2014 ndi 6ws-fitzmier, Lundberg, Abelkop Economy Disads Spending da



Download 0.74 Mb.
Page16/32
Date03.03.2018
Size0.74 Mb.
#42026
1   ...   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   ...   32


***Impact***

2NC Data [Royal]

Best data proves – economic collapse causes war


Jedidiah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, M.Phil. Candidate at the University of New South Wales, 2010, “Economic Integration, Economic Signalling and the Problem of Economic Crises”

Thus, the answer to the first question set out at the beginning of this section, whether economic integration and economic crises are linked, seems reasonably well-established. Substantial recent scholarship indicates a positive association between interdependence and economic crises. What then about the second question? Is there a correlation between economic crises and armed conflict? The impacts at an individual level and on a state level are intuitive and well-documented (see. e.g., Richards & Gelleny, 2006). Rodrik (1997a, 1997b), among others, argues that instability in the global economic system contributes to social disintegration and political conflict. Social unrest, regime change and even civil war have directly resulted from the vagaries of economic integration. / Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent stales. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow. / First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the global economy are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crises could usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin, 1981) that leads to uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Fearon. 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner. 1999). Separately, Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. / Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland’s (1996. 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that “future expectation of trade” is a significant variable in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states. / Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write, / The linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing. Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour. Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts self-reinforce each other. (Blomberg & Hess. 2002. p. 89) / Economic decline has also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg- Hess, & Weerapana. 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions. / Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government. 'Diversionary theory' suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting governments have increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts to create a 'rally around the flag' effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995), and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997), Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of force. / In summary, recent economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national levels.5 This implied connection between integration, crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.

2NC Competitiveness – Energy

Further debt and accumulations of deficits kill US competitiveness


Daniel Mitchell, Senior fellow @ Cato, May 6th 2011, “The Budget Deficit and U.S. Competitiveness,” http://www.cfr.org/competitiveness/budget-deficit-us-competitiveness/p24910

Competitiveness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. But there's presumably widespread agreement that it is good for a nation to have a prosperous and dynamic economy that generates above-average income and growth. Government impacts competitiveness in many ways, including monetary policy, trade policy, and regulatory policy. Moreover, the presence of sound institutions, such as property rights and the rule of law, is critical for an economy to have a good foundation. Fiscal policy also is an important part of the mix. Excessive government spending can slow growth by diverting labor and capital from more productive uses. Punitive tax rates can hinder prosperity by discouraging work, saving, investment, and entrepreneurship. And large budget deficits can undermine competitiveness by "crowding out" private capital and building negative expectations of future tax increases. In extreme cases, high budget deficits can destabilize entire economies, either because a government resorts to the printing press to finance deficits or because investors lose faith in a government's ability to service debt, thus leading to a sovereign debt crisis. The United States hopefully is not close to becoming either Argentina or Greece, but the trend in recent years is not very encouraging. The burden of government spending has exploded, which, combined with temporarily low tax receipts because of a weak economy, has pushed annual red ink above $1 trillion per year.

Competitiveness is key to energy independence


Rocco Martino, spring 2007, founder and chair of the board of Cyber Technology Group, Inc., “A Strategy for Success: Innovation Will Renew American Leadership,” Orbis, p http://www.fpri.org/orbis/5102/martino.innovationamericanleadership.pdf

Much of the foreign policy discussion in the United States today is focused upon the dilemma posed by the Iraq War and the threat posed by Islamist terrorism. These problems are, of course, both immediate and important. However, America also faces other challenges to its physical security and economic prosperity, and these are more long-term and probably more profound. There is, first, the threat posed by our declining competitiveness in the global economy, a threat most obviously represented by such rising economic powers as China and India.1 There is, second, the threat posed by our increasing dependence on oil imports from the Middle East. Moreover, these two threats are increasingly connected, as China and India themselves are greatly increasing their demand for Middle East oil.2 The United States of course faced great challenges to its security and economy in the past, most obviously from Germany and Japan in the first half of the twentieth century and from the Soviet Union in the second half. Crucial to America’s ability to prevail over these past challenges was our technological and industrial leadership, and especially our ability to continuously recreate it. Indeed, the United States has been unique among great powers in its ability to keep on creating and recreating new technologies and new industries, generation after generation. Perpetual innovation and technological leadership might even be said to be the American way of maintaining primacy in world affairs. They are almost certainly what America will have to pursue in order to prevail over the contemporary challenges involving economic competitiveness and energy dependence.


Wars for oil go nuclear


Islam Yaisn Qasem, Doctoral candidate in the Department of Politics and Social Sciences at the University of Pompeu Fabra (UPF) in Barcelona, Spain, July 9th 2007, “The Coming Warfare of Oil Shortage,” http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_islam_ya_070709_the_coming_warfare_o.htm

Recognizing the strategic value of oil for their national interests, superpowers will not hesitate to unleash their economic and military power to ensure secure access to oil resources, triggering worldwide tension, if not armed conflict. And while superpowers like the United States maintain superior conventional military power, in addition to their nuclear power, some weaker states are already nuclearly armed, others are seeking nuclear weapons. In an anarchic world with many nuclear-weapon states feeling insecure, and a global economy in downward spiral, the chances of using nuclear weapons in pursues of national interests are high.




Download 0.74 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   ...   32



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
united states
soviet union
world bank
great depression
communist party
united states did
national debt
budget control act
central banks