Competitiveness

DDI 2008 <CM>

Brendan Burke

Germany DA Answers and More Competitiveness

Germany DA Answers and More Competitiveness.............................................................................................1
2AC – German Competitiveness...........................................................................................................................2
AT: German Competitiveness – EU Econ Won’t Collapse.................................................................................3
AT: German Competitiveness – AE not Key.......................................................................................................4
Innovation Key.......................................................................................................................................................5
Gov Key...................................................................................................................................................................6
Gov Key...................................................................................................................................................................7
AT: Plan Causes Backlash.....................................................................................................................................8
Space Key to Econ..................................................................................................................................................9
Challengers Rising...............................................................................................................................................10
2AC: GT Heg F/L.................................................................................................................................................11

1
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

2AC – German Competitiveness

1. Uniqueness overwhelms the link – nothing in their evidence indicates that funding NASA would be enough to deter
the German alternative energy economy from growing

2. No link – their evidence is only specific to funding corporations and privates to do the plan – doesn’t assume SBSP
development and funding to NASA

3. No link – their DOE evidence does not talk about the German alternative energy economy in the context of American
solar development – no trade-off

4. No internal link – the German economy is resilient and is not dependent on alternative energy production

The Independent, 5-16-2008, How to weather the financial storms; LEADING ARTICLE;
GERMANY, lexis
The economic news around much of the rich world is causing policymakers sleepless nights, but there was at least one source of
optimism out there yesterday. According to Germany's Federal Statistics Office, the eurozone's largest economy is growing at its
fastest rate since 1996. German gross national product expanded by 1.5 per cent in the first three months of this year - double
the predictions of many analysts.
So why is Germany bucking the miserable trend? The country seems to be benefiting from labour market reforms of recent years
and a resurgence of exports. Unemployment has fallen and consumer demand has risen. Analysts are also arguing that the milder
weather in January and February boosted the domestic construction industry. We must not get carried away. Schadenfreude in Berlin
at the calamity that has befallen the "Anglo-Saxon" economies would be a most inappropriate reaction. German investment banks
have lost a lot of money in the financial meltdown, thanks to their foolish investments in US sub-prime mortgage packages. And even
after the necessary recalculations are made in the light of this surge in output, German growth is still projected to be lower in 2008
than it was in 2007. The credit crunch and higher commodity prices will see to that. Moreover, the country is particularly
vulnerable to a decline in demand for German products in the US. And the rising value of the euro will act to depress exports.
But, nevertheless, Germany does seem to be proving rather more resilient in the face of these malign economic forces than
many other European countries, notably Britain. And these latest figures should give us pause to consider the merits of a balanced
economy.

5. Cross-apply impact calc

2
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

AT: German Competitiveness – EU Econ Won’t Collapse

No impact – the EU economy won’t collapse – strong fundamentals

The Times, 1-30-2008, Wednesday, Don't panic, say EU leaders in call for financial shock absorbers, lexis

Europe's most powerful leaders issued a "don't panic" message last night as they called for stronger international
protection against shocks such as Northern Rock and the American sub-prime mortgage crisis.
Gordon Brown played host in Downing Street to Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President, Angela Merkel, the German
Chancellor, Romano Prodi, the Italian caretaker Prime Minister, and Jose Manuel Barroso, the head of the EU Commission.
They were performing a difficult balancing act, showing that they were aware of the need for fresh action to safeguard
against financial turbulence while not allowing their unprecedented gathering to provoke market alarm. Mr Barroso admitted
that the European Union's economy was "not completely immune" to a US downturn but insisted that "nobody is speaking
about a recession in Europe".
"Yes, there is turbulence in the financial markets," he said in Brussels, but "there is no need to rush for the lifeboats". The
leaders agreed that while the "fundamentals" of the European economy remained sound, new institutional arrangements were
needed to combat international shocks.
Mr Barroso said: "It is clear that the recent turmoil in the financial markets requires vigilance. None of us are insulated from
what happens on financial markets. Excessive volatility affects confidence throughout the economy.
"So, we cannot be complacent. But we can be confident. The fundamentals of the EU economy are sound. "We have
thelowest unemployment rate for 25 years. We have a positive current account balance. The euro is strong. We remain
on the growth path.
"What is needed now is action that is both targeted and proportionate. We must not be tempted into protectionism, or
futile attempts to stem financial globalisation, or an artificial stimulus of the economy.

