All their disads are non-unique – a Privatization’s inevitable internationally
Download 1.61 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- PROMOTE
- 2ac – airlines good – ag Commercial agriculture is uniquely sustained by efficient airlines – no other transport can fill in
- Extinction Lugar 4
- 1ar – airlines good – ag – brown Terrorism causes food price blips – kills billions Brown 5
- World War 3 Droke 12
- Or is it
- ‘Field of Dreams’
- We are reaching a point of saturation
2ac – airlines – efficiency key Efficiency’s essential – delays deter flyers, devastating demand May 4 – Air Transport Association (Mr. Jim May, 6/22/4, “Statement of Mr. Jim May CEO, Air Transport Association (ATA),” Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony, Lexis)//twemchen II. TSA MUST PROMOTE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT SECURITY PROCEDURES Uncertainty about security lines deters people from flying. While TSA and the industry work together every day to minimize this effect, it remains a major reason why people have substituted cars and other transportation modes for flying, particularly for short-haul trips. TSA predicts that passenger volumes will increase from 58 million to 65 million per month during the summer, a sustained 12 percent increase in monthly volumes over 2003's single peak month. We are already seeing security lines with wait times of 45 minutes and more at major airports, including Washington Dulles, Los Angeles International Airport, Las Vegas McCarran, and Atlanta Hartsfield. The industry worked with TSA to help develop its Summer Plan, and we are doing what we can to educate our customers on what they can do to reduce potential wait times. Also, TSA is hiring additional screeners at some airports. However, these efforts will not fully eliminate the public concern about the hassles of flying. Those concerns, which keep passengers away, will not subside until TSA has determined the number of screeners necessary to efficiently and effectively screen passengers and established processes that can move passengers through security screening in ten minutes or less on a consistent basis nationwide. It is imperative that we continue to see progress toward this goal, and Congress should insist on TSA finalizing its model to predict accurately the number of screeners needed at each airport. TSA Summer Staffing Plan and Screener Performance Standards. Recent passenger boardings and projected bookings clearly indicate that security checkpoints will experience far higher traffic levels this summer than they did last year. Monthly boardings peaked at 58-million for just one month last summer. Current projections are that 64-million monthly boardings will occur for a sustained period this summer. This level of traffic already has begun to produce significantly increased demands on checkpoints, particularly because TSA has 6,000 fewer screeners than last year. Recognizing that these increased demands will affect passenger processing times at checkpoints, representatives of the TSA, airports and airlines undertook a collaborative effort to develop and implement enhancements to passenger screening practices. Twenty-five "focus" airports were identified for this program. This joint effort has produced best practices that should translate into faster screening for our customers. This is an important accomplishment in its own right but also because it demonstrates that collaborative efforts involving TSA, airports and airlines can be successful. In addition, airlines are supplying TSA with passenger enplanement forecasts to enable TSA to test its checkpoint staffing model. The goal of this effort is to predict more precisely passenger wait times at checkpoints and thereby permit TSA to staff those locations accordingly. Staffing decisions must be based on both accurate passenger demand forecasts and realistic processing time assumptions in order for TSA to do its job effectively and efficiently. Both in the short-term and long-term, resources must be promptly and efficiently allocated to accommodate the increases in traffic we are now beginning to experience. For passenger and checked baggage screening, an appropriate performance metric is needed. Without such a basic tool, there is no accurate way to determine how screeners are performing and whether resources are being allocated effectively. TSA states that its internal guideline is an average wait time of ten minutes. We think an "average" wait time is not the right metric in this context because it will allow significantly longer wait times during peak travel times. We recommend that TSA be required to establish a maximum wait time of ten minutes per passenger. Only this standard will ensure that passenger wait times at checkpoints and baggage screening locations are kept to an absolute minimum. Such a maximum wait standard offers additional benefits. Among other things, it allows screening performance problems to be identified quickly, it encourages uniformity across the system - something passengers expect to see, and it aids Federal Security Directors (FSDs), in