I can take the highest scores by using my homework.

1. An actual debate? a. "This homework is that I should read 'Bad Samaritans' and make summary, appreciative criticism, debate topic based on the book. I need my opponent who will correct my homework by pointing out my weakness in my homework as harsh as possible. " That, right there, is my opponent's topic. He wants his opponent to help him with his homework through criticism, proving that he would not get the highest score for it; yet, the fact that he is here, asking for criticism, and asking us to help him finish his assignment, my opponent has already admitted imperfections in his homework, thus proving that, as it stands, he would not get "the highest scores" for his work; further, my opponent has yet to specify the grading scale or criteria upon which his work would be judged. b. "more advice, more information will be useful to me. " As my point b in Round 1 explains, the best way to get a lot of advice is to make a topic on the forum; in making this into a 'debate', my opponent is limiting criticism to a single view; further, my opponent later admits "I don't want to have more forfeit so I should finish this debate"; as he failed to address, making a debate puts my opponent on a very strict deadline, forcing him to respond, whereas creating a forum topic would allow not only a larger, more diverse trading of information, but there would also. be no timer tick-tocking away; to connect this to the 'topic', by sticking to a single opinion here in this debate, my opponent will not be getting as much advice as he would be from the larger DDO Community, and thus he would be far less likely to get a high score through the methods that he is currently employing. c. "Advice doesn't have to have fullest potential. " My opponent is advocating a lot of advice, but yet he isn't necessarily advocating good advice; this is a simple case of quantity over quality; by wanting more and more advice, but disregarding overall quality, my opponent may not be getting the best criticisms of his work, and may actually be adding imperfections to his paper, meaning that, not only might his score not increase, it may actually decrease. d. "So he gave me useless advice. That means his arguments are based on no evidence. " This claim makes absolutely no sense. I was making recommendations, and critiques against the idea of the topic; clearly, the only real 'evidence' that one needs would be the use of reason. He likes to claim that I broke the rules, but clearly, I've argued against the topic, refuting my opponent's request, and actually offered him a method by which he could get more opinions than merely my own. I think my burden is fulfilled here. e. Further, on the idea of choosing a debate topic, Pro doesn't address that, to best choose a topic, he should start a debate on one of THOSE, as opposed to this; not only would he learn more about the topics that he is studying, but that extra knowledge would help to contribute to the integrity of his assignment, thus earning him a better grade. 2. If it makes my opponent happy. .. Foreword: You don't need to vote on these new arguments. a. "Economic policies that are based on neoliberalism does not helpful for developing economy of developing countries. " - I ask you, why not? You explain nothing further on this assertion, failing to even define neoliberalism in your summary. b. You also fail to explain the concept of the "golden straitjacket"; your paper has to be understandable for generally everyone, meaning that you have to explain these concepts, and not just throw terms around. c. This might just be a western thing, but you need to explain the weaknesses in a lot of these ideas, such as keeping a certain level of technology, and one idea that I really didn't like was: "Keeping nation's fiscal health and price stabilization does not a cure-all for economy of developing countries. " It seems to me that, if you keep up a nation's fiscal health, and you stabilize prices, you're probably going to have a reasonable economy, even in a developing country. d. One thing that really bothered me: "Irregularities and corruption. . are not enemies to economic growth. " You really need to take that out; personally, the idea that corruption ISN'T an enemy of economic growth is a bit. .. strange to me. e. From what I can understand, your criticism is alright, but you need to do more explicating on examples and reasoning as to why the UK's protective trade policies hurt India; put in some statistics, or historical facts. There's more that I have on this, but, as I said, it's in my opponent's best interests to put this on the forums. Oh, yeah.