three richest men in the world are wealthier than the 48 poorest countries combined. Policies that give increasing power to multinational companies—for every £1 of aid going into poor countries, multinationals take 66p of profits out. The powerful are exploiting the poor to make bigger and bigger profits." The WDM's solution to the problem of world poverty follows logically from this analysis that it is "the policies of governments and companies" that is the cause: "We lobby decision makers to change the policies that keep people poor." They claim that this can work, if enough pressure is brought to bear: "In rich countries like Britain, decisions are made which can make or break the lives of the poor. We can influence those decisions. That's why our actions matter so much. Together we can be powerful and win change for the world's poor." Is this true? Is world poverty caused by the mistaken policies of governments and multinationals? Can lobbying and campaigning get these policies changed? As socialists, we have to say that the answer to both questions is "no". Governments don't pursue policies that put profits before poor people because they have chosen to do this rather than chosen not to. Nor have they given in to pressure from the rich and powerful to pursue policies that favour them. They don't have any choice in the matter, because they are not in control of things. Governments operate within the framework of an economic system, and the current economic system—capitalism, to give it a name—is based on wealth being produced for sale on a market with a view to profit and on the competitive pressures of the market dictating that these profits be accumulated in the form of more and more capital invested to make yet further profits. The aim of production under capitalism is not to satisfy people's needs but to accumulate profits. This is not a policy choice but an economic necessity imposed by the operation of impersonal and uncontrollable economic laws which governments have to abide by, unless they want to risk making things worse by provoking an economic crisis and stagnation in the area they rule over. In short, governments put profits before poor people because they are obliged to by the impersonal workings of world market forces, not out of choice. The same goes, even more forcefully, for capitalist corporations. Their whole purpose is to make a profit on the capital invested in their businesses so that their shareholders can benefit. That's the nature of the beast, and we can't imagine that the World Development Movement is really so naïve as to believe that private companies, whether national or multinational, could pursue any other policy than to maximise their profits.

2. Government assistance for poverty increases the size of government without solving the root cause.

Republicae, January 10, 2009, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.nolanchart.com/article5778.html

Thus it appears that the government, while attempting to abolish poverty, has actually contributed to the spread of poverty. The push to break the "cycle of poverty" using government intervention has been a utter failure; instead of breaking generational poverty, it has effectively contributed to it continuation over the last several decades. Yet, despite all the evidence, the government continues to press forward with its good intentions. When aid to those in poverty was made available, like aid to those with disabilities, the government found that their ranks not only began to swell, but continue to swell. The enticement of government assistance for those who were already in poverty and even those who were not, provided an incentive to either remain in poverty or enter the ranks of the poor. The government's programs taught generations how to live in a constant state of dependency.

3. Social programs aimed at helping the poor provide the lifeblood for capitalism’s continued existence.

Republicae, January 10, 2009, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.nolanchart.com/article5778.html

The problem, of course, is that the solution is not solution at all, and rarely provides for an exit to get people off the government dole. In fact, there are still instructive classes on how to get the most from the government programs. Similarly, the ranks of the disabled increased dramatically once disability benefits were introduced. Likewise, the incentive for government social workers to increase their roles should be obvious. There is, after all, nothing like a self-perpetuating system of job security. "Helping the poor" is always a good selling point for government appropriations. I would think by now we would all know that bureaucratic, centralized control over any of our lives cannot provide happiness, security or economic advancement to those who fall under the "protective" arm of the government. All one need do is drive into any public housing complex to see that the government is ill-equipped to provide a way out.

Capitalism Kritik 1NC Shell 2/2

4. The aff’s attempt to annihilate poverty taps into a culture of rage that affirms capitalist violence.

Internationalist Perspective, Spring 2000, “Capitalism and Genocide”, #36, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.geocities.com/wageslavex/capandgen.html

One way in which this ideological hegemony of capital is established over broad strata of the population, including sectors of the working class, is by channeling the disatisfaction and discontent of the mass of the population with the monstrous impact of capitalism upon their lives (subjection to the machine, reduction to the status of a "thing", at the point of production, insecurity and poverty as features of daily life, the overall social process of atomization and massification, etc.), away from any struggle to establish a human Gemeinwesen, communism. Capitalist hegemony entails the ability to divert that very disatisfaction into the quest for a "pure community", based on hatred and rage directed not at capital, but at the Other, at alterity itself, at those marginal social groups which are designated a danger to the life of the nation, and its population.