consultation with airlines, in making staffing adjustments. In addition, to better and more promptly meet the increased passenger levels, TSA must assess, hire and train screeners locally rather than to continue to rely upon the centralized hiring system. The current system cannot provide the responsiveness that the rebound in passenger traffic requires. Relocating personnel, while helpful as a stopgap measure, creates other issues (including cost) and problems that can be avoided. Finally, Congress must provide funding, and TSA must be prepared, to expand hiring to meet passenger growth. The 45,000 cap on the screener workforce, in fact, may not be adequate to meet actual passenger demand. There has been some recent modest passenger growth system-wide, and some analysts forecast a five percent increase in passenger traffic this year. Indeed, we are already hearing reports that security checkpoints and checked baggage screening locations are understaffed at as many as 90 of the nation's commercial service airports. As the nation's economy continues to recover and air carriers respond to accommodate increasing demand, TSA must have the funding and authority to hire additional screeners where and when demand exists. The TSA's staffing model, as well as the results of the Summer Plan, should provide better information to guide Congress in determining whether the 45,000 screener cap makes sense. Beyond this Summer: TSA Recruiting and Hiring Practices. A positive evolutionary step for TSA has been the decision to begin hiring part-time employees. From the industry's perspective, the flexibility to match screening capacity with demand is crucial to an effective and efficient system. Part-time positions allow TSA managers to have in place enough employees to meet operating and rest needs during peak travel times, thereby ensuring that screeners remain vigilant and perform their functions effectively. 2ac – airlines good – ag Commercial agriculture is uniquely sustained by efficient airlines – no other transport can fill in AFA 12 (Airlines for America, “Economic Impact,” http://www.airlines.org/Pages/Economic-Impact.aspx)//twemchen In the summer of 2005, Pulitzer Prize winner Daniel Yergin opined, "Every day, the airline industry propels the economic takeoff of our nation. It is the great enabler, knitting together all corners of the country, facilitating the movement of people and goods that is the backbone of economic growth. It also firmly embeds us in that awesome process of globalization that is defining the 21st century." Indeed, the World Bank recognizes that "Air transport has become an essential economic and social conduit throughout the world. Beyond the benefits of fast and inexpensive transcontinental travel, air transport also has become a vital form of shipping for high-valued items that need to come to market quickly, such as agricultural products subject to spoilage." Further, it notes that air cargo has become the essential mode of transportation for high value and perishable goods, wherein 40 percent of all goods by value worldwide are transported by air: "Many developing countries depend heavily on air cargo for their exports as other modes are unreliable or non-existent." Extinction Lugar 4 (Richard G., former U.S. Senator – Indiana and Former Chair – Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “Plant Power”, Our Planet, 14(3), http://www.unep.org/ourplanet/imgversn/143/lugar.html) In a world confronted by global terrorism, turmoil in the Middle East, burgeoning nuclear threats and other crises, it is easy to lose sight of the long-range challenges. But we do so at our peril. One of the most daunting of them is meeting the world’s need for food and energy in this century. At stake is not only preventing starvation and saving the environment, but also world peace and security. History tells us that states may go to war over access to resources, and that poverty and famine have often bred fanaticism and terrorism. Working to feed the world will minimize factors that contribute to global instability and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. With the world population expected to grow from 6 billion people today to 9 billion by mid-century, the demand for affordable food will increase well beyond current international production levels. People in rapidly developing nations will have the means greatly to improve their standard of living and caloric intake. Inevitably, that means eating more meat. This will raise demand for feed grain at the same time that the growing world population will need vastly more basic food to eat. Complicating a solution to this problem is a dynamic that must be better understood in the West: developing countries often use limited arable land to expand cities to house their growing populations. As good land disappears, people destroy timber resources and even rainforests as they try to create more arable land to feed themselves. The long-term environmental consequences could be disastrous for the entire globe. Productivity revolution To meet the expected demand for food over the next 50 years, we