Tang Wen, a debater from the University of China and S, in a three-minute argument,

The three points of "urban congestion should be based on restricting public vehicles rather than restricting private cars, and the government's public power should be strictly restricted, so as to lead by example", "the problem of energy consumption should be guided by economic means rather than limited by administrative means", and "the development of new energy technology rather than restricting private cars should be used to control urban pollution".

It can be regarded as refuting all the "several reasons why private cars must be restricted" stated by Nan Xiaoyuan at the beginning.

Speaking from the heart, the strength of the rebuttal cannot be considered strong, but it is good to answer all questions and compete with each other, and there is no omission.

The reason why this is so is also limited by Tang Wen's ability - when the China S University team was preparing for the game, it was obviously for a certain type of imaginary enemy problem, and it prepared a set of corresponding rebuttals and evidence.

This arrangement, when the enemy's speech is very cautious and stable, will really not be very effective, because the opponent is likely to have plugged the leak himself, and the opponent will still spray according to the original plan.

"It's Feng Jianxiong who is too cautious, Tang Wen's ability can only go so far, and the key to the future depends on the struggle during free debate. It is estimated that a little core dry goods will be released in advance, otherwise the intermediate stage will not be able to mix up with the actual governance strategy. ”

Yang Weiwei thought secretly in her heart, while writing a small note to her teammates for the second and third debates, fine-tuning the game strategy.

At the same time, the judges also made a judgment on the level of the opponent's argument in their hearts.

The opening statement of the opposing side was also written before the game, and the degree of improvisation was too low. Fudan Professor Jiang thinks.

"It's just a random trade-off based on the module, but the adjustment of the speech doesn't keep up. Professor Zhang of Peking University thought.

At the moment when everyone was grasping the scale in their hearts, the host Sa Beining announced that the competition had entered the next link: "Now, enter the free debate stage, please start first!"

Feng Jianxiong hinted at Tian Haimo with his eyes, and Tian Haimo stood up first.

Xiaoxiong's prediction was really accurate, the other party was ready to play the tactic of shrinking the yin man and suddenly pulling up when he came to a conclusion. Therefore, there is no outline at all in the argument process, but only a move. In this way, it seems that the views are too scattered. ”

Tian Haimo took a deep breath, she knew that her duty was to provoke and humiliate the other party's status quo first, and force the enemy to take out the hole cards completely:

"I don't know if the opening argument of the opponent's defense friend was modularly written before the game - when our side made the argument, it was clear that we should take a 'multi-pronged approach' to deal with the three major syndromes of the above-mentioned cities, and private cars should be restricted, and public cars should also be restricted. New energy vehicles should be promoted, but the number of old cars should also be fundamentally and directly controlled.

I really don't understand why the opponent's defense friend would have to make such a blunt rebuttal by a certain means. Obviously, there are more efficient and faster solutions to solve the problem there, but they only choose one or two of them to practice. ”

On the opposing side, Chen Han, the third debater, retorted: "Please pay attention to the opponent's defense friend, whether to buy a private car or not is a citizen's personal freedom of choice. When the government solves some public welfare problems, if there are available means that do not infringe on the freedom of choice of private rights, it should of course exhaust all possibilities in this regard.

There is really no way to choose to infringe on private rights. Therefore, the reason why we think that the number of private cars should not be limited is based on the social reality that governments have not done their best to restrict buses, promote new energy, and optimize urban planning.

Under such circumstances, it is impossible to prove how much responsibility private cars are responsible for problems such as congestion and pollution, and whether the above problems can be completely solved after restricting private cars, so we ask the government to be cautious when implementing a policy that is not necessarily successful and that infringes on the private rights of citizens?"

When Chen Han said this, Yang Weiwei listened carefully all the time, and it was not until Chen Han sat down that she breathed a sigh of relief.

These words were obviously forced out by Tian Haimo's provocation, and they had to be answered. And Chen Han is still competitive, and he has not finished his hole cards at the ideological level.

In the end, he didn't say the sentence "For private individuals, the law does not prohibit it, and for the government, the law does not authorize it, it cannot be done" - according to the pre-game plan, this kind of accusation of the other party's politically extremely incorrect big hat and big political label is best pressed to the time when the opponent concludes the argument, and Yang Weiwei said it herself.

Because the opposing side has the last chance to speak when concluding its arguments, the positive side has no chance to speak again after speaking.

Therefore, at this time, "the most lethal power can be exerted by using the evidence that has already been cross-examined in the 'factual judgment' part, combined with the new and elevated 'value judgment' political label".

However, it is precisely because these words are still hidden that it is enough to spread the flames of war.

Yu Meiqin almost choked back: "Then I can only say that the opponent doesn't know anything about public management affairs - governing a big country is like cooking a small fresh, and in this era of rapid change, government governance and public management affairs are facing new situations and new problems every day."

If all administrative strategies had to be proven to be '100% effective and 100% able to solve the current problem' before they could be implemented, then there would be no effective government in this world!