5. This creates a world of pure death where all violence is possible.

Internationalist Perspective, Spring 2000, “Capitalism and Genocide”, #36, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.geocities.com/wageslavex/capandgen.html

Mass death, and genocide, the deliberate and systematic extermination of whole groups of human beings, have become an integral part of the social landscape of capitalism in its phase of decadence. Auschwitz, Kolyma, and Hiroshima are not merely the names of discrete sites where human beings have been subjected to forms of industrialized mass death, but synecdoches for the death-world that is a component of the capitalist mode of production in this epoch. In that sense, I want to argue that the Holocaust, for example, was not a Jewish catastrophe, nor an atavistic reversion to the barbarism of a past epoch, but rather an event produced by the unfolding of the logic of capitalism itself. Moreover, Auschwitz, Kolyma, and Hiroshima are not "past", but rather futural events, objective-real possibilities on the Front of history, to use concepts first articulated by the Marxist philosopher Ernst Bloch. The ethnic cleansing which has been unleashed in Bosnia and Kosovo, the genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda, the mass death to which Chechnya has been subjected, the prospect for a nuclear war on the Indian sub-continent, are so many examples of the future which awaits the human species as the capitalist mode of production enters a new millenium. Indeed, it is just such a death-world that constitutes the meaning of one pole of the historic alternative which Rosa Luxemburg first posed in the midst of the slaughter inflicted on masses of conscripts during World War I: socialism or barbarism!

Alternative: Reject the affirmative and embrace the logic of Marxist anti-capitalism.

6. Only a Marxist critique can throw off the shackles of capitalism.

Adam Katz, English Instructor at Onodaga Community College. 2000. Postmodernism and the Politics of “Culture.” Pg. 141.

Any discussion of the public intellectual, especially in connection with the various crises framing such discussions (of the humanities, of the Left or leftist intellectuals, of the university, of the public sphere) needs to be grounded in the assumption that only as a result of sustained theoretical struggle—the contention of foundational claims made exoteric—will any genuine critique emerge from the site of theory. Also, it will only be possi¬ble to do anything more than conceal the roots of the aforementioned cri¬sis if such critiques make visible the polemics constitutive of the public sphere and if they do so by siding with the polemic of theory against com¬mon sense. This, of course, requires implicating common sense in the op¬erations of global capitalism through ideology critique. Only in this way, by defending the public “rights” of theory and the theoretical grounds of politics, will it be possible to explain anything, that is, to offer critiques of ideology and expose the structures of violence appearing (anti)politically.

Uniqueness – Collapse Inevitable

1. Capitalism is dead – the bourgeoisie has used up all of their lifelines.

Eduardo Smith 1-27-2009, “The Economic Crisis: State Capitalism Is Running Out of Room for Manoeuvre,” Internationalism no 149, http://en.internationalism.org/inter/149/state-capitalism

Yet given the fact that so far the bourgeoisie has failed to contain the crisis, the odds for Obama's success are definitely not good. Nothing in the toolkit used by the doctors of moribund capitalism seems to have worked so far. After uncountable monetary and fiscal gimmicks -the Fed's key interest rate is close to being negative, trillions of dollars have been injected into the financial system, the federal budget deficit has ballooned to over one trillion dollars - the economy just keeps getting worse. The financial system is still in shambles, while the so-called real economy is getting worse by the day. Economic production and commodity sales are rapidly falling, bringing with them a wave of company bankruptcies and a massive upsurge in the numbers of workers being laid off throughout all the sectors of the economy. Although there are still no comprehensive figures about the economic performance during the past holiday season, all estimates predict historically low sales, while the last official figures on unemployment have the unemployed rate running at a 7.2 percent, the highest in the last 16 years

2. Collapse inevitable – this recession is the end of a 40 year process of decent

Eduardo Smith 1-27-2009, “The Economic Crisis: State Capitalism Is Running Out of Room for Manoeuvre,” Internationalism no 149, http://en.internationalism.org/inter/149/state-capitalism

As we have often pointed out the present economic slump is just one moment in the open crisis of capitalism that started at the end of the 1960's, and that has only gotten worse ever since, despite the "recoveries" which follow the progressively worse "recessions" over the last four decades. Throughout these years -up to now - state capitalist policies have been able to avoid a dramatic collapse similar to that of the great depression, but only at the price of aggravating on the long term capitalism chronic crisis. Thus the ongoing recession -in America and throughout the world - with its dramatic shakeup in the financial system and its apparent unresponsiveness to the government economic manipulation, expresses the reckoning with reality of a system in crisis kept artificially alive by state capitalist policies. Let us be clear, the policies being prepared by Obama's bright boys are not new, they are variants of the same capitalist policies implemented by the state at one moment or another during the last four decades and that were widely used before during FDR's Depression era. However the failure of this state capitalist economic toolkit to work its magic and keep this moribund system alive is what gives the present world economic slump its true historical significance. And this does not bode well for the Obama's administration. If anything, the margin of maneuver that the state has today to manipulate the economy is far more reduced than what the bourgeoisie had in the 30's.

