Observation one: Status quo America has no high speed rail system, and no plans to implement one.

Congress just sent Obamas proposals back to the starting blocks Fawn Johnson JANUARY 17, 2012 Correspondent, National
Journalhttp://transportation.nationaljournal.com/2012/01/highspeed-rail-in-a-coma.php

Policymakers' appetite for high-speed rail seems to be dwindling to almost nothing. It is old news that congressional Republicans are not fans of President Obama's high-speed rail initiative. They view it as a waste of taxpayer dollars at a time when belt-tightening is of the highest order. The national conversation has not advanced much beyond that point, perhaps because the biggest fans of high-speed rail are distracted by other problems. Democrats in Congress raised only a faint protest when the fiscal 2012 appropriations bill cut funding for the Transportation Department's high-speed rail program. Republicans who ostensibly like high-speed rail said the cuts will allow rail enthusiasts to start over from scratch. The problems continue at the state level, particularly in California. The California High
Speed Rail Peer Review Group recently refused to recommend that bond money be devoted to the state's high-speed rail plan. The review group said the state's business plan lacked "credible sources of adequate funding" that posed "an immense financial risk" to California. Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown proposed folding the California High-Speed Rail Authority into a broader transportation agency to save money. That move could potentially take some steam out of the state's high-speed rail initiatives as they get lumped in with other transportation priorities. Even so, more than $3.5 billion in federal funding could be at risk if the state Legislature doesn't approve funds for a high-speed rail line, according to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Thus the plan, the USFG should substantially increase its infrastructure funding by implementing a nationwide high speed rail system in the United States

Fuck your spec arguments, ask us in cross x

ADVANTAGE 1: Warming
Subpoint A. Warming is real and anthropogenic. CO2 levels are out of control

Cook 10 (John, Solar Physics Scientist @ University of Queensland, Adjunct Fellow at the University of Queensland, The human fingerprint in
global warming, 29 March 2010, http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-fingerprint-in-global-warming.html , CT)

In science, there's only one thing better than empirical measurements made in the real world - and that is multiple independent measurements all pointing to the same result.

There are many lines of empirical evidence that all detect the human fingerprint in global warming: Confirmation that rising carbon dioxide levels are due to human activity comes from analysing the types of carbon found in the air. The carbon atom has several different isotopes (eg - different number of neutrons). Carbon 12 has 6 neutrons, carbon 13 has 7 neutrons. Plants have a lower C13/C12 ratio than in the atmosphere. If rising atmospheric CO2 comes fossil fuels, the C13/C12 should be falling. Indeed this is what is occuring (Ghosh 2003) and the trend
correlates with the trend in global emissions. Further confirmation comes by measuring oxygen levels in the atmosphere.

When fossil fuels are burned, the carbon in the fossil fuels are joined to oxygen, creating carbon dioxide. As CO2 increases in the atmosphere, oxygen decreases. Observations show oxygen levels are falling at a rate consistent with the burning of fossil fuels . The human fingerprint in the increased greenhouse effect Satellites measure infrared radiation as it escapes out to space. A comparison between satellite data from 1970 to 1996 found that less energy is escaping to space at the wavelengths that greenhouse gases absorb energy (Harries 2001). Thus the paper found "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect". This result has been confirmed by more recent data from several different satellites (Griggs 2004, Chen 2007). That less heat is escaping out to space is confirmed by surface measurements that find more infrared radiation returning to earth. Several studies have found this is

due to an increased greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004, Wang 2009). An analysis of high resolution spectral data allows scientists to quantitatively attribute the increase in downward radiation to each of several greenhouse gases (Evans 2006). The results lead the authors to conclude that "this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming."

Subpoint B.

Global warming is reversible but now is key Dietz and Stern 8 (Simon and Nicholas, Review of Environmental and economics policy, profs,
http://reep.oxfordjournals.org/content/3/1/138.full, dw: dec, 4 2008 da: 6-30-2011, lido)

Stabilization at even the upper limit of 550 ppm of CO2e will require sharp reductions in emissions in the near and medium term. The atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases is already around 435 ppm and increasing by about 2.5 ppm per annum (the annual rate of increase is itself rising and will soon be 3 ppm if unchecked). In the Stern Review, we estimated that the global emissions control rate in 2050 would have to be around 0.60.65 for stabilization at 550 ppm, and 0.85 for stabilization at 450 ppm. Thus, there is a very substantial mitigation

gap to bridge and time is in short supply. The earlier we begin, the greater are the opportunities to (a) limit the accumulation of carbon-intensive capital stock and (b) drive innovation of low-carbon technologies. Moreover, the earlier we begin, the greater are the opportunities to reverse our decision later, should we make unanticipated discoveries about the costs and benefits of emissions reductions. As for instance Yohe et al. (2004)
have shown, only with sharp near-term emissions reductions can we keep ambitious stabilization targets of 550 ppm of CO2e and below in play. If we drive up the policy ramp too slowly, it will soon be too late or prohibitively costly to achieve such targets: we will fall into the gap. Thus delay now and haste later not only builds up damage, but

also risks expensive mistakes in investment decisions. We are arguing for clarity and strength in policy now. Subpoint C. Plan drastically reduces CO2 emissions and solves warming PATRICK HAYS February 1, 2011 Patrick Hays is the mayor of North Little Rock, Ark.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/02/01/high-speed-rail-is-key-to-economic-development

