Wake PZ 1NC v. UMKC DW Texas 2 R3 - deaconsource

olivinephysiologistInternet και Εφαρμογές Web

5 Δεκ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 4 μήνες)

92 εμφανίσεις

Waivers CP


CP TEXT: The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services should
exempt highly skilled
workers in the field of clean technology from the annual cap on H
-
1B visas.


Waivers solve H1B.

Gary
Endelman
,
immigration law a
t BP America Inc,
Edit
orial Advisory Board of Immigration Daily

and
Cyrus D. Mehta
,
founder and managing attorney of Cyrus D. Mehta & Associates, PLLC, a New York law firm
which concentrates in the area of US immigration law
, 4
-
25
-
10
,
comprehensive immigrati
on reform through
ex
ecutive fiat, insightful immigration blog,
http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/2010/04/comprehensive
-
immigration
-
reform.html

In another display of Executive legerdemain, in March of 2000,
a

former
INS official

Mr. Cronin, in a Memo,
http://www.boulettegolden.co
m/H_and_L_Travel_and_Advance_Parole.pdf,
allowed nonimmigrants
holding H
-
1B

or L status
to

travel overseas while their adjustment of status applications were pending and
be
admitted on

advance
parole

and still be able to work as if they were in H
-
1B or L s
tatus without first obtaining
an EAD. The following Q&A extract in Mr. Cronin’s memo is worth noting: 4. If an H
-
1 or L
-
1 nonimmigrant
has traveled abroad and reentered the United States via advance parole, the alien is accordingly in parole
status. How d
oes the interim rule affect that alien’s employment authorization? A Service memorandum dated
August 5, 1997, stated that an ‘adjustment applicant’s otherwise valid and unexpired nonimmigrant
employment authorization…is not terminated by his or her tempor
ary departure from the United States, if
prior to such departure the applicant obtained advance parole in accordance with 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii).’ The
Service intends to clarify this issue in the final rule. Until then, if the alien’s H
-
1B or L
-
1 employment

authorization would not have expired, had the alien not left and returned under advance parole, the Service will
not consider a paroled adjustment applicant’s failure to obtain a separate employment authorization document
to mean that the paroled adjustme
nt applicant engaged in unauthorized employment by working for the H
-
1 or
L
-
1 employer between the date of his or her parole and the date to be specified in the final rule. A close
examination of this astonishingly creative policy reveals that the Executi
ve presumably allowed such an
individual to continue working without any formal work document.
Admitting an H
-
1B on

advance
parole
(and
thus presumably as a parolee rather than as an H
-
1B nonimmigrant), and allowing him or her to extend H
-
1B
status subsequ
ently, while

permitting this individual to continue working for the employer without an EAD,
required creative thinking on
the part of the government. These are a few examples of how the Executive has creatively found ameliorative
solutions within the

fou
r corners of the
INA
.


EPA 1NC

A.

Uniqueness


EPA regulations are coming now; pol cap is key.

Steven
Cohen
, executive director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, “Defending EPA Against the Coming Right Wing Attack,”
12/28
/2010, http://www.huff
ingtonpost.com/steven
-
cohen/defending
-
epa
-
against
-
the_b_801876.html


Last week I wrote that
it is good politics for President Obama to protect and defend EPA
:


Right wing efforts to curtail EPA and slow down environmental regulation and enforcement
will

fail

and can
easily be painted as the views of extremists. Protecting the environment remains as mainstream an issue as you can find. Peop
le define environmental
quality as a form of security and think of it as a way that they protect their families and t
he health of their children. The notion that environmental
regulation "kills jobs" competes with the more powerful perception that pollution is poison that can make your family sick. W
hile environmental
regulation must be portrayed as "reasonable" and regu
latory agencies must move prudently and without arrogance, public support for environmental
protection remains strong. People like to breathe air, drink water and eat food that is not poisoned by toxins.

I am not alone in my concern about the attack that
is coming. On December 24 the New York Times lead editorial was entitled: "A Coming Assault on the
EPA." That editorial predicted that:


Republicans
in the next Congress
are obviously set on limiting the E
nvironmental
P
rotection
A
gency's
authority
under

the Clean Air Act to regulate a wide range of air pollutants
--

even if it means
denying the agency money to run

its
programs

and chaining its administrator, Lisa Jackson, to the witness stand.