3
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

AT: German Competitiveness – AE not Key

Alternative Energy isn’t key – cost competitiveness is the cause of Germany’s

economic upswing
The Economist, 1-27-2007, Beggar thy neighbour; The euro area's economy, lexis

THE economy of the euro area is basking in a rare period of optimism. Growth forecasts ended the year higher than at the start of the
year, the first time this has happened since 2000. The growth differential with America's economy has narrowed and is expected to
contract further this year. But in an economy that comprises 13 diverse nations, such blessings are rarely unmixed. A particular
concern is that the recent resurgence at the euro zone's core could portend a protracted slump at its periphery. Germany has been the
source of much of the recent good news in Europe. For so long a laggard in the euro area, its economy is now growing faster than
the regional average. Unemployment, though still high, has dropped sharply in the last two years. The latest survey from Ifo, a
Munich economic-research institute, shows that business confidence remains close to a 15-year high. Exports and business
investment are doing well. Understandable doubts remain about the durability of Germany's revival: consumer spending has so far
failed to take off convincingly. Yet arguably the German economy is on a sounder footing than at any time since reunification
(see page 87). Germany's recovery in cost competitiveness has been crucial to its reviving fortunes. Declining real wages and a
modest upswing in productivity have together produced a sustained drop in unit labour costs. Lower wage costs, in turn, have
helped boost exports and jobs. Hope for a lasting German recovery is mixed with concern about the outlook for countries
where wage discipline has been less strict. In Italy and Portugal, for example, a combination of strong wage increases and weak
productivity growth has undermined cost competitiveness.

4
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

Innovation Key

Innovation key to the U.S. economy

Bill Gates, 2-25-07, no quals needed, How to Keep America Competitive, Washington Post, lexis

Innovation is the source of U.S. economic leadership and the foundation for our competitiveness in the global economy.
Government investment in research, strong intellectual property laws and efficient capital markets are among the reasons that
America has for decades been best at transforming new ideas into successful businesses. The most important factor is our
workforce. Scientists and engineers trained in U.S. universities -- the world's best -- have pioneered key technologies such as the
microprocessor, creating industries and generating millions of high-paying jobs. But our status as the world's center for new ideas
cannot be taken for granted. Other governments are waking up to the vital role innovation plays in competitiveness. This is not
to say that the growing economic importance of countries such as China and India is bad. On the contrary, the world benefits as more
people acquire the skills needed to foster innovation. But if we are to remain competitive, we need a workforce that consists of the
world's brightest minds.

5
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

Gov Key

Government leadership is key – space programs generate technology that is

key to the economy
Aviation Week and Space Technology, 3-19-2007, The 50 years Since Sputnik and The Next 50, lexis

In the U.S., arguably the leader in space exploration, we've seen little evidence in the past 20 years of the national leadership it
takes to inspire our country and citizens to commit more resources to space exploration. The bold vision President Bush
articulated three years ago held promise but since then, we have heard almost nothing about space exploration from the Oval Office.
The potential of space exploration to improve our lives is vast, probably greater than any human endeavor in history. The
launch of Sputnik alone triggered an overhaul of the U.S. education system and a renaissance in science and math that
underpins today's information economy.

6
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

Gov Key
Government is key to space – stimulates innovation necessary to solvency
Aviation Week & Space Technology, 3-19-2007, The 50 years Since Sputnik and The Next 50, lexis

Governments should retain their traditional roles of developing pre-competitive space systems, better ways to get large
payloads to space. The 130-ton-capacity Ares V rocket NASA hopes to develop for lunar and Mars exploration also can serve
commercial interests, as can more advanced systems such as the long-awaited air-breathing hypersonic jets. And, of course,
governments should also support space science, in part for the spinoff potential from the engineering that goes into scientific
spacecraft and instruments. In fact, pursuit of space goals generates innovations in virtually all fields of science and technology,
and thus helps stimulate progress in areas unrelated to the original effort. If the U.S. and other spacefaring nations are able to
work toward a common goal in space, innovations almost certainly await that we can't even begin to imagine.