Enhancing U.S. energy security is just one reason the country needs a state-of-the-art highspeed rail system, which by 2030 could transport millions of people each day between Americas cities. A national high-speed rail system would generate millions of jobs; help revive the countrys manufacturing sector by
creating a new industry producing the trains, steel, and related components; alleviate pressure on a crumbling transportation infrastructure; and lessen the ever-worsening congestion on Americas highways and at its airports, where delays cause an estimated $156 billion in losses to the U.S. economy annually.

And then there is climate change and the large-scale reduction of CO2 emissions that would result from the creation of an interstate high-speed rail system and the expansion of regional commuter rail systems

Subpoint D

Warming magnifies the impact of natural disasters

Grist 5 (Grist.com, environmental news & commentary, written by David Roberts, 2005,
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2005/1/6/162641/5470)JFS

What is the relationship between global warming and the recent tsunami in the Indian Ocean (and natural disasters more generally)? Who is and is not drawing such a connection? Who is and is not trying to score political points around it? There's been a flurry of writing on the subject recently. We begin with today's
Muckraker ... ...which follows up on this post. Our own Amanda Griscom Little argues that, contrary to the assertions of some right-wing cranks, no enviro is in fact claiming that global warming caused the tsunami. What some enviros are claiming is that global warming -- along with over-development and other such deleterious human activity -- is raising sea levels and reducing or eliminating the natural barriers (mangroves, coral reefs, etc.) that protect coastlines from the worst of the tsunami damage. As a result, the damage was worse than it needed to be, and will be worse yet in the next catastrophe. On the issue of those natural barriers, Emily Gertz over at WorldChanging has followed her excellent original piece on mangroves with another stellar, linkfilled post on the same subject. She promises more to come, so keep an eye out.

Subpoint E. Natural disasters outweigh war its the largest, fastest, most probable scenario for human extinction

Sid-Ahmed 5 (Mohammed, Egyptian political writer, Ahram, Issue 724,

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/724/op3.htm)JFS

The year 2005 began with a calamity, resulting not from conflicts between people but from an unprecedented natural disaster that has so far claimed over 155,000 lives, a figure that

is expected to rise still more over the coming period. Is this Nature's reaction to the abuse it is suffering at the hands of the human race, its revenge on us for challenging its laws beyond acceptable limits? The earthquake that struck deep under the Indian Ocean was the strongest in over a century. What is still more critical is that what we have witnessed so far is only the beginning of the catastrophe. According to a spokesman from the World Health organisation, "there is certainly a chance that we could have as many dying from communicable diseases as from the tsunamis". The logistics of providing the survivors with clean water, vaccines and medicines are formidable, and, with many thousands of bodies lying unburied, epidemics spread by waterborne diseases are expected to claim many thousands of victims. There is also the possibility of seismic activity elsewhere in the world because disturbances in the inner structure of the earth's crust have occurred and there are no means to foresee how they will unfold. Will they build up into still broader disarray and eventually move our planet out of its orbit around the sun? Moreover, even if we can avoid the worse possible scenario, how can we contain the earthquake's effects ecologically, meteorologically, economically and socially? The contradiction between Man and Nature has reached unprecedented heights, forcing us to re-examine our understanding of the existing world system. US President George W Bush has announced the creation of an international alliance between the US, Japan, India, Australia and any other nation wishing to join that will work to help the stricken region overcome the huge problems it is facing in the wake of the tsunamis. Actually, the implications of the disaster are not only regional but global, not to say cosmic. Is it possible to mobilise all the inhabitants of our planet to the extent and at the speed necessary to avert similar disasters in future? How to engender the required state of emergency, that is, a different type of interhuman relations which rise to the level of the challenge before contradictions between the various sections of the world community make that collective effort unrealisable? The human species has never been exposed to a natural upheaval of this magnitude within living memory. What happened in South Asia is the ecological equivalent of 9/11. Ecological problems like global warming and climatic disturbances in general threaten to make our natural habitat unfit for human life. The extinction of the species has become a very real possibility, whether by our own hand or as a result of natural disasters of a much greater magnitude than the Indian Ocean earthquake and the killer waves it spawned. Human civilisation has developed in the hope that Man will be able to reach welfare and prosperity on earth for everybody. But now things seem to be moving in the opposite direction, exposing planet Earth to the end of its role as a nurturing place for human life. Today, human conflicts have become less of a threat than the confrontation between [hu]Man and Nature. At least they are less likely to bring about the end of the human species. The reactions of Nature as a result of its exposure to the onslaughts of human societies have