I don't see the symbolic posturing or preening Representative
s as a threat to the EPA, but
the cynical right wing strategy of "starving the
beast" by
cutting funding could pose a grave threat
to this chronically underfunded agency
. EPA is a very decentralized
and relatively small federal agency. Throughout the anti
-
environmental Bush years, EPA was starved financially. When Bush came into office in 2001
EPA's annual budget was about $8 billion and by the time he left it had declined to about $7.5 billion. These data are not pr
esented in constant dollars,
and so the p
urchasing power of EPA's budget declined substantially during the Bush years. EPA had a staff of about 18,000 when Bush arriv
ed at the
White House, by the time he left it had declined to about 17,200. Most of EPA's staff is not in Washington but in the ten

regional offices around the
nation that work closely with state and municipal governments to manage our environment. Under President Obama, the EPA's res
ource picture has
been improving. The agency's budget is finally over $10 billion, and the staff size
is gradually approaching 18,000 again.

Since funding bills must begin in the

now Republican controlled
House
of Representatives,
the threat to EPA's
funding is real
. President
Obama will need to use his political capital to defend the EPA's budget.
Ten
bil
lion dollars may be a lot of money, but not when compared to the entire federal budget. In the military budget it would be a
rounding error. While
defending EPA will be good politics, it is even better public policy. America is learning that sustainable ec
onomic development requires the protection of
our ecosphere. Polluting the planet poisons our water, air and food and impairs human health and well being. We have already
spent hundreds of billions
of public and private dollars on toxic waste clean up. The

Chinese government will soon be learning the same lesson as it pays the costs of its rapid
economic expansion. BP learned that lesson last summer in the Gulf of Mexico.


B.

Congress hates H
-
1B visas

Johnson and Bhagwati, 09



Staff Writer for CFR.org and
Senior Fellow for International Economics,
Council on Foreign Relations (Toni and Jagdish N, 11/12. “Stricter Rules for Skilled
-
Worker Visas Are a
Mistake.” Council on Foreign Relations.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/20732/stricter_rules_for_skilledworker
_visas_are_a_mistake.html)


As for H
-
1Bs, the current recession has meant that, owing to a mix of low demand and more obstacles devised by U.S. legislators, the u
tilization of even a
small H
-
1B quota has fallen off. But that is surely a temporary phenomeno
n. Once the recession is behind us, our ability to use many more H
-
1Bs will
certainly revive and should be indulged by our legislators.

Senators

Dick
Durbin

[D
-
IL]
and

Charles
Grassley

[R
-
IA
]
are pushing a bill that will crackdown on

"abuse" of
H
-
1B visas
.

Earlier this year
,
Grassley sent a letter to Microsoft, urging the company to fire H
-
1B visa holders before laying off
Americans
.

What are the senators trying to accomplish and how would the bill affect the program?

It will be most unfortunate to go down

that road, particularly once the recession is over. Our open society with relatively free immigration, continued
freeing of trade, expanding role for multinationals, and equity investments
-
all of these in the post
-
war period have led to unprecedented pros
perity. This
is generally true worldwide. The big emerging powers like India and China also owe their huge jump in prosperity to increased

embrace of openness,
among other liberal reforms, especially since the early 1990s. Two decades of phenomenal growth
there have seen nearly 500 million of their poor
"pulled up" into gainful employment and out of extreme poverty.

So, we ought to stick to our relative openness on trade and on immigration despite and particularly during the current recess
ion
.
If everybody
starts, as Durbin and Grassley want us to do, hiring natives first and firing them last, Americans will lose jobs

from Britain and France. Even India hires a lot of foreigners, like [U.S.] pilots. It is something that will lead to
--
what in the 1930s we use
d to call a
"beggar thy neighbor" policy
--
where each beggars the other. If we were the only one doing it, we could say that our hire
-
America policies will keep our
jobs to ourselves. But if others start doing that too
-
then we [all] are behind the curve.




C.

EPA regulations are key to solve climate change, econ, and competitiveness.

