That the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 will successfully mitigate economic slowdowns next year.

first for a few questions for my the pro side: 1. what is in the next year. 2. where dose the money for this come from 3. what prevents money being spent on thing made outside of the country. 4. where is this economic slowdown being mitigated 5. will this increase investment in forgin now i will provide definitions for this debate 1.resolved- "TO DETERMINE OR DECIDE IN PURPOSE; TO MAKE READY IN MIND; TO FIX; TO SETTLE; AS, HE [OR SHE] WAS RESOLVED BY AN UNEXPECTED EVENT," WEBSTER'S REVISED UNABRIDGED DICTIONARY, 1996 [THIS EVIDENCE WAS GENDERPARAPHRASED] [HTTP://DICTIONARY.REFERENCE.COM...] my first attack is using the word resolved. the word resolved means that you as a person must support the resolution. but if i'm able to disprove the reason that you support the resolution i will have been able to negate the resolution. you claim the reason that you support the resolution is because of the Bush quote. the first problem is that it states "we must trust people with their own money and empower them to grow our economy" that there is a automatic doubt that it fill fail because it is up to the people to make this work. you as the pro has the burden of proof and must be able to give proof that the people will be able to spend money wisely. secondly to discredit your source, 2 words IT'S BUSH. if i remember right it was Bush who has caused gas price to raise because of the war. under Bush the unemployment rate has grown to 5%. http://en.wikipedia.org... so by putting doubt in the pro's reason to debate that they would no longer be resolved in the resolution and would no longer be able to affirm the resolution. against your sub point b,c,d my third question. even if you give people the money what says they spend it inside of our country? as of now we import billion of dollars in products from other counties so some of the money will leave the country causing the plan to be ineffective. from china alone we import over 300 billion $.http://www.uschina.org.... the reason this happens is that if the money leaves the country people in the US will no longer be able to spend it making it useless. against your second con. we can see this is dependent on the plan working but cross apply the above arguments at would stop it from being successful. secondly what will prevent people from believing that this is the US becoming despreit and cause them to believe that we are on the edge and cause people to pull out of the US economy hurting it even more. and against your final con. it will not create job because part of the rebates go to businesses that that improve their equipment which would mean less of a need to have people working because they have other things to do their jobs. one major question that i ask is where is the money coming from? it could only come from 3 thins 1 tax increase, 2 the US printing more money, or 3 loans from other counties. but all the ways that this could be funded are flawed. 1. if the government would have to increase taxes in order to fund this it would have no effect because the money that was given to them would be taken back because of taxes. secondly taxes hurt economies because it cause a surplus when people don't have the money to buy things and this is compounded by the biasness incentives because now the produce more and now there is more died wight product not being used. 2. by the US printing more money they will just cause the decline in the US dollar and because of that event though they have more money the total worth of this money will still be the same because it's worth less. 3. taking from other governments will cause the our debt to grow that will cause to lose even more money and will not help the economy.