become more important in determining the fate of the human species than any harm it

can inflict on itself. Until recently, the threat Nature represented was perceived as likely to arise only in the long run, related for instance to how global warming would affect life on our planet. Such a threat could take decades, even centuries, to reach a critical level. This perception has changed following the devastating earthquake and tsunamis that hit the coastal regions of South Asia and, less violently, of East Africa, on 26 December. This cataclysmic event has underscored the vulnerability of our world before the wrath of Nature and shaken the sanguine belief that the end of the world is a long way away. Gone are the days when we could comfort ourselves with the notion that the extinction of the human race will not occur before a long-term future that will only materialise after millions of years and not affect us directly in any way. We are now forced to live with the possibility of an imminent demise of humankind.

ADVANTAGE 2: Economy, well isolate three scenarios

Scenario 1, Subpoint A

Unemployment is the biggest problem facing the economy Rob Port October 6, 2011 http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama-economys-biggest-problem-is-unemployment-amonggovernment-workers/

We know that the biggest problem that weve had in terms of unemployment over the last several months has not been in the private sector, its actually been layoffs of teachers and cops and firefighters, said the President earlier today. We created over 2 million jobs in the private sector; a million jobs this year alone in the private sector. But in the public sector, we keep on seeing these layoffs having an adverse effect on economies in states all across the country. So, according to the president, the private sector is fine. We just need to make government bigger.

Subpoint B. Depression may already be here, government spending is key to avert deeper downturn PAUL KRUGMAN June 27, 2010 Krugman is an economist and a professor of economics at Princeton University
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28krugman.html

We are now, I fear, in the early stages of a third depression. It will probably look more like the Long Depression than the much more severe Great Depression. But the cost to the world economy and, above all, to the millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs will nonetheless be immense. And this third depression will be
primarily a failure of policy. Around the world most recently at last weekends deeply discouraging G-20 meeting governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending. In 2008 and 2009, it seemed as if we might have learned from history. Unlike their predecessors, who raised interest rates in the face of financial crisis, the current leaders of the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank slashed rates and moved to support credit markets. Unlike governments of the past, which tried to balance budgets in the face of a plunging economy, todays governments allowed deficits to rise. And better policies helped the world avoid complete collapse: the recession brought on by the financial crisis arguably ended last summer. But future historians will tell us that this wasnt the end of the third depression, just as the business upturn that began in 1933 wasnt the end of the Great Depression. After all, unemployment especially long-term unemployment remains at levels that would have been considered catastrophic not long ago, and shows no sign of coming down rapidly. And both

In the face of this grim picture, you might have expected policy makers to realize that they havent yet done enough to promote recovery. But no: over the last few months there has been a stunning resurgence of hardmoney and balanced-budget orthodoxy. As far as rhetoric is concerned, the revival of the old-time religion is most evident in
the United States and Europe are well on their way toward Japan-style deflationary traps. Europe, where officials seem to be getting their talking points from the collected speeches of Herbert Hoover, up to and including the claim that raising taxes and cutting spending will actually expand the economy, by improving business confidence. As a practical matter, however, America isnt doing

much better.

The Fed seems aware of the deflationary risks but what it proposes to do about these risks is, well, nothing. The Obama administration understands the dangers of premature fiscal austerity but because Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress wont authorize additional aid to state governments, that austerity is coming anyway, in the form of budget cuts at the state and local levels . Why the wrong turn in policy? The hard-liners
often invoke the troubles facing Greece and other nations around the edges of Europe to justify their actions. And its true that bond investors have turned on governments with intractable deficits. But there is no evidence that short-run fiscal austerity in the face of a depressed economy reassures investors. On the contrary: Greece has agreed to harsh austerity, only to find its risk spreads growing ever wider; Ireland has imposed savage cuts in public spending, only to be treated by the markets as a worse risk than Spain, which has been far more reluctant to take the hard-liners medicine. Its almost as if the financial markets understand what policy makers seemingly dont: that while long-term

fiscal responsibility is important, slashing spending in the midst of a depression, which deepens that depression and paves the way for deflation, is actually self-defeating.

Subpoint C.