Brendan
Smith
, Co
-
founder of the labor network for sustainability, “5 Reasons Why EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gasses Is Good for Labor,”
11/30
/2010, http://www.huffingtonpost.
com/brendan
-
smith/5
-
reasons
-
why
-
epa
-
regulat_b_789737.html


While American labor unions have been heavily involved in the discussion of climate legislation and green jobs,
since the defeat of climate
legislation few have publicly raised their voices yet on
EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses. Here are five
reasons they should support it
.

1. Labor has identified "green jobs" as the key to its future. But recent experience shows that
there is no way to grow green jobs without
putting the
pressure
on
to reduce
emissions

--

that's why green jobs have been growing so slowly in the US.
EPA regulation is a
powerful tool
to do that.
Only with

such
pressure

will the many players in the US economy
use

whatever
subsidies and public investments are made to actually creat
e green jobs
by transitioning to a lower
-
GHG basis
.
Compared with overall spending in the economy, spending on environmental protection and clean
-
up employs more than twice as many workers in
construction (11 percent versus 4 percent) and 25 percent more i
n manufacturing (20 percent versus 16 percent). Plant closings and layoffs in response to
environmental regulation are very rare, affecting only one
-
tenth of 1 percent of all layoffs nationwide.
Science
-
based
targets and timelines
are essential to
spur inv
estment

and
create green jobs
.

2.
US standards are necessary to keep other countries from capturing the entire climate protection industry.

In
the absence of carbon reduction policies, US companies have little incentive to invest in low
-
carbon energy techn
ologies like wind and solar. As a result,
corporations have
actually
been taking manufacturing jobs away from the US

and moving them
to countries
like China that are
investing
heavily
in carbon
-
reducing tech
nologies
.
A strong domestic clean
-
energy industry

will only develop when we have a strong domestic demand for clean energy
. Right now
EPA regulation is

a
crucial

means to achieve that.

3.
EPA regulation will strengthen domestic manufacturing
. A recent study by the World Resources Institute shows that
new

restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions will lead to corporate investment in energy efficiency. That in turn
will lead to energy cost savings
for American manufacturers. Not to mention new jobs

created by that investment.

4. Climate change is already thr
eatening millions of American jobs. A study from the University of Maryland concludes that, "
The true economic
impact of climate change is fraught with 'hidden' costs." These costs will vary regionally and will put a strain on
public sector budgets
. For ex
ample, even under current conditions, the combined storm impact for the nation since 1980 has surpassed $560
billion. More frequent and intense storms would raise the price tag even higher. A recent study of the economic effects of cl
imate change on Califo
rnia
found that the damages if no action is taken will include tens of billions of dollars per year in direct costs, even higher i
ndirect costs, and trillions of
dollars of assets exposed to climate risk.

5.
Climate
-
destroying
greenhouse gas emissions must

be reduced
to the level climate science says is acceptable
-

the consequences of not doing so are just too devastating
. With labor
-
supported climate legislation defeated,
EPA
regulation is the primary means available now to get started
.
While the cuts man
dated by the EPA are
far less than those in labor
-
supported climate legislation, and far below targets established by climate scientists
as necessary to avoid the worst effects of climate change,
they
do
provide an opportunity to start moving in the
right
direction.

For the sake of its members, their communities, and their children,
organized labor must help take the lead
.

Of course, the fossil fuel lobby, climate change deniers, and right
-
wing ideologues are trying to scare American workers that climate pr
otection will mean
vast loss of jobs. But
most studies indicate

exactly the opposite:
money invested in the transition to clean energy will
produce far more jobs than continuing to expand the use of fossil fuels
. For example, a research group at the Univer
sity of
Massachusetts, Amherst estimates that $150 billion in clean
-
energy spending will generate 1.7 million new jobs.


C
ommodification K 1NC


A.

The aff creates and reinforces dichotomies and classifications of immigrants, which
uphold the global neolibe
ral order of commodification, deregulation, and devaluation,
resulting in war.

