Pre Note: It is highly recommended you do not flow with paper as to not discriminate against

trees in the middle of your round.

Bobby and I stand proud to Negate the Resolution: Resolved: The United States should
promote the development of market-rate housing in urban neighborhoods

Our Sole contention is saving the trees

I am the Lorax and I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.
And I'm asking you sir, at the top of my lungs - that thing! That horrible thing that I see! What's
that thing you've made out of my tree?

Promoting market rate housing Hurts our precious forests in two key ways:

The first is Urban Sprawl

Sisson of Curbed in 2018 reports that to allow more construction, especially burdened and dense cities
like Minneapolis, Austin, and Portland are examining radical large-scale zoning overhauls.

Less strict zoning policies lead to more urban sprawl

Springer 10 asserts that many developers and individuals find places with less zoning more suitable for
new construction. This is why according to the Sightline institute, cities with strict zoning policies
developed only 10 new acres for every 100 new residents which is 5 times less than cities with little to
no zoning.

Gourmeleon 16 quantifies that urban sprawl causes 7.4 million lost acres of land each year.

The Second is cutting the trees

Mckeever of the US forest service in 2009 writes that nearly all new houses are built principally
with wood. Wood building products are also used extensively in the construction of
nonresidential buildings and in the upkeep and improvement of existing structures. Solid wood
is also used to produce, package, and transport manufactured products.

Indeed, The House Designers, a housing development and construction blog, reports that the
average American home requires 22 precious trees to be cut down in order for 1 home to be
built.

Those trees are highly important, as MAST reports that a healthy forest has 40 to 60 trees per
acre, meaning that it only takes three average houses to completely eliminate an entire acre of
forests.

But what's worse is that Chew of Shelterforce in 2018 reports that most market-rate housing is
geared towards luxury development, meaning that it will take more trees to make one and
cause more deforestation.

As a result of developing more housing, the aff world would lead to an increase in
deforestation.

Killing our forests has three deadly impacts:

The first is minority supression

We are the neg and we speak for the trees. Realize that the trees have no tongues to speak
with and cannot speak up for themselves rendering them completely susceptible to political will
and giving them 0 political power. By ruthlessly slaughtering trees to make houses for humans,
we are openly discriminating against trees.

Importantly, Schiffman of Yale in 2016 writes that trees are sentient beings, with innate
adaptability and intelligence.
Andrews of the World Wildlife Foundation in 2015 corroborates that trees have volition, show
altruism and understand kinship much like many animal species.

The impact of tree suppression pre-empts all other arguments, as Professor Albert Memmi
from the University of Paris argues in 2000 that we cannot accept even the slightest degree of
discrimination. One cannot found a moral order, let alone a legislative order, on discrimination,
because discrimination signifies the arbitrary exclusion of others.

The second is removing humanities natural habitat

When you promote deforestation and uproot our fellow trees, you remove our natural habitat.
Mercado of Pachamama in 2017 reports that humans have been intrinsically linked to trees
since the beginning of time.

Boyle of the Daily Mail in 2017 writes that people can live in trees. This is important, as Bolton
of the Independent in 2015 explains that there are 422 trees for every person on this planet,
meaning that we can house all of humanity in trees if we were to stop building houses today.

Trees create better housing, as Devlin of the Telegraph in 2009 explains that trees have a
psychologically calming effect on people and allows them to rejuvenate. As a result, Harvey of
the Washington Post in 2016 writes that living in trees cause people to live longer.

The third is promoting climate change

Matthews of the FAO in 2006 writes that between 25 and 30 percent of the greenhouse gases
released into the atmosphere each year is caused by deforestation.

Warmer temperatures are devastating for agriculture. Brown of EarthPolicy in 2012 explains
that even with the most conservative estimate, a 1-degree-Celsius rise in temperature
decreases wheat, rice, and corn yields by 10 percent. Rising temperatures have already caused
malnutrition to rise by 24 million.
To save the trees, we strongly negate. [743]