We have to act now to jumpstart the economy and create permanent jobs. Michael Melaniphy January 19, 2012 President and CEO, American Public Transportation Association http://transportation.nationaljournal.com/2012/01/highspeed-rail-in-a-coma.php There is no better time than now to recommit ourselves to the goal of developing a modern, 21st century high-speed rail system. The prompt asks if it makes sense for the country to take a break on high-speed rail projects. Can you imagine where we would be today if President Eisenhower had waited for a better time to begin building the nations interstate highway system? The Administrations high-speed rail initiative is a forward-looking undertaking that recognizes that building this system will take decades. In that time-frame the American population is expected to grow by at least 100 million, roadway congestion will increase, fossil fuels will become scarcer, and environmental concerns will require the use of greener, more energy efficient modes of transportation. High-speed rail fits that bill. An important point for policymakers to understand is that this is not an either/or debate, despite the naysayers attempts to position it this way. This is a debate about developing a modern transportation network a network that incorporates all modes of travel and provides Americans with more options. Just as importantly, high-speed rail systems have been proven to be huge drivers of economic growth and development nationally and internationally. For each $1 billion invested in high-speed rail, 24,000 jobs will be created. Nationally, that will amount to more than 1.3 million jobs over a six year period but only if we can commit ourselves fully to these projects. And in addition to the hundreds of thousands of construction jobs, many more permanent manufacturing jobs will be created to support these systems and their infrastructure by exporting rail components to countries around the world. If we truly want to kick-start our economy, protect the environment, and improve quality of life, then high-speed rail can provide the answer. These benefits are well known to legislators from both parties. Now that we have found a solution to these issues, we cannot shirk the responsibility for political expedience now is the time to act.

Subpoint D Failed economies will lead to resource wars, these go nuclear and cause extinction

Broward 2009 (Member of Triond) Will an Economic Collapse Kill You?, http://newsflavor.com/opinions/will-an-economic-collapse-killyou/ AD: 7-7-09 CS

Now its time to look at the consequences of a failing world economy. With five offical nations having nuclear weapons, and four more likely to have them there could be major consequences of another world war. The first thing that will happen after an economic collapse will be war over resources. The United States currency will become useless and will have no way of securing reserves. The United States has little to no capacity to produce oil, it is totally dependent on foreign oil. If the United States stopped getting foreign oil, the government would go to no ends to secure more, if there were a war with any other major power over oil, like Russia or China, these wars would most likely involve nuclear weapons. Once one nation launches a nuclear weapon, there would of course be retaliation, and with five or more countries with nuclear weapons there would most likely be a world nuclear war. The risk is so high that acting to save the economy is the most important issue facing us in the 21st century

SCENARIO 2: Airpower, Subpoint A Any further downturn in the economy will doom the F-35 program which is key to airpower Jeremy Herb - 01/20/12http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/marine-corps/205449-panetta-says-f-35-absolutely-vital-as-he-liftsprobation

This fifth-generation fighter behind me is absolutely vital to maintaining our air superiority, Panetta said. As secretary of Defense, my department is committed to the development of the F-35. Its absolutely critical, that we get it right, and thats why youre here. The F-35B, the Marines short-takeoff, vertical-landing variant, has been the most troubled version of the F-35, the Pentagons largest weapons program in history. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates placed the program on a two-year probation in January 2011, threatening to cancel the Marine fighter altogether if problems were not addressed. Budget watchers had also pegged the F-35B as a potential target for the budget axe, as the Pentagon prepares to cut $487 billion from its budgets over the next decade. Some had suggested the military would have been fine with only two
variants instead of three. Panetta reaffirmed his commitment to the Marine's version Friday, though that doesn't mean the program won't face some reduction when the Pentagon's budget is released next month. Panetta

said Friday theres still a long way to go for the F-35 program, as its obviously not out of the woods yet.

Subpoint B. The U.S. massively underestimated Chinas stealth technology, they have a stealth fighter very close to operational phases. Plan is key to keep air superiority David Fulghum, Bill Sweetman, Robert Wall Jan 10, 2011 With the surprise rollout and high-speed taxi tests of Chinas newest J-20 fighter, a stealth prototype, the U.S. Navys top intelligence official admits that the Pentagon has erred in its estimates of the speed with which Beijing is introducing new military technology. The aircrafts
existence was not a surprise to the intelligence community, but one of the things that is . . . true is that we have been pretty consistent in underestimating the delivery and initial operational capability of Chinese technology weapons systems, says Vice Admiral David J. Dorsett, deputy and the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (AW&ST Jan. 3, p. 18). Moreover, chief of naval operations for information dominance and director of naval intelligence. Two recent examples of misanalyses have been the J-20 fighter

there is evidence that Chinas advances include high-performance engines and missiles that display a new level of technical maturity and performance. In terms of the [J-20] stealth photos, its not clear to me when

its going to become operational, Dorsett says. Do we need to refine our assessments better? I think so. Other Washingtonbased intelligence officials say they are watching the J-20s testing with interest.