Aziz
Choudry
, assistant professor in the Department of
Integrated Studies in Education

at McGill University, “‘Free Trade’, Neoliberal Immigration
& The Globalization Of Guestwo
rker Programs,” 6/16/
2008
, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0806/S00213.htm


The Declaration of Philadelphia, now an annexe to the International Labour Organization (ILO) constitution, unequivocally sta
tes: “Labour is not a
commodity” . The ILO is hardly a

radical organization, nor is this statement a radical proposition. Yet today, workers, especially
migrant workers,
are routinely commodified,

through
domestic, regional and international instruments, policies and
agreements. These include the expansion of

temporary
migrant worker programs
, and disputes over the
interpretation of labour mobility provisions

in free trade and investment agreements such as the World Trade Organization (WTO)
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), and bilateral and regio
nal free trade and investment agreements (FTAs) outside of the WTO. In this
presentation, I will talk about the links between the resurgence of guestworker programs, migrant workers, and free trade, ma
inly in reference to the
Asia
-
Pacific.

For all of the t
alk of postcolonialism in some circles, in 2008, Third World countries are treated as little more than colonies of transnatio
nal corporations
(TNCs) and powerful governments for natural resource extraction: notably minerals, energy, biodiversity, and even
people, either as labour commodities
for export themselves, or producing for export in free trade/special economic zones (FTZs/SEZs), and industrial agriculture.
This system of
capitalist relations is backed by
war, the militarization of borders, conflict
-

and poverty
-
fuelled
forced migration
, and in turn, the criminalization of many migrants and immigrants
. Justin Akers Chacón calls this
phenomenon “neoliberal immigration”
-

“displacement accompanied by disenfranchisement and often internal segregation in
host countries” .

Neoliberal policies force people from their farms, jobs, families and communities and into exploitation and
precarity as migrant workers
in other countries. Deindustrialization and the downsizing and privatization of
essential services



accompanied by increasing user fees
-

are other “push factors”, forcing growing numbers to seeking work abroad. Health and
education professionals in shattered public sectors are forced to migrate in search of work. Free trade, its advocates (like
the US A
dministration)
promise, will supposedly lead to a reduction of immigration because countries will become more prosperous. Washington proclai
med that the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) would lead Mexico to export goods, and not people to the US
, yet so
-
called illegal
immigration to the US has
risen
.

In looking at how free trade and investment agreements can and do affect migrant workers, it is important to frame our unders
tanding of them as
comprehensive instruments of imperialism, and avoid com
partmentalizing or reducing the discussion to technical trade policy analysis talk which clouds
a more critical “big picture” analysis.

We are witnessing the entrenchment of immigration apartheid
.
A global

(often Western
-
)
educated elite is
relatively mobi
le, but of those who are able to leave their home countries at all, the overwhelming majority of
migrants are temporary, non
-
status, exploitable, and often underground
/“illegal”.

Immigration
requirements have tended to become more elitist
, refugee systems
leave fewer avenues for appeal,
and for many,
permanent residence is harder to attain
. Meanwhile, in both migrant
-
worker sending and receiving countries, a more general trend of
state withdrawal for responsibility for provision of social services impacts l
ocal and migrant workers alike. Worldwide,
the neoliberal offensive
has also eroded trades jobs, attacked unionism, imposed policies of labour deregulation, flexibilization,
casualization, expanded subcontracting chains, and the relocation of industry to c
heaper production sites. In
some cases, these changes have fuelled exclusionary or racist practices within unions towards new immigrants
,
instead of solidarity and support for struggles for workplace justice and within wider society.
Immigration status is
used as a tool
by governments and business elites to undermine alliance
-
building among workers, while
immigrants still make convenient scapegoats for politicians

the world over
. Simultaneously, there is a
widespread reluctance and denial in many countries
to admit the extent to which their economies depend on migrant labour.

In temporary migrant worker schemes,
migrant workers are commodities, pure and simple, temporary labour
units to be recruited, utilized and sent away again as employers require, tied to

a specific
employer, and therefore often stuck with worse conditions with little recourse to improve them
.
In this context, discrimination and exploitation because of race, immigration status, class, and gender play out together. Wo
men migrant workers are

particularly impacted, comprising the majority in sectors with the least protections, lowest wages and most demeaning conditi
ons. Typically,
guestworkers are not allowed to join unions, so have no collective bargaining power. Sometimes they are not paid o
n time or maybe not paid at all, may
endure unsafe and unhealthy working conditions, and receive wages far below the average paid to local workers for equivalent
work, toiling long hours,
and perhaps be more willing to accept this situation because of the
relatively short duration of their employment abroad, and are subject to abuse from
employers.
The labour of international migrants is systematically devalued
. Skilled migrants frequently leave their
countries only to find their qualifications and experien
ce are not valued in the new country, so are locked into
low
-
skilled jobs .