7
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

AT: Plan Causes Backlash

Space engenders cooperation between nations

Aviation Week & Space Technology, 3-19-2007, The 50 years Since Sputnik and The Next 50, lexis

The excitement afforded by space exploration has had similar effects in other nations as well, most recently India and China. Today,
U.S. technical hegemony faces unprecedented competition from abroad, but space is a place where the U.S. and its partners
enjoy unprecedented technical cooperation as well. A sustained effort to achieve a bold objective 10 or 20 years in the future
could well be the catalyst needed to inspire more young people around the world to pursue technical degrees and more
cooperation. That in itself would be a huge dividend, even more than the inevitable new generations of products and processes
that spin off from space activities. For aerospace, the industry we cover, it's time for a shift to a real commercial-space marketplace
in low Earth orbit. Government space programs are a nice cash cow to milk, but the real potential of commercial space won't be
realized until we move into cost-driven mass production of all types of space systems--manned and unmanned--for a mass industrial
and consumer market. Space tourism is only the tip of the iceberg.

8
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

Space Key to Econ

Space tech is key to the economy and military – remaining at the forefront of
space innovation is essential

William C. Martel is a professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Rhode Island and Toshi Yoshihara is a
doctoral candidate at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, and a research fellow at the Institute for Foreign
Policy Analysis in Massachusetts., Averting a Sino-U.S. Space Race, The Washington Quarterly 26.4 (2003) 19-35,
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/washington_quarterly/v026/26.4martel.html

Conventional wisdom holds that space is so vital to national security and economic prosperity that the United States will
do whatever it takes to protect its ability to use space. This rationale was enshrined in an influential report issued in January
2001 by a blue-ribbon commission on space, 1 headed by Donald Rumsfeld before he became secretary of defense, which
strongly advocated greater protection for U.S. space assets. The Rumsfeld Commission asserted that "[t]he security and
economic well being of the United States and its allies and friends depend on the nation's ability to operate successfully
in space. To be able to contribute to peace and stability in a distinctly different but still dangerous and complex global
environment, the [United States] needs to remain at the forefront in space, technologically and operationally, as we have
in the air, on land and at sea." 2 Furthermore, the report argued that "the present extent of U.S. dependence on space, the
rapid pace at which this dependence is increasing, and the vulnerabilities it creates, all demand that U.S. national
security space interests be recognized as a top national security priority." In economic terms, the United States relies on
space technologies and capabilities to support a wide range of commercial activities. Among the most important
commercial assets in space is the constellation of Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation satellites. The precise timing
signals emitted from the GPS allow automobiles, aircraft, and ships to locate their positions and establish the chronological
order for virtually all financial transactions. Indeed, the global financial network would collapse without GPS. Equally
important, commercial satellites carry most global communications. Despite the phenomenal growth rate of fiber optics
networks, commercial satellites still dominate long-haul global communications. The United States is extraordinarily
dependent on space for its national security. 4 The U.S. military has integrated space technologies into virtually all aspects
of military operations, dramatically improving U.S. military power. Since the 1991 Persian Gulf War, which is widely
considered the first "space war," the Pentagon has relied on electro-optical, hyperspectral, infrared, and radar satellites to
see what is happening on the battlefield.

9
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

Challengers Rising
China is threatening US space dominance now – it’s perceived as key to
modernization

William C. Martel is a professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Rhode Island and Toshi Yoshihara is a
doctoral candidate at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, and a research fellow at the Institute for Foreign
Policy Analysis in Massachusetts., Averting a Sino-U.S. Space Race, The Washington Quarterly 26.4 (2003) 19-35,
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/washington_quarterly/v026/26.4martel.html