Subpoint C. Chinese rise in power over the U.S. causes nuclear war Glaser, PolSci Prof at George Washington, 11 (Charles, March/April, Will Chinas Rise Lead to War? Foreign Affairs, Vol 90
Issue 2, EbscoHost)

ACCOMMODATION ON TAIWAN? THE PROSPECTS for avoiding intense military competition and war may be good, but growth in China's power may nevertheless require some changes in U.S. foreign policy that Washington will find disagreeable--particularly regarding Taiwan. Although it lost control of Taiwan during the Chinese Civil War more than six decades ago , China still considers Taiwan to be part of its homeland, and unification remains a key political goal for Beijing. China has made clear that it will use force if Taiwan declares independence, and much of China's conventional military buildup has been dedicated to increasing its ability to coerce Taiwan and reducing the United States' ability to intervene. Because China places such high value on Taiwan and because the United States and China--whatever they might formally agree to--have such different attitudes regarding the legitimacy of the status quo, the issue poses special dangers and challenges for the U.S.-Chinese relationship, placing it in a different category than Japan or South Korea. A crisis over Taiwan could fairly easily escalate to

nuclear war, because each step along the way might well seem rational to the actors involved. Current U.S. policy is designed to reduce the probability that Taiwan will declare independence and to make clear that the United

States will not come to Taiwan's aid if it does. Nevertheless, the United States would find itself under pressure to protect Taiwan against any sort of attack, no matter how it originated. Given the different interests and perceptions of the various parties and the limited control Washington has over Taipei's behavior, a crisis could unfold in which the United States found itself following events rather than leading them. Such dangers have been around for decades, but ongoing improvements in China's military capabilities may make Beijing more willing to escalate a Taiwan crisis. In addition to its improved conventional capabilities, China is modernizing its nuclear forces to increase their ability to survive and retaliate following a large-scale U.S. attack. Standard deterrence theory holds that Washington's current ability to destroy most or all of China's nuclear force enhances its bargaining position. China's nuclear modernization might remove that check on Chinese action, leading Beijing to behave more boldly in future crises than it has in past ones. A U.S. attempt to preserve its ability to defend Taiwan, meanwhile, could fuel a conventional and nuclear arms race. Enhancements to U.S. offensive targeting capabilities and strategic ballistic missile defenses might be interpreted by China as a signal of malign U.S. motives, leading to further Chinese military efforts and a general poisoning of U.S.-Chinese relations.

Scenario 3: Macro industrial, Subpoint A Economic growth necessary for macro industrial culture Michael Zey. The Macroindustrial Era: A New Age of Abundance and Prosperity, The Futurist. March-April 1997 http://www.zey.com/featured_2.htm In this exciting new epoch of human development, the Macroindustrial Era, the primary emphasis will be on the production of material goods and tangible products. And this will only occur by the development and application of advanced technologies and the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Of course, to achieve these goals a nation must have an "expansionary" culture that fosters progress and technological improvement and facilitates the development and nurturance of the workers and scientists who must be the creators of the new technology of the Macroindustrial Era. Such a society will have a strong sense of purpose and a vision of the future to serve as its goal and as a guidepost for advancement.

Subpoint B. Macro industrial era will result in super fast inter continental travel

Michael Zey. The Macroindustrial Era: A New Age of Abundance and Prosperity, The Futurist. March-April 1997 http://www.zey.com/featured_2.htm Human beings will expand time in other ways. The introduction of superfast transport will enable individuals to expend less time traveling and devote more time to accomplishing other goals. The supertrain, operating at speeds of 300 miles per hour, will greatly transform our concept of "commuting time," allowing us more time for work and leisure. In the United States, Amtrak has recently announced that it will begin a high-speed rail system connecting New York, Boston, and Washington, D.C., in 1998. The United States, Japan, and Russia all have on their drawing boards hypersonic aircraft, which will reduce flying time between places like Japan and New York to under two hours. The transportation issue provides a good example of the fundamental philosophical difference between the"Information Age" concept and Macroindustrial Era idea. Proponents of the Information
Age concept claim that the main goal of our society should be the rapid transmission of information from one site to another. But I believe that the major focus of society in the Macroindustrial Era will be the quick and efficient

transportation of people from one continent to another. This new era will require rapid relocation of members of the work force - engineers, managers, laborers - to work on construction projects, help build and nurture local business, and transfer needed skills and technologies to other regions. Moreover, if individuals are to become truly global citizens who appreciate other
cultures and cooperate across borders, they must have the opportunity to personally visit other countries and interact with their inhabitants.

Subpoint C. Macro industrial era will result in outer space colonies Michael Zey. The Macroindustrial Era: A New Age of Abundance and Prosperity, The Futurist. March-April 1997 http://www.zey.com/featured_2.htm The next major change in the Macroindustrial Era is humanity's extension into and domination of both the inner and outer reaches of physical space. Even now, countries are planning joint missions to Mars and the moon to establish permanent space colonies, and unmanned missions are probing deeper into the outer regions of the solar system and beyond. In early 1996, Japan announced its long-range vision for space exploration, such as its intention to construct a moon base and,
eventually, a Mars colony. The extension of mankind's spatial influence is not exclusively relegated to interplanetary travel. In an effort to extend human existence down to the subterranean level, humanity is beginning to burrow underneath the earth's surface. For instance, Japan has already broken ground to construct "Alice Cities," large urban centers a hundred feet below the earth's surface, replete with shopping centers, offices, homes, and power plants.

Such macroprojects signal a fundamental change in the very definitioin of real

estate.