It is common sense in the administration that any new countermeasures to solve new problems can be popularized as long as they are carefully demonstrated, partially piloted, and experience summed up. I hope that the opponent's debaters will not ignore administrative common sense, talk empty slogans, and be a person who can solve practical problems. ”

Chen Han was suddenly a little embarrassed, but fortunately he had already sat down, and it was not necessary for him to answer this question.

"The handling just now is still frizzy, in order to save the killer feature, the other words are a little too conservative, which leads to being regarded as 'useless scholars'. Yang Weiwei frowned, reflecting on Chen Han's small mistake just now.

Since it has been ridiculed as "not doing practical things, only empty talk", this kind of hat has a huge impression of the team in the eyes of the jury, and it belongs to the kind that has to be slammed back head-on.

Yang Weiwei had no choice but to go out in person:

"Since the opponent thinks that we should talk about the specific control strategy and implementation rules, and let us rationally discuss whether it does infringe on the convenience of the people, then we have to discuss it - but I have to remind the opponent that the topic of today's debate is 'should the government control the number of private cars'.

And you've just talked a lot about the big things like 'promoting new energy vehicles', and these strategies control the 'quality' of private cars, not the 'quantity'. Therefore, even if this trick works, it cannot be used to support your position today.

It is precisely on the premise that the specific policy policies that you have casually enumerated earlier are either beyond the debate or obviously inappropriate, that we believe that we should be 'cautious'. ”

In Yang Weiwei's words, she couldn't help but use the weakness she had detected when she was under pressure from the off-site visit that day.

The competition has finally developed to the occasion where MPA people play, that is, the competition of specific policy and detailed rules.

"The topic of the debate is to talk about the control of the quantity of private cars, of course, we will only talk about quantity control, not about quality, which does not need to worry about the opponent's defense friend to cross the line. Yu Meiqin felt that she was in a good state to warm up, and threw out the only few specific baits she knew while the iron was hot.

"The specific measures we envisage to control the number of private cars can be completely increased fuel tax standards, licensing fees, and sewage fees, which can be controlled through economic means. The kind of brutal behavior of relying on administrative coercive orders to be one-size-fits-all and go against the laws of the market is completely the imagination of the opponent's defense friend!"

"Do you just say that it is controlled by tax and license fees...... This is completely economic, and it is not good to attack them for their 'rough governance'. Yang Weiwei and the team members thought about it, and said that the other party was really cunning enough.

However, on the competition field, even if it is just a not very easy to spray method of "adding money and limiting cars", it can only be sprayed without spraying.

Yang Weiwei gave a look, and Tang Wen knew that this kind of nonsense and dirty work should appear by herself.

Tang Wen immediately spewed out a sentence of chicken soup: "If you add money, you will definitely be able to control the number of private cars? You don't see how high the state has increased the land value-added tax in order to restrict housing speculation in macroeconomic regulation and control.

This kind of specious chicken soup body, if not debunked, is still very deceptive to laymen.

After all, Chinese people suffer greatly from housing prices, as long as someone mentions this analogy, the resonance is almost a grasp.

Yu Meiqin always felt that the other party's words were wrong, but unfortunately she couldn't be pierced instantly within a second or two.

It's completely impossible to prepare in advance for the game, so it's 100% a test of the ability to adapt on the spot.

This is also an additional question to distinguish between the god and the king.

Feng Jianxiong stood up just right and took on this question that tested his wit: "Please don't change your concept from the other side! Buying a bus or a car for a company belongs to 'investment' in the field of economics -- buying a house is also an investment." However, the act of buying a private car is 'consumption' in economics. These are two different things entirely.

Isn't it ridiculous that the opponent's defense friend actually tried to use the reason that 'tax increases cannot restrict investment' to deduce that 'tax hikes also cannot restrict consumption'? Don't you see that imported cosmetics have been heavily taxed several times? Isn't there a noticeable decline in the consumption of imported cosmetics through legal channels in China compared with when there were no heavy taxes?

Chen Han was dumbfounded now.

On the question of "whether it is effective to limit the quantity by collecting money", the opponent obviously had to admit defeat.

That is, to obediently admit that the quantity can be controlled by collecting money.

"Unfortunately, it can't be proven that 'collecting money doesn't necessarily have a controlling effect'. Otherwise, we can continue to blackmail the other side, 'economic regulation and control will definitely not work, and if we want to control the quantity, we will definitely use the tyrannical and harmonious government of administrative coercion'. Yang Weiwei sighed silently in her heart, but she was helpless.

I had to turn to another angle of attack.

Yang Weiwei adjusted her mood and said generously: "Okay, maybe you can really control the number of private cars by adding money." However, in the environment of good governance in accordance with the law, shouldn't the collection of all taxes and fees be 'taken from the people and used by the people'? After the money is collected, it is purely misappropriated to other people and purposes, isn't it the biggest injustice to private car owners?

Moreover, those car owners who bought private cars in the early years did not have to give this money, but now they suddenly want to give it, isn't it the biggest injustice to those who get rich late!"