By 2040, the FG should mandate that all new vehicles sold in US be powered by alt fuels

No, I don't take Sponge Bob seriously, I actually thought you were about to. :) Oil Dependency- As I would like to point out, Pro can at best solve for 40% of oil dependency, however, he fails to recognize that we will still be dependent on other countries for alternative fuels. As I have contested mandates hinder our alt. fuel car industry therefore how can one contest it helps? WWe wasted billions of dollars on the banks who just keep losing it, is that good? Look, Con has pointed a hole after a hole in Pro's case, at the end put all these together and they just outweigh the Pro's arguments. I have just attacked a few of the Alt. Fuels and hey, last time I check I proved they were wrong. As I have said my evidence for Crutzen paper is either in comments or in one of the links. Also my opponent does not provide evidence that with the land usage variable the CO2 is reduced, therefore Con proves that nothing good is happening. "the fact that industries are not changing to alt fuels does NOT mean alt fuels are the solution" As far I understand that sentence = alt. fuels aren't the solution, I concede. Thank you. Why would one not want to change where one can profit? It is because the alt. fuels are bad now, therefore you mandate an inefficiency and no you can't predict we will solve by 2040. that's Menand 2005 Look, unlike in a real debate, EVERYTHING is written. I just have to cross apply my agr. and as long as you don't have contradicting evidence, why bother pasting the link? as you have said yourself, 8000 character limit is bad! !! CO2 Monster As my opponent clearly concedes, alt. fuels increase CO2, now why is that bad? I don't know, perhaps pollution? How about the increase in GW? Sure one can argue that humans didn't cause GW, but all concede that we help accelerate GW. And Global Warming = bad times. By saying bad times I mean, the meltdown of the ice caps, do you realize what this causes, this cause the stop of the current in the Atlantic that will make Europe free, and as for Pakistan, their water supply will die out and they will be forced to Nuclear attack people for it. My evidence is Discovery, and CNBC. com FUELS STATUS QUO Pro says alt. fuels are good. Evidence? No! Now one might say well Con has not showed much evidecne on thsi matter either, so you can disregard both arguments, HOWEVER before you do, ask yourself "Why don't we use fuels now? And if we do, then why mandate and risk the collapse of the free market principles that are helping us right now? " Mandates Alright, Con presents evidence of what Government had done, does Pro? No. And the consumers have tried to get high MPG, but the best cars are expensive and not good even with its claim. Sure they say they have better mpg, but the problem is, is that the good mpg is bad in itself, therefore the government screws us up, just look at the bailout, BILLIONS went to the banks, and what happened, I don't know, the fact is that know one does. .. And is the situation better? last time I checked, economy was bad to say it politely. "new" means "not of long duration; having just (or relatively recently) come into being or been made or acquired or discovered;" wordnet. princeton. edu/perl/webwn Therefore the unbought cars have to run on alt. fuels. therefore its costly. I don't know the exact companies, and don't have time to research, however take a not that whenever you give someone special rights such as having the ability to make product that everyone has to buy, corruption results which will contribute to monopoly. However, despite all this, the core issue is that Pro screws up everything by having a mandate which goes against the principle of free market. In free market people, consumers help companies grow, and currently 24% of the cars sold last year were on alternative fuels which mean Pro is not solving, its best case scenario is that they help, however the mandates are not good and cause downfalls which are only fixed by free market American market. wikipedia. com I know it's not the best site, but they do have the statistic for cars sold and statistics are not make up lies. No these are NOT Counter plans. These are the thing stat my opponent has to prove wrong and he hasn't. Who championed Russian mandated market (USSR) or USA? USA did, what did China use to grow their economy? CAPITALISTIC FREE MARKET. How did our economy grow? From free market. History prove that free market solves and mandates fail. :)