Migrant workers and remittances are a key area of interest to the World Bank

, the European Commission, and the
International Organization for Migration (IOM)
and other internation
al agencies, which increasingly promote the concept of
migrant workers' family remittances to keep their native countries from collapsing
. Remittances are what Devesh Kapur,
in a 2004 UNCTAD/G
-
24 discussion paper calls “the new development mantra” .
The gr
owing dependence on remittances from
migrant workers puts many countries at the mercy of vagaries of anti
-
immigrant sentiment and immigration
(and other) policies of other countries
.
Locked into a neoliberal model, countries that have grown
dependent on ex
porting workers often have shrinking policy space to pursue other options for
economic development.

Growth of remittances has outpaced that of private capital flows and official development assistance (ODA) during
the last 15 yrs . A 2007 UN International
Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)/Interamerican Development Bank (IDB) report showed that
migrant remittances were over US $ 300 billion in 2006 , well over twice what ODA contributed. Of course, migration is certai
nly not only a South
-
North
phenome
non, but occurs among countries in the South, Indonesian workers in Malaysia, South Asians in Gulf, Filipina caregivers in Sy
ria, Lebanon, and
dozens of other countries, and Zimbabwean and Mozambican workers in South Africa, as last month’s anti
-
migrant wo
rker violence tragically reminds
us.


b. labor movement is the
critical site

for examining neoliberalism


it represents the
intersection of the global movement of capital as well as the widening of market relations that
allows its ideology to spread.

Hen
k
Overbeek
, associate professor in international relations at the Free University, Amsterdam, “Neoliberalism and the Regulati
on of
Global Labor Mobility,” May
2002
,
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences
, JSTOR


I
n fact,
the selective criminalization of specific forms of migration and the privileged treatment of other types of
mobility is functional not only in the context of proliferating neoliberal labor market reforms but also in the
context of redrawing the bou
ndaries of the regions concerned
. Both in the case of the Americas and in the case of Europe, we
observe the restructuring of regional hierarchies. Certain countries or regions are gradually integrated into the OECD heartl
and (Mexico, Central Europe,
and p
ossibly in the long run, Turkey). These
countries are themselves becoming destination countries for migrants from
the outer layers of the emerging new regional geohierarchies

(just as a decade ago the southern European countries made the
transition from mi
grant
-
sending to migrant
-
receiving countries against the background of their integration into the hegemonic structures of the West).
Other countries are recast in the role of dependent (semi
-
) peripheries, whose migrant workers are admitted to
the heartlan
d countries only on the strictest conditions, and who are themselves burdened with the task of
policing their borders with the external world whose people can come in only as illegal migrants

(and in decreasing
measure as asylum seekers) (cf. van Buuren 19
99).6

To summarize this section,
Neoliberal restructuring of the global economy involves both the deepening and the
widening of market relations and the transformation of governance structures.
Labor has a specific role in
this process
: because internation
al labor migration is only one way in which global capital can access the
emerging global labor market, the emerging global regime for labor involves both the disciplining of labor and
the selective freeing of the mobility of labor. There is clearly a tens
ion between regulating migration under the
auspices of global neoliberalism on one hand and upholding the values of democratic governance on the other
.

When we turn to discuss the contours of a possible new comprehensive framework for the regulation of glo
bal migration in the next section, we shall
therefore emphasize the importance of democratic multilateralism as a safeguard against downward harmonization through discip
linary neoliberal
policy competition.



c.

Commodification of humanity makes human ext
inction inevitable through the
destruction of democracy and destruction of human ethics.

Boaventura de Souza
Santos
, Professor of Sociology at the University of Coimbra, Collective Suicide?,
http://www.ces.fe.uc.pt/opiniao/bss/072en.php
2003


According to
Franz Hinkelammert,
the West has repeatedly been under the illusion that it should try to
save humanity
by destroying part of it
. This is a salvific and
sacrificial destruction, committed in the name of the need to
radically materialize all the possibiliti
es opened up by a given social and political reality over which it is
supposed to have total power.
This is how it was in colonialism, with the genocide of indigenous peoples, and
the African slaves. This is how it was

in the period of imperialist struggle
s, which caused millions of deaths
in
two world wars
and many other colonial wars. This is how it was in Stalinism, with the Gulag and in Nazism,
with the holocaust
. And now today,
this is how it is in neoliberalism, with the collective sacrifice of the pe
riphery

and
even the semiperiphery
of the world system
. With the war against Iraq,
it is fitting to ask whether what is in progress is a new
genocidal and sacrificial illusion, and what its scope might be. It is above all appropriate to ask if the new
illu
sion will not herald the radicalization and the ultimate perversion of the western illusion: destroying all of
humanity in the illusion of saving it.