3. Capitalism’s collapse is inevitable—no rescue plans can save it

International Communist Current 10-28-2008, “1929-2008 - Capitalism is a bankrupt system, but another world is possible: communism!” http://en.internationalism.org/icconline/2008/10/crisis_leaflet

Because capitalism is a system which produces not for human needs but for the market and for profit. There are vast unsatisfied needs but they are not solvent: in other words, the great majority of the population does not have the means to buy the commodities produced. If capitalism is in crisis, if hundreds of millions of human beings, and soon billions, have been hurled into intolerable misery and hunger, it's not because the system doesn't produce enough but because it produces more commodities than it can sell. Each time the bourgeoisie gets round this problem by resorting massively to credit and the creation of an artificial market. This is why the ‘recoveries' always pave the way for even bleaker tomorrows, since at the end of the day all this credit has to be reimbursed, the debts have to be called in. This is exactly what is happening today. All the ‘fabulous growth' of the last few years has been based entirely on debt. The world economy was living on credit, and that now it's time to foot the bill, the whole thing collapses like a pack of cards. The present convulsions of the capitalist economy are not the result of ‘bad management' by the political leaders, of speculation by ‘traders' or the irresponsible behaviour of the bankers. All these people have done no more than apply the laws of capitalism and it is precisely these laws that are leading the system towards ruin. This is why the billions and billions injected into the markets by all the states and their central banks will change nothing. Worse! They are only piling debt on debt, which is like trying to put a fire out with oil. The bourgeoisie is only showing its impotence with these desperate and sterile measures. Sooner or later all their bail-out plans are bound to fail. No real recovery is possible for the capitalist economy. No policy, whether of the right or the left, can save capitalism because this system is racked by an incurable, fatal illness. Against mounting poverty, solidarity and class struggle!

Capitalism Links – Reform

1. Poverty reform efforts replicate systems of capitalist domination.

Republicae, January 10, 2009, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.nolanchart.com/article5778.html

So, after decades of government "support", the plight of the poor is no better, one would think that if a "solution" does not solve a problem then it should not be considered a solution. It is the very nature of government programs to perpetuate themselves, to seek more Congressional funding, all under the guise of a solution. The conundrum is that such government agencies must always ensure that the solution continues to remain a part of the problem otherwise their reason for existing would no longer be considered valid, their funding would dry up and their employees would enter another government incentive program called unemployment. I am sure it would be quite surprising to most people to find out that there are entire divisions of bureaucrats in Washington specifically dedicated to providing new recruits to the various government dependency programs. Perhaps one day the People of this country will realize the futility of such "solutions". The government is no more the social worker of this country than it is the policeman of the world, it can only fail on both accounts; the reason for such failure is that the government was not created to fulfill such functions nor is it equipped to fulfill them. Even with the illusion of unlimited resources, it is not capable of replacing the forces within our society or economy that countermand its intervention.

2. Attempting to reform poverty policies is guaranteed to fail in a capitalist system.

World Socialist Movement, August 13, 2006, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/what_causes_world_poverty.php

The WDM and the other campaigning charities are making, on the world level, the same classic reformist mistake that used to be made at national level: blaming policies pursued by governments rather than the economic system, and so seeing the solution as changing the government or even just its policies rather than changing the economic system. In many countries throughout the world, governments have been changed but the policies involving putting profits before people continued just as they did under the old government that openly upheld the status quo. So, to be frank, campaigning charities like the WDM have got no chance at all of getting governments, and even less multinational companies, to change their practice of putting profits before people. And it is not because they believe merely in lobbying that dooms them to failure; not even the most violent street demonstrations can bring about a change in this practice. As long as the international capitalist system continues to exist, its economic laws will operate to put profits before people, and governments will have no choice but to dance to this tune.

3. Poverty reforms empirically fail to solve in a capitalist system.

Working Class Freedom, May 21, 2008, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.workingclassfreedom.com/index.php?display=cgd.vs.activism

Let us look at two particular problems: War and Poverty. After hundreds of years of social activism, both of these problems, which most people consider to be rather important, are still major problems and are nowhere near solution. War did not stop in 1918 or 1945, it continues every day, somewhere in the world. The anti-war movement seems to be fading out without ending war. The anti-poverty movement is now only working to try to make poverty less poor. Eliminating war and poverty are no longer even in the realm of discussion for reformists. The reformists have failed.