Subpoint D. Space is necessary to solve multiple scenarios for extinction Stephen Hawking, Worlds Smartest Person. Stephen Hawking: Humans Must Colonize Space Or Risk Extinction, Pleasant Morning Buzz. June 14, 2006 http://www.pleasantmorningbuzz.com/blog/614061 Astrophysicist Stephen Hawking says that the future of the human race depends on our going out into space. The survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster will destroy the Earth, world-renowned astrophysicist Stephen Hawking said Tuesday. Humans
could have a permanent base on the moon in 20 years and a colony on Mars in the next 40 years, the British scientist told a news conference. "We won't find anywhere as nice as Earth unless we go to another star system," added Hawking, who arrived in Hong Kong to a rock star's welcome Monday. Tickets for his lecture planned for Wednesday were sold out. He added that if humans can avoid killing themselves in the next 100 years, they should

have space settlements that can continue without support from Earth. "It

is important for the human race to spread out into space for the survival of the species," Hawking said. "Life on Earth is at the everincreasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of." Ad 3: International competitiveness, Subpoint A. America is falling as the world leader in technology and innovation, government stimulants are key to keeping our leadership Ibrahim B. Syed, Ph. D. President Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc. December 2011
http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_101_150/america_the_global_leader_in_sci.htm

America's status as the world leader of technological innovation is seriously threatened, unless an innovative partnership is created by the primary movers and shakers of R&D (Research and Development) in this country (industry, government and academia). A research university plays an important national role in educating America's scientists, discovering new knowledge and developing technological innovation. In order to maintain the technological leadership Government must continue to stimulate civilian research, foster research partnerships, create a business climate more conducive to private sector R&D, refocus federal research to today's missions and budget environment, and maintain its support of American universities. Academia should give priority to developing the nation's human capital in science and
technology in emphasizing universities' teaching mission, and promote R&D partnerships. Graduate study should be restructured to open a broader spectrum of career opportunities to Ph.D. students and to develop a credible practice-oriented master's degree. Education that is limited to a single sub-field does not equip students adequately for either the academic world or the corporate world. Universities should work with industry to explore different emphases in graduate programs. Creating master's degree programs geared to the needs of the workplace would be particularly valuable. Everything possible should be done to attract and keep students interested in science and engineering. More industrial internships should be created to bring additional real world and teamwork experiences into the classroom. Universities must pay more attention to the nature and quality of introductory science and engineering courses. Federal research grants should be used in a way that enhances the quality of undergraduate and graduate education at the same time Universities must alter policies, particularly those of tenure and promotion for the Faculty members. Programs should be developed with companies that encourage both graduate students and faculty to gain experience in industrial laboratories, universities. Universities and industries should work together toward intellectual property rights, and to promote partnerships. Government agencies such as the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautic and Space Administration, and the Department of Energy should strengthen science, engineering and long-term growth by extensively promoting basic research as basic research is critical to fostering technological progress in research-intensive industries. Although private companies have increased their total R&D spending in recent years, only a small portion of their spending goes to basic research. The return on research investment to the economy and society is remarkable. Prominent

economists unanimously agree that over the last 50 years, advances in science and technology have produced more than half of Americas economic growth. No other federal investment generates a greater long-term return to the economy and society than does basic research. Technological innovations have contributed more than any other single factor in Americas economic history to long-term growth. A great many of these technological innovations have grown out of publicly funded research, much of
which has been undertaken at Americas universities. In the last twenty years, legislative and fiscal conditions in the United States have enhanced the ability of universities to interface directly with the market, thus increasing substantially the opportunities for private capital to benefit from public investments in scientific research. Private companies, both established industrial giants and emerging entrepreneurial ventures, have built on Americas foundation of publicly funded scientific research, investing capital and capturing the innovations that drive American economy forward. These investments have created multiple new industries, thousands of firms, and hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

Scientific and technological change accounts for over 50 percent of long-term economic growth.

Subpoint B.

China leads the world in High Speed Rail technology, and theyre pulling even further ahead.
Tuan C. Nguyen | December 28, 2011 http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/thinking-tech/chinas-new-bullet-train-is-worldsfastest-smashes-record/9656

Bigger, better faster is a perhaps the most apt way to describe Chinas ambitious approach to revamping its infrastructure. For instance, the worlds second largest economy boasts the two longest bridges in the world, including the worlds longest

seabridge unveiled back in July. And while the country is already home to the worlds fastest passenger trains, theyre recently shown that theyre still working hard to outdo even themselves. Over the weekend, local train manufacturer CSR Corp successfully completed a trial run of their fastest train yet. China Daily reported that the test train reached a world record-breaking speed of 311 mph. Previously, the title of fastest passenger train was held by the Beijing Shanghai High Speed Railway, which operated at a top speed of 300 kilometers per hour.