Sacrificial genocide arises from a totalitarian illusion that is manifested in
the belief that there are n
o alternatives to the present
-
day reality

and that the problems and difficulties
confronting it arise from failing to take its logic of development to its ultimate consequences. If there is
unemployment, hunger and
death in the Third World, this is not the

result of market failures; instead, it is the outcome
of the market laws not having been fully applied. If there is terrorism, this is not due to the violence of the
conditions that generate it; it is due, rather, to the fact that total violence has not b
een employed to physically
eradicate all terrorists and potential terrorists
.
This political logic is based on the supposition of total power and
knowledge, and on the radical rejection of alternatives; it is ultra
-
conservative in that it aims to infinitel
y
reproduce the status quo. Inherent to it is the notion of the
end of history
. During the last hundred years, the West has
experienced three versions of this logic, and, therefore, seen three versions of the end of history: Stalinism, with its logi
c of in
superable efficiency of the
plan; Nazism, with its logic of racial superiority; and

neoliberalism
, with its logic of insuperable efficiency of the market
. The first two
periods involved the destruction of democracy. The last one
trivializes democracy, disa
rming it in the face of
social actors sufficiently powerful to be able to privatize the State and international institutions

in their favour.
I have described this situation as a combination of political democracy and social fascism
. One current manifestat
ion of
this combination resides in the fact that intensely strong public opinion, worldwide, against the war is found to be incapabl
e of halting the war machine
set in motion by supposedly democratic rulers.
At all these moments,
a death drive
, a catastrop
hic heroism, predominates,
the idea of a looming collective suicide, only preventable by the massive destruction of the other
. Paradoxically, the
broader the definition of the other and the efficacy of its destruction, the more likely collective suicide be
comes. In its sacrificial genocide version,
neoliberalism is a mixture of market radicalization, neoconservatism and Christian fundamentalism.

Its death drive
takes a number of
forms, from the idea of "
discardable populations
"
, referring to citizens of the

Third World not capable of
being exploited
as workers and consumers, to the concept of "collateral damage", to refer to the deaths, as a
result of war, of thousands of innocent civilians.
The last, catastrophic heroism
, is quite clear on two facts: accord
ing to
reliable calculations by the Non
-
Governmental Organization MEDACT, in London, between 48 and 260 thousand civilians will die during the war and in
the three months after (this is without there being civil war or a nuclear attack); the war will cost
100 billion dollars, enough to pay the health costs of the
world's poorest countries for four years. Is it possible to fight this death drive?
We must bear in mind that, historically,
sacrificial
destruction has always been linked to the economic pillage o
f
natural resources and
the labor force
, to the
imperial design of radically changing the terms of economic, social, political and cultural exchanges in the face
of falling efficiency rates postulated by the maximalist logic of the totalitarian illusion in

operation. It is as
though hegemonic powers, both when they are on the rise and when they are in decline, repeatedly go through
times of primitive accumulation, legitimizing the most shameful violence in the name of futures where, by
definition, there is
no room for what must be destroyed. In today's version,
the period of primitive
accumulation consists of combining neoliberal economic globalization with the globalization of war.
The
machine of democracy and liberty turns into a machine of horror and dest
ruction
.


d.

The alternative is to
vote negative as a rejection of the 1AC and its foundations in
neoliberalism



critical examination and rejection is critical to open up new spaces for a
more democratic politics.