As with the United States, China's objectives in space reflect broad commercial and military interests. From an economic perspective,
the PRC views the exploitation of space as an integral part of its modernization drive, a top priority on Beijing's national
agenda. 8 The rapid growth of China's economy in the past two decades has fueled investments in civilian space capabilities
for several reasons. First, the explosive growth of the Chinese telecommunications market has spurred China to put both
indigenous and foreign-made networks of communications satellites into orbit to keep pace with demand. Second, China's
relatively inexpensive and increasingly reliable launchers have enabled Beijing to provide satellite-launching services to major
international customers. Third, China recognizes that space research at the frontier of scientific knowledge promises innovative
breakthroughs that are likely to strengthen its economic power and technological capabilities in the long term. As a result of
these economic imperatives, the Chinese government has invested substantial resources in a robust space program. The PRC has
developed a comprehensive scientific and industrial base capable of producing commercial space launchers and satellites. Chinese
launch vehicles, which have become increasingly reliable and competitive in the international market, can place a variety of satellites
—including those used for communications, remote sensing, photo reconnaissance, meteorology, and scientific research—into earth
orbit. Furthermore, since 1999, China's involvement in preparations for manned space flight has attracted substantial
international attention. In the case of national security, China's space program is shrouded in extreme secrecy, effectively
shielding Chinese intentions and capabilities from outside observers. The PRC's official policy is to support the exploitation of space
for economic, scientific, and cultural benefits while firmly opposing any militarization of space.

10
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

2AC: GT Heg F/L

1NC 1 – space mil kills heg

1. No link – we don’t send weapons into space

2. Even if they win that we militarize space

Space weaponization good for heg

Everett C. Dolman, , 9-14-05 Associate Professor of Comparative Military Studies at the U.S. Air Force, “US Military Transformation
and Weapons in Space,” http://www.e-
parl.net/pages/space_hearing_images/ConfPaper%20Dolman%20US%20Military%20Transform%20%26%20Space.pdf

This rationality does not dispute the fact that US deployment of weapons in outer space would represent the addition of a potent
new military capacity, one that would assist in extending the current period of American hegemony well into the future. This
would clearly be threatening, and America must expect severe condemnation and increased competition in peripheral areas. But such
an outcome is less threatening than any other state doing so. Placement of weapons in space by the United States would be
perceived correctly as an attempt at continuing American hegemony. Although there is obvious opposition to the current
international balance of power, the status quo, there is also a sense that it is at least tolerable to the majority of states. A continuation
of it is thus minimally acceptable, even to states working towards its demise. So long as the US does not employ its power
arbitrarily, the situation would be bearable initially and grudgingly accepted over time.

1NC 2 – Russia-China Co-op

1. Space mil isn’t perceived

Karl P. Mueller; 5-8-02; “Debating The Space Weaponization Debate” Rand,

http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/TotemandTabooGWUpaperRevised%5B1%5D.pdf

Space weapons (here and below in this section we will use this term in its widest possible sense for the sake of simplicity) can employ
a wide range of mechanisms to affect their targets. The most obvious are conventional explosive, other kinetic energy, and directed
energy (e.g. laser and radio frequency) weapons, which together occupy the middle range of this continuum, and seem clearly to
qualify as weapons. Above these are nuclear weapons (and perhaps biological and chemical weapons, though the latter is especially
unlikely for space weapons employment), the only category of weapon whose deployment in space is proscribed by international law
or treaty.5 More interesting in political terms is the other end of the spectrum: devices or techniques that could have weapon-like
effects but whose status as weapons is ambiguous. These include such things as electronic jamming of communications and
telemetry, barriers with which to shade satellite solar panels or obstruct the view of space-based sensors, and space “special
forces” capabilities, including direct human or mechanical interference with or sabotage of satellites in orbit

2. Plan spurs international cooperation

Aviation Week & Space Technology, 3-19-2007, The 50 years Since Sputnik and The Next 50, lexis

The excitement afforded by space exploration has had similar effects in other nations as well, most recently India and China. Today,
U.S. technical hegemony faces unprecedented competition from abroad, but space is a place where the U.S. and its partners
enjoy unprecedented technical cooperation as well. A sustained effort to achieve a bold objective 10 or 20 years in the future
could well be the catalyst needed to inspire more young people around the world to pursue technical degrees and more
cooperation. That in itself would be a huge dividend, even more than the inevitable new generations of products and processes
that spin off from space activities. For aerospace, the industry we cover, it's time for a shift to a real commercial-space marketplace
in low Earth orbit.

11
Competitiveness
DDI 2008 <CM>
Brendan Burke

3. A Sino-Russian alliance wouldn’t collapse US technological dominance – NASA is key to innovation – that’s our
Mankins evidence

1NC 3 – space mil causes backlash

1. Cross-apply answers from above

2. Read counter-balancing won’t happen

1NC 4 – causes counterbalancing

1. Cross-apply answers from above
2. Their evidence doesn’t assume solar power satellites

12