Subpoint C. Tech advancements in China are emboldening the Chinese military to compete with and eliminate reliance on the U.S. David Lague HONG KONG | Thu Dec 29, 2011 8:29am EST
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/29/us-china-military-idUSTRE7BS0AM20111229

If Beijing can successfully deploy the full 35 satellites planned for the Beidou network on schedule by 2020, its military will be free of its current dependence for navigation on the U.S. global positioning network (GPS) signals and Russia's similar GLONASS system. And, unlike the less accurate civilian versions of GPS and GLONASS available to the People's Liberation Army (PLA), this network will give China the accuracy to guide missiles, smart munitions and other weapons. "This will allow a big jump in the precision attack capability of the PLA," said Andrei Chang, a Hong
Kong-based analyst of the Chinese military and editor of Kanwa Asian Defense magazine. China has launched 10 Beidou satellites and plans to launch six more by the end of next year, according to the China Satellite Navigation Management Office. Chinese and foreign military experts say the PLA's General Staff Department and General Armaments Department closely coordinate and support all of China's space programs within the sprawling science and aerospace bureaucracy. As part of this system, the Beidou, or "Big Dipper ,"

network will have an important military role alongside the country's rapidly expanding network of surveillance, imaging and remote sensing satellites. China routinely denies having military ambitions in space.
Defense Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun Wednesday dismissed fears the Beidou network would pose a military threat, noting that all international satellite navigation systems are designed for dual civilian and military use .

CATCHING UP WITH THE U.S. China accelerated its military satellite research and development after PLA commanders found they were unable to track two U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups deployed in 1996 to the Taiwan Strait at a time of high tension between the island and the mainland, analysts say. The effort
received a further boost when it was shown how crucial satellite networks were in the 1991 Gulf War, the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. While China still lags the United States and Russia in overall space technology, over

the last decade it has rapidly become a state-of-the-art competitor in space-based surveillance after deploying a range of advanced satellite constellations that serve military and civilian agencies. With the launch of more than 30 surveillance satellites over the last decade, according to space technology experts, the PLA can monitor an expanding area of the earth's surface with increased frequency, an important element of reliable military reconnaissance. That coverage gives PLA commanders vastly improved capability to detect and track potential military targets. Real-time satellite images and data can also be used to coordinate the operations of China's naval, missile and strike aircraft forces in operations far from the mainland. "What we are seeing is China broadly acquiring the same capabilities in this area as those held by the U.S.," said Ross Babbage, a defense analyst and founder of the Canberra-based Kokoda Foundation, an independent security policy unit. "Essentially, they are making most of the Western Pacific far more transparent to their military." In a recent
article for the Journal of Strategic Studies, researchers Eric Hagt and Matthew Durnin attempted to estimate the capability of China's space network using orbital modeling software and available data on satellite performance. China's most basic satellites carried electro-optical sensors capable of taking high resolution digital images in the visible and non-visible wavelengths, wrote the authors. More advanced satellites launched in recent years carried powerful synthetic aperture radars that could penetrate cloud and cover much bigger areas in high detail. Added to that, China was now deploying satellites that could monitor electronic signals and emissions, so-called electronic intelligence or ELINT platforms, the authors said. "Next to China, only the United States possesses more capable tactical support systems in space for tactical operations," they wrote.

Subpoint D. Competitiveness key to contain Chinese aggression Swaine 1998 (Michael- Senior Associate and Co-Director of the China Program at the Carnegie

Endowment For International Peace, Sources of Conflict in the 21st Century, 1998 )
The second vital interest is to prevent the rise of a hegemonic state in Asia. Any hegemonic state capable of dominating the Asian land mass and the lines of communication, both internal and external, represents an unacceptable challenge to the safety, prosperity, and power position of the United States. For reasons well understood by geopoliticians since Sir Halford Mackinder, Asias great wealth and resources would serve its possessors well in the struggles endemic to international politics. If the regions wealth and resources were secured by any single state (or some combination of states acting in unison), it would enable this entity to threaten American assets in Asia and, more problematically, in other areas such as the Middle East, and
finally perhaps to challenge the United States itself at a global level. This entity, using the continents vast resources and economic capabilities, could then effectively interdict the links presently connecting the United States with Asia and the rest of the world and, in the limiting case, menace the CONUS itself through a combination of both WMD and conventional instruments. Besides being a threat to American safety, a hegemonic domination of Asia by one of the regions powers would threaten American prosperityif the consequence of such domination included denying the United States access to the continents markets, goods, capital, and technology. In combination, this threat to American safety and prosperity would have the inevitable effect of threatening the relative power position of the United States in international politics. For these reasons, preventing the rise of a hegemonic center of power in Asia especially one disposed to impeding American economic, political, and military accesswould rank as a vital interest second only to preserving the physical security of the United States and its extended possessions. This interest inevitably involves paying close attention to the possible power transitions in the region, especially those relating to China in the near-tomedium term and to Japan, Russia, and possibly India over the long term. In any event, it requires developing an appropriate set of policy responseswhich may range from containment at one end all the way to appeasement at the otherdesigned to prevent the rise of any hegemony that obstructs continued American connectivity with Asia.