Henry A.
Giroux
, 11
-
2
-
06
,

Cultural Studie
s in Dark Times: Public Pedagogy and the Challenge of Neoliberalism,
http://firgoa.usc.es/drupal/node/25904


As collective agents recede under
neoliberalism,

market forces
incessantly attempt to privatize or
commercialize public space
. One consequence is t
hat
t
hose noncommodified spaces

and vernacular
capable of
providing
individuals with the discourses, values, and
subject positions crucial to identifying and struggling
over institutions vital to the life of democracy begin to disappear from the political
scene
. Under such
circumstances, matters of agency become even more crucial to viable democratic politics as those spaces
capable of producing critical modes of pedagogy increasingly slip into the black hole of commercialized space.
As public spaces disapp
ear, it becomes more difficult to develop a democratic
discourse for educating collective
social agents capable of raising critical questions about the limits of a market
-
driven society as well as what it
might mean to theorize about the future of public i
nstitutions central to the development of truly substantive
democratic society.

In the absence of public spaces that promote shared democratic values, a new authoritarian
politics and culture emerge in which the state makes a grim alignment with corporate
capital, neoconservative
visions of empire, and Christian fundamentalism. Political power is now accumulated behind an alliance of
economic, political, and religious fundamentalists who recognize that "military
-
like discipline abroad requires
military
-
like

discipline at home"

(Harvey 2003
:193).
Repressive legislation is used to sacrifice civil liberties in the
cause of national security; the government promotes a culture of fear to implement neoliberal policies at home
and neoconservative visions of empire
abroad; dissent is labeled as unpatriotic, and the media and political
parties increasingly become adjuncts of official power

(Giroux 2003; Barber 2003; Robin 2004).

As neoliberal economics is
accorded more respect than democratic politics, the citizen ha
s been abandoned and
the consumer becomes the only viable model of agency. As public spending decreases, education is divorced
from democratic politics and the

political state increasingly becomes the corporate state

(Hertz 2003). All the more reason to t
ake seriously Hannah Arendt's (1965)
claim that "
without a politically guaranteed public realm, freedom lacks the worldly space to make its appearance
"
(p.149 ). And
it is

precisely
within such a realm that subjects are socialized into forms of individual
and social agency
in which they learn how to govern rather than be governed, to assume the responsibilities

of engaged citizens
rather than be reduced to consumers or investors
. Arendt (1965) understood quite clearly that
democracy can only
emerge
, if not
flourish,
within political organizations in which education was viewed both as a
site of politics and as the foundation that provided the pedagogical conditions in which
individuals could learn the knowledge
, skills, and values
necessary for those forms of

citizenship
, leadership, and social engagement
that deepened and extended the realities of an
inclusive democracy.

Politics often begins when it becomes possible to
make

power

visible
, to
challenge

the

ideological

circuitry

of

hegemonic

knowledge
, and to
recognize that "political
subversion presupposes cognitive subversion, a conversion of the vision of the world
"(Bourdieu
2001:128).
But another element of politics focuses on where politics happens, how proliferating sites of pedagogy
bring into being
new

forms

of

resistance,

raise

new

questions,

and

necessitate

alternative

visions

regarding

autonomy

and the possibility of democracy itself. Neoliberal ideology and pedagogy have been
reproduced and reinforced within the advanced countries of the West through

the development of new sites of
pedagogy and new technologies that penetrate spaces that historically have been beyond the reach of the logic
of commercialism and commodification. Hence, it is all the more necessary for educators

and other cultural worker
s
to
take seriously both the proliferating sites of these new forms of ideological address and the work they do within
the social order to create agents and subject positions that become complicitous with the brutalizing logic of the
market.

At this point

in American history, neoliberal capitalism is not simply too overpowering; on the contrary, "democracy is too weak" (Barber 2
002:A23).
Profound transformations have taken place in the public space, producing new sites of pedagogy marked by a distinctive c
onfluence of new digital and
media technologies, growing concentrations of corporate power, and unparalleled meaning producing capacities. Unlike traditio
nal forms of pedagogy,
knowledge and desire are inextricably connected to modes of pedagogical address

mediated through unprecedented electronic technologies that include
high speed computers, new types of digitized film, and CD
-
ROMs. Such sites operate within a wide variety of social institutions and formats including
sports and entertainment media, cable

television networks, churches, and channels of elite and popular culture, such as advertising. The result is a public
pedagogy that plays a decisive role in producing a diverse cultural sphere that gives new meaning to education as a political

force.