in the United States will have to grow roughly three times more food on the land we have. That’s a tall order. My farm in Marion County, Indiana, for example, yields on average 8.3 to 8.6 tonnes of corn per hectare – typical for a farm in central Indiana. To triple our production by 2050, we will have to produce an annual average of 25 tonnes per hectare. Can we possibly boost output that much? Well, it’s been done before. Advances in the use of fertilizer and water, improved machinery and better tilling techniques combined to generate a threefold increase in yields since 1935 – on our farm back then, my dad produced 2.8 to 3 tonnes per hectare. Much US agriculture has seen similar increases. But of course there is no guarantee that we can achieve those results again. Given the urgency of expanding food production to meet world demand, we must invest much more in scientific research and target that money toward projects that promise to have significant national and global impact. For the United States, that will mean a major shift in the way we conduct and fund agricultural science. Fundamental research will generate the innovations that will be necessary to feed the world. The United States can take a leading position in a productivity revolution. And our success at increasing food production may play a decisive humanitarian role in the survival of billions of people and the health of our planet. 1ar – airlines good – ag – brown Terrorism causes food price blips – kills billions Brown 5 – Lester R. Brown, President of the Earth Policy Institute, 2-7-2005 http://www.peopleandplanet.net/doc.php?id=2424 The world has been slow to respond to these new threats to food security. In four of the last five years the world grain harvest has fallen short of consumption. As a result, world grain stocks are now at their lowest level in 30 years. Another large world grain shortfall in 2005 could drop stocks to the lowest level on record and send world food prices into uncharted territory of rising food prices. IT CONTINUES Many Americans see terrorism as the principal threat to security, but for much of humanity, the effects of water shortages and rising temperatures on food security are far more important issues. For the 3 billion people who live on 2 dollars a day or less and who spend up to 70 per cent of their income on food, even a modest rise in food prices can quickly become life-threatening. For them, it is the next meal that is the overriding concern." D-rule LaFollette 3 — Cole Chair in Ethics at USF (Hugh, www.stpt.usf.edu/hhl/papers/World.Hunger.htm) Those who claim the relatively affluent have this strong obligation must, among other things, show why Hardin's projections are either morally irrelevant or mistaken. A hearty few take the former tack: they claim we have a strong obligation to aid the starving even if we would eventually become malnourished. On this view, to survive on lifeboat earth, knowing that others were tossed overboard into the sea of starvation, would signify an indignity and callousness worse than extinction (Watson 1977). It would be morally preferable to die struggling to create a decent life for all than to continue to live at the expense of the starving. World War 3 Droke 12 — editor of the three times weekly Momentum Strategies Report; frequently covers the current status of the economy (2012, Clif, “Rising fuel costs and the next Revolution,” http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article33595.html) The economic and political importance of high food prices can’t be underestimated. To take one example, high food prices were the catalyst for last year’s outbreak of revolution in several Middle East countries. The region once known as the Fertile Crescent is heavily dependent on imported grain and rising fuel costs contributed to the skyrocketing food prices which provoked the Arab revolts. Annia Ciezadlo, in her article “Let Them Eat Bread” in the March 23, 2011 issue of Foreign Affairs wrote: “Of the top 20 wheat importers for 2010, almost half are Middle Eastern countries. The list reads like a playbook of toppled and teetering regimes: Egypt (1), Algeria (4), Iraq (7), Morocco (8), Yemen (13), Saudi Arabia (15), Libya (16), Tunisia (17).” Indeed, high food costs have long been a major factor in fomenting popular revolt. The French Revolution of the late 1700s originated with a food shortage which caused a 90 percent increase in the bread price in 1789. Describing the build-up to the Reign of Terror in France of 1793-94, author Susan Kerr wrote: “For a time, local governments attempted to improve distribution channels and moderate soaring prices. Against this backdrop of rumbling stomachs and wailing hungry children, the excesses and arrogance of the nobility and clergy strutted in sharp contrast.” This historical event has an obvious parallel in today’s emphasis on the elite “1 percent” versus the “99 percent.” The French government of the late 18th century attempted to assuage the pain caused by soaring food prices, but ultimately this effort failed. Although the U.S. government attempted for a