Subpoint E. Containing China is key to avoiding WWIII Charles Krauthammer 7/31/1995 (why we must contain china Time Magazine,

http://jcgi.pathfinder.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,983245,00.html, Date Accessed 7/30/2006)

Does containment mean cold war II, with China playing the part of the old Soviet Union? Not quite. There is no ideological component to this struggle. Until late in life, the Soviet Union had ideological appeal, with sympathizers around the globe. Today's China, unlike Mao's, has no such appeal. China is more an old-style dictatorship, not on a messianic mission, just out for power. It is much more like late 19th
century Germany, a country growing too big and too strong for the continent it finds itself on. Its neighbors are beginning to feel the pressure. China is extending its reach deep into the South China Sea, claiming islets hundreds of miles from China, near four of its neighbors but within the reach of its rapidly growing military. Indeed, while defense spending in Russia and the West has declined, China's is rising dramatically, doubling in the past 10 years. Those dollars are going to intercontinental rocketry, a modernized army and a blue-water navy .Nor is China deploying its new might just locally. It is sending missile and nuclear technology to such places as Pakistan and Iran. The Pakistan connection represents a flanking maneuver against China's traditional enemy, India; Iran, a leapfrog to make trouble for that old imperial master, the West. Containment of such a bully must begin early in its career. That means building relations with China's neighbors, starting with Vietnam. For all the emotion surrounding our decision to normalize relations with Vietnam, its significance is coldly geopolitical: Vietnam is China's traditional enemy (they fought a brief war in 1979). We must therefore make it our friend. A map tells you the rest of a containment strategy: 1) a new security relationship with democratic India, now freed from its odd, cold war alliance with the Soviets; 2) renewing the U.S.- Japan alliance, now threatened by a U.S. Administration so hell-bent on selling carburetors in Kyoto that it is blithely jeopardizing the keystone of our Pacific security; and 3) cozying up to the Russians, who, however ornery elsewhere, have a common interest in boxing in China. Containment is not a cold war invention. It is a principle of power politics going back centuries. After the Napoleonic wars, the Congress of Vienna created a system of alliances designed to contain a too dynamic France. In our time the Atlantic Alliance contained an aggressive

the West failed to contain an emergent Germany. The result was two world wars. We cannot let that happen with the emerging giant of the 21st century.
Soviet Union. In between,

Subpoint F. No risk of the impact with the plan. We solve international competitiveness PATRICK HAYS February 1, 2011 Patrick Hays is the mayor of North Little Rock, Ark.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/02/01/high-speed-rail-is-key-to-economic-development

The U.S. must build a national high-speed rail network if

it hopes to maintain its competitiveness in the world economy. China and Europe are now moving ahead
with their high-speed rail networks at breakneck speed, which means that in a decade or two they will have significantly reduced their dependence on imported oil, created tens of millions of new jobs, and saved their countries trillions of dollars by vastly improving the productivity of their economies thanks to a low-carbon transportation sector that moves people and goods at speeds that could one day hit 300 miles per hour, or more. The U.S. can be part of that future. But if more states follow the example of Florida, Wisconsin, and Ohio, the country will remain shackled by 19thand 20th-century forms of transportation in a 21st-century world. Contemplate this image: China,
Europe, Russia, South America, and other parts of the globe are streaking by at 250 miles per hour while the likes of Governor Scott are stuck in a

Solvency: HSR solves a laundry list of problems, and its easily implemented Peter Gertler, 2011Chairman, High Speed Rail Services, HNTB Corporation Listen to the Quieter Voices of Reason
Two years after President Barack Obama announced awards of $8 billion to states across the country to develop high-speed intercity passenger rail service, the program has become the target of unceasing ideological rhetoric. Increasingly, vocal critics

of high-speed rail continue to ratchet up the volume of their criticism. I say: enough already! All sides need to take a break from the rhetoric and listen to the substance and facts about the development of high-speed rail in America. Sound arguments in favor of high-speed rail could fill volumes, but proven benefits of high-speed rail are simple. Cost savings compared to plane travel, particularly if youre going a relatively short distance. Stable fares compared with airline pricing. Fewer security hassles. Consumer-friendly baggage policies. The proximity of most train stations to Americas downtowns. More travel choices and reduces our dependence on both planes and automobiles. Congestion relief for the nations highways and airports. Lower our national energy bill and reduce dependence on foreign oil. The interstate highway system, which galvanized our nation in the 50s and 60s, had its share of ideological critics, too. What would our country be like today if we had listened to them?
High-speed rail continues to move ahead with strong support. In the Northeast Corridor intercity trains enjoy a market share almost equal to the airlines, and plans for high-speed passenger rail service are on track. Projects are moving forward in the Southeast including Virginia and North Carolina, and in Illinois and Michigan in the Midwest. We need to set aside the ideological din of high-speed rail opponents and listen to the quieter voices of fact and reason. To

guarantee the long-term vitality of our transportation system, economy and mobility, high-speed rail must be part of Americas transportation system.