4. Capitalism is structurally oriented to guarantee poverty – attempts to reform this system will fail.

Tony Wilsdon, Activist and Freelance Author, September 18, 2005, The Socialist Alternative, Accessed 4/27/09, http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/katrina/logic.html

We should be under no illusions that the capitalist system can do this. The sizeable period of economic growth of the 1950s and 1960s is over. It was based on the period of the explosive emergence of U.S. capitalism during the turn of the last century, and a temporary period of worldwide superiority of U.S. manufacturing in the aftermath of World War II. Today, we see a world economic slowdown, with U.S. corporations shutting down production here in search of areas that produce higher rates of profit. The economic engine of jobs, which helped some workers in previous generations to get out of the ghettos, will not be reoccurring. The vast majority of jobs created under Clinton and Bush have been low-wage jobs, which have replaced higher-wage jobs. Under the rule of capitalism, the majority of the public faces further sharp attacks on their living standards and quality of life, with a growing number being forced into dire poverty, homelessness, and destitution.

Capitalism Links – Use of Law

1. Reliance on the law guarantees the rapid spread of capitalism.

Internationalist Perspective, Spring 2000, “Capitalism and Genocide”, #36, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.geocities.com/wageslavex/capandgen.html

The real domination of capital is characterized by the penetration of the law of value into every segment of social existence. As Georg Lukács put it in his History and Class Consciousness, this means that the commodity ceases to be "one form among many regulating the metabolism of human society," to become its "universal structuring principle." From its original locus at the point of production, in the capitalist factory, which is the hallmark of the formal domination of capital, the law of value has systematically spread its tentacles to incorporate not just the production of commodities, but their circulation and consumption. Moreover, the law of value also penetrates and then comes to preside over the spheres of the political and ideological, including science and technology themselves. This latter occurs not just through the transformation of the fruits of technology and science into commodities, not just through the transformation of technological and scientific research itself (and the institutions in which it takes place) into commodities, but also, and especially, through what Lukács designates as the infiltration of thought itself by the purely technical, the very quantification of rationality, the instrumentalization of reason; and, I would argue, the reduction of all beings (including human beings) to mere objects of manipulation and control. As Lukács could clearly see even in the age of Taylorism, "this rational mechanisation extends right into the worker's `soul'." In short, it affects not only his outward behavior, but her very internal, psychological, makeup.

2. Government intervention represents a perversion of the capitalist ideal – ultimately it is freedom-restricting.

Dr. Fred Foldvary, Economics Teacher Santa Clara University, April 17, 2007, The Free Liberal, Accessed 4/29/09, http://www.freeliberal.com/archives/002719.html

The most important statement ever made in economics was written by the 19th-century American economist Henry George in Social Problems: “There is in nature no reason for poverty.” The pure free market has harmony within society and with nature. Labor is the ultimate limit to production, and the evidence is clear that economic freedom maximizes growth and income, so with today’s productive economy, there would be no poverty if the world had a pure free market. A global free market would have full employment, high wages, minimal pollution, and social peace. If a pure free market has peace, prosperity, and harmony, then the absence of these today must have its cause in government intervention, which creates war, subsidizes pollution, protects land monopoly, depresses wages with taxes and restrictions, and obliterates liberty. Those who criticize today’s economies should learn the difference between voluntary market action and intervention that restricts freedom, and then clearly say which one they think is the problem: is it freedom, or the restriction of freedom, that causes social problems?

3. Relying on the rule of law makes capitalism stronger than ever.

Slavoj Zizek, Senior Researcher University of Ljubljana, October 1997, New Left Review, Accessed 4/29/09, http://newleftreview.org/?getpdf=NLR22102

Nonetheless, the post-Nation-State logic of capital remains the Real which lurks in the background, while all three main leftist reactions to the process of globalization—liberal multiculturalism; the attempt to embrace populism by way of discerning, beneath its fundamentalist appearance, the resistance against ‘instrumental reason’; the attempt to keep open the space of the political—seem inappropriate. Although the last approach is based on the correct insight about the complicity between multiculturalism and fundamentalism, it avoids the crucial question: how are we to reinvent political space in today’s conditions of globalization? The politicization of the series of particular struggles which leaves intact the global process of capital is clearly not sufficient. What this means is that one should reject the opposition which, within the frame of late capitalist liberal democracy, imposes itself as the main axis of ideological struggle: the tension between ‘open’ post-ideological universalist liberal tolerance and the particularist ‘new fundamentalisms’. Against the liberal centre which presents itself as neutral and post-ideological, relying on the rule of the Law, one should reassert the old leftist motif of the necessity to suspend the neutral space of Law.