Sdi 2010 Midterms Impacts Updates


Card Check Good – Competitiveness



Download 0.56 Mb.
Page12/34
Date10.08.2017
Size0.56 Mb.
#30755
1   ...   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   ...   34

Card Check Good – Competitiveness


Competitiveness is crucial to hegemony

Adam Segal is Maurice R. Greenberg Senior Fellow in China Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations “Is America Losing its Edge?” Nov/Dec. 2004 accessed July 20, 2010 http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/60260/adam-segal/is-america-losing-its-edge



The United States' global primacy depends in large part on its ability to develop new technologies and industries faster than anyone else. For the last five decades, U.S. scientific innovation and technological entrepreneurship have ensured the country's economic prosperity and military power. It was Americans who invented and commercialized the semiconductor, the personal computer, and the Internet; other countries merely followed the U.S. lead. Today, however, this technological edge-so long taken for granted-may be slipping, and the most serious challenge is coming from Asia. Through competitive tax policies, increased investment in research and development (R&D), and preferential policies for science and technology (S&T) personnel, Asian governments are improving the quality of their science and ensuring the exploitation of future innovations. The percentage of patents issued to and science journal articles published by scientists in China, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan is rising. Indian companies are quickly becoming the second-largest producers of application services in the world, developing, supplying, and managing database and other types of software for clients around the world. South Korea has rapidly eaten away at the U.S. advantage in the manufacture of computer chips and telecommunications software. And even China has made impressive gains in advanced technologies such as lasers, biotechnology, and advanced materials used in semiconductors, aerospace, and many other types of manufacturing. Although the United States' technical dominance remains solid, the globalization of research and development is exerting considerable pressures on the American system. Indeed, as the United States is learning, globalization cuts both ways: it is both a potent catalyst of U.S. technological innovation and a significant threat to it. The United States will never be able to prevent rivals from developing new technologies; it can remain dominant only by continuing to innovate faster than everyone else. But this won't be easy; to keep its privileged position in the world, the United States must get better at fostering technological entrepreneurship at home.
US heg is the only way to prevent nationalist power wars form intensifying

Robert Kagan is a Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace End of Dreams, Return of History July 19, 2007 accessed July 16, 2010 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/07/end_of_dreams_return_of_histor.htm



The jostling for status and influence among these ambitious nations and would-be nations is a second defining feature of the new post-Cold War international system. Nationalism in all its forms is back, if it ever went away, and so is international competition for power, influence, honor, and status. American predominance prevents these rivalries from intensifying -- its regional as well as its global predominance. Were the United States to diminish its influence in the regions where it is currently the strongest power, the other nations would settle disputes as great and lesser powers have done in the past: sometimes through diplomacy and accommodation but often through confrontation and wars of varying scope, intensity, and destructiveness. One novel aspect of such a multipolar world is that most of these powers would possess nuclear weapons. That could make wars between them less likely, or it could simply make them more catastrophic.

Card Check Good – Human Rights


EFCA solves unionization—that is crucial to solving workers rights that are being violated in the status quo—this is key to overall human rights

Harley Shaiken is a professor of social and cultural studies at the Graduate School of Education, director of the Center for Latin American Studies and a member of the Department of Geography at UC Berkeley, where he specializes on issues of work, technology and global production Union expert February 22, 2007accessed July 20, 2010 http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp181.html//Donnie



To ensure the exercise of free choice, EFCA provides both monetary penalties and the possibility of injunctions to limit coercion and restore fairness to the process. Currently, an employer who threatens to fire union supporters or to shut a plant if the union wins does not incur any monetary penalties. Those fines that can be levied against illegal firing are minimal and not much of a deterrent. EFCA allows meaningful fines—triple the amount of back pay in case of discharge—and the possibility of union injunctions in the face of significant violations of worker rights. Finally, EFCA seeks to deter Bad faith bargaining through mediation and arbitration. After 90 days of bargaining on a first agreement, either an employer or a newly certified union can request mediation by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. If an agreement is not reached after 30 days of mediation, either party can call for binding arbitration. This process eliminates the incentive of stalling at the bargaining table to provoke the decertification of a union down the road. EFCA restores balance to a process that has become increasingly dysfunctional. As we have seen, denying workers the right to form a union has damaging consequences for the economy and the political process. We have a dual disconnect. First, the disconnect between the high number of workers who indicate preference for joining a union and the low number who actually belong. As a result of weakening unions, we have the second gap, the Great Disconnect between rising productivity and stagnant or even declining real wages. Workers' freedom to form unions is, and should be, considered a fundamental human right. Seventy years ago, the LaFollette Senate Committee concluded that "The denial of this right [to organize] was the most important problem of civil liberties before the Nation." The committee emphasized that "denying workers the right to organize almost invariably meant denying them the fundamental civil rights which are the basis of our democratic system" (Swidorski 2003, 57). Strengthening free choice in the workplace lays the basis for ensuring a more prosperous economy, a healthier society, and a stronger democracy
Human rights solve secessionist backlash against tyrants that escalates to nuclear war

Human Rights Web an international organization committed to human rights 1994 accessed July 20, 2010 http://www.hrweb.org/intro.html

Many also realized that advances in technology and changes in social structures had rendered war a threat to the continued existence of the human race. Large numbers of people in many countries lived under the control of tyrants, having no recourse but war to relieve often intolerable living conditions. Unless some way was found to relieve the lot of these people, they could revolt and become the catalyst for another wide-scale and possibly nuclear war. For perhaps the first time, representatives from the majority of governments in the world came to the conclusion that basic human rights must be protected, not only for the sake of the individuals and countries involved, but to preserve the human race.





Download 0.56 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   ...   34




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page