time to keep fuel prices low, it has since abandoned all effort at stopping speculators from pushing prices ever higher. An undercurrent of popular revolt is already present within the U.S. as evidenced by the emergence of the Tea Party and by last year’s Occupy Wall Street movement. This revolutionary sentiment has been temporarily suppressed by the simultaneous improvement in the retail economy and the financial market rebound of the past few months. The fact that this is a presidential election year, replete with the usual pump priming measures and underscored by the peaking 4-year cycle, has been an invaluable help in keeping revolutionary fervor suppressed for the moment. But what those within the government and financial establishment have failed to consider is that once the 4-year cycle peaks later this year, we enter the final “hard down” phase of the 120-year cycle to bottom in late 2014. This cycle is also known, in the words of Samuel J. Kress, as the “Revolutionary Cycle.” Regarding the 120-year cycle, Kress wrote: “The first 120-year Mega Cycle began in the mid 1770s after a prolonged depressed economy and the Revolutionary War which transformed American from an occupied territory to an independent country as we know the U.S.A. today. The first 120-year cycle ended in the mid 1890s after the first major depression in the U.S. and the Spanish American War. This began the second 120-year cycle which transformed the U.S. from an agricultural to a manufacturing based economy and which is referred to as the Industrial Revolution. The second 120-year is scheduled to bottom in later 2014 to begin the third (everything comes in threes). If history, an evolving cycle, continues to repeat itself, the potential for the third major depression and a WWIII equivalent exists and the U.S. could experience another transformation and our life style as we know it today.” 2ac – airlines good – aerospace Airline event risk demolishes the aerospace industry – it’s on the brink Flottau 9/29 – analyst @ Aviation Week and Space Technology (Jens Flottau, 9/29/14, “Growing Concerns About Aircraft Demand,” Lexis)//twemchen Airline demand for civil aircraft is strong, financing is readily available for almost any kind of operator, and manufacturers are asking themselves whether they have to build even more aircraft. All is well. Or is it? In spite of many good signs, aircraft financiers and other industry leaders are voicing concern that the industry could be in for a rude awakening. While the civil aerospace boom is unlikely to suddenly go bust, a number of industry executives attending last week’s International Society of Transport Aircraft Trading (Istat) Europe conference here expect some kind of downward correction to demand with a corresponding rise in aircraft cancellations or postponements. “Somehow the stars are aligned; something has to happen," says Gordon Welsh, director of aerospace at U.K. Export Finance. Christian McCormick, managing director and global head of aviation finance at Natixis, says he is “a little bit concerned." He notes that “we still have to really figure out whether this is double-counting"—several airlines ordering aircraft for the same markets. Airbus and Boeing have been remarkably adept at buffering themselves from downturns by overbooking orders. But even John Leahy, Airbus’s chief salesman and normally one of the industry’s cheerleaders, is sounding a note of caution. “Three airlines tell us they’re going to improve their market share by 10-15%," he says. “But someone is going to be very successful, someone very unsuccessful and someone in the middle. So two or three don’t need all the planes they ordered." And Leahy would not be Leahy if he did not take a poke at Boeing and its plan to raise production rates for the 737 eventually to 52 aircraft per month, up from 42 now and a planned rate of 47 in 2017. “What worries me is this whole ‘Field of Dreams’ concept: ‘Build it and they will come,’" he says. Randy Tinseth, Boeing vice president for marketing, counters that his company takes “a very thoughtful and measured approach" to aircraft output. “We have worked very hard to ensure that demand for these planes is real," he says. “And we make rate decisions on the assumption that we’ll continue producing at those rates for a substantial period of time." Forecasting future demand remains tricky because there are still no concrete indications that increasing capacity is the wrong decision. In fact, Airbus is considering boosting A320 rates to 50 per month, up from 42 currently. Leahy says Airbus has the orders to support such a robust rate, but he concedes that delivery positions 7-8 years out are less certain. Boeing is ramping up production rates for the 787 to a planned 14 aircraft per month and Airbus is bringing the A350 into service, with first delivery due by year-end. And the planned A320 and 737 narrowbody rate increases come in spite of the fact that both are transitioning to reengined models during the next few years. That should, in theory, have an impact on demand for the old versions. At around the turn of the decade, Boeing will be shifting from the 777 to the 777X. The debate about optimal production rates gained momentum after UBS published a study signaling caution just days before the Istat event. While its sees a rough balance of supply and demand in the narrowbody market until 2018, production rates for long-haul aircraft need to be cut by up to 30%, it says. The disconnect: While current widebody production plans suggest that demand will increase 6% a year until 2018, UBS is forecasting a more modest 4% rise. If UBS is correct, Boeing and Airbus would be producing 200-250 more aircraft per year than the market could absorb. The bank’s analysts suggest cutting A330 output to four per month from 10, decreasing the 777 rate to four from 8.3 per month, and freezing the 787 rate at 10 per month rather than raising it to 14. But UBS makes the most radical recommendation for the largest jets: Airbus should cut production of the A380 to one a month—from 30 per year—and Boeing should stop building the 747-8 altogether. That, of course, is unlikely to happen, at least in the short term. Both manufacturers have pledged to keep production as stable as possible, although Airbus has conceded that A330 rates are likely to come down somewhat. UBS believes Airbus will build only 40 A330s in 2018, down from this year’s high of 110. But introduction of the A350 should more than compensate for that 70-aircraft reduction. In fact, Leahy is more concerned that Airbus may not deliver as many A350s as would be in demand because of its conservative production ramp-up. “We are being prudent, but it bothers me," he says. Airbus might soon decide to go for higher production rates, though: “I believe this will be decided sometime next year," he adds. By year-end, the aircraft maker plans to be building three A350s per month, up from two now; by the end of 2015, it targets producing five A350s per month; and by 2018, 10 per month. The UBS analysts forecast that Boeing 777 production will decline to 60 per year in 2018 from 96 now, and 747 and 767 rates will settle to one per month in 2016. By 2018, 140 787s will be built per year, they project, up from 108 this year. Airbus will deliver 529 narrowbodies in 2018 (up from 483 this year), the analysts expect, and Boeing deliveries will increase by six aircraft to reach 490 over four years, UBS estimates. UBS is not alone in its concerns. Earlier this year, Bank of America Merrill Lynch analysts issued similar warnings (AW&ST July 14, p. 24). And Thomas Hollahan, managing director at Citi, says that “this industry is still subject to event risk and it is always good to assume another one is around the corner." Welsh says that the U.K. Export Finance program is now typically receiving around 80 bids by banks for its business per transaction, compared to 2-3 only a few years ago. He says that some of the banks coming in with financing proposals for aircraft transactions are hardly known. The availability of cheap financing is a key ingredient of the marked changes the aircraft business has undergone in the last several years. It is a function of the proliferation of new financiers in the market, including private equity, and it raises questions for banks established in aircraft financing and lessors. However, Air Lease Corp. (ALC) Chairman/CEO Steven Udvar-Hazy thinks many of the new entrants will disappear when the next crisis hits. Adam Pilarski, senior vice president at Avitas, has been warning for some time that airlines are overordering. “If Middle East and low-cost airlines succeed, someone else has to fail," he says. Boeing and Airbus have to assume “a huge number of retirements" in order not to end up in an overcapacity situation, he says. On the other hand, he concedes that both manufacturers have become sophisticated in overbooking narrowbody production, which is making shifts in delivery schedules easier to handle. Pilarski also notes the unique set of conditions the industry has been operating in for some years: High fuel prices have led to the development of new aircraft such as the A320neo and the Boeing 737 MAX, which airlines can afford to buy in large quantities because financing is so cheap and easily available. But, he asks, what if one or two of the underlying parameters such as high fuel prices or cheap financing change over time? Udvar-Hazy has concerns of a different nature. “There is a good symmetry between the backlog and production rates," he says. “But our deeper concern is about how the very complex supply chain will deal with production." While Airbus and Boeing are increasing output, other players such as Bombardier (with its CSeries), Comac and Mitsubishi are entering the market, and Udvar-Hazy worries that “some suppliers will have difficulties." He adds that “galleys and seats have the longest lead times I have ever seen in my career. . . . We are reaching a point of saturation." Therefore, ALC is urging manufacturers to not overbuild, he says, “because they may not be able to meet their contractual obligations." Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 1.61 Mb. Share with your friends:
|