Whi
le John Dewey, Paulo Freire, and various other leading educational theorists in the last century understood the important con
nection between
education and democracy, they had no way in their time of recognizing that the larger culture would extend beyond,
if not supercede, institutionalized
education, particularly schools, as the most important educational force over developed societies. In fact, education and ped
agogy have long been
synonymous with schooling in the public mind. Challenging such a recogniti
on does not invalidate the importance of formal education to democracy, but
it does require a critical understanding of how the work of education takes place in such institutions as well as in a range
of other knowledge and
meaning producing spheres such a
s advertising, television, film, the Internet, video game culture, and the popular press. Rather than invalidate the
importance of schooling, it extends the sites of pedagogy and in doing so broadens and deepens the meaning and importance of
public pedagog
y.
What
is being suggested here is that educators
, cultural studies theorists, and others
take seriously the role that culture plays
, as
Raymond Williams (1967:15) puts it, a
s a form of "permanent education
."

The concept of public pedagogy as a form of pe
rmanent education underscores the central importance of
formal spheres of learning that unlike their popular counterparts

driven largely by commercial interests that
more often miseducate the public

must provide citizens with those critical capacities, mod
es of literacies,
knowledge, and skills that enable them to both read the world critically and participate in shaping and
governing it
. Put differently,
formal spheres of learning provide one of the few sites where students can be educated
to understand, c
ritically engage, and transform those institutions that are largely shaping their beliefs and
sense of agency
.

I am not claiming that public or higher education are free from corporate influence and dominant ideologies, but
that

such
sites of education
, at

best,
have historically provided the spaces and conditions for prioritizing civic values over
commercial interests
, for recognizing that consumerism is not the only kind of citizenship, and for vouchsafing
the purpose and meaning of critical education in
a democratic society that bears its responsibility to present
and future generations of young people
. In spite of its present embattled status and contradictory roles,
higher education
, in
particular
, remains uniquely placed

though also under attack by the

forces of corporatization

to prepare
students to both understand and influence the larger educational forces that shape their lives
.

Needless to say, those of us
who work in such institutions by virtue of our privileged positions within a rather obvious d
ivision of labor have an obligation to draw upon those
traditions and resources capable of providing a critical education to all students in order to prepare them for a world in wh
ich information and power
have taken on new and significant dimensions. In f
act, the critique of information cannot be separated from the critique of power itself, providing a
substantial new challenge for how we are to theorize politics for the twenty
-
first century.

One way to take up this challenge is to address
the theoretical
contributions that a number of radical educators and cultural studies theorists have made in
engaging not only the primacy of culture as a political force, but also how the relationship between culture and
power constitutes a new site of politics, pedagogy
, and resistance.


Case
-

Econ


Economic decline doesn’t cause war

Morris
Miller
, economist,
adjunct professor in the University of Ottawa

s Faculty of Administration
,
consultant on international development issues
, former Executive Director and Senior Econ
omist at the World
Bank, Winter
2000
,
Interdisciplinary Science Reviews
, Vol.
25, Iss. 4
, “
Poverty as a cause of wars?
” p.
Proquest


The question may be reformulated.
Do wars spring from

a popular reaction to
a sudden economic crisis

that
exacerbates pover
ty and growing disparities in wealth and incomes? Perhaps one could argue, as some scholars
do, that it is some dramatic event or sequence of such events leading to the exacerbation of poverty that, in
turn, leads to

this deplorable denouement.

This exogen
ous factor might act as a catalyst for
a violent reaction

on the part of the people or on the part of the political leadership who would then possibly be tempted to seek a
diversion by finding or, if need be, fabricating an enemy and setting in train the p
rocess leading to war.
According to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace,
there would not appear to be any merit in this

hypothesis.
After studying ninety
-
three episodes of
economic crisis

in
twenty
-
two countries in Latin America and Asia in the years since the Second World War
they concluded that
:19
Much of the conventional wisdom about
the political impact of economic crises may be
wrong

... The severity of
economic crisis

-

as measured in te
rms of inflation and negative growth
-

bore no
relationship to the collapse of regimes ... (or
,

in democratic states, rarely)
to
an outbreak of violence

... In the
cases of dictatorships and semidemocracies, the ruling elites responded to crises by increas
ing repression
(thereby using one form of violence to abort another).



Experts aren’t able to gather all relevant economic data and create flawless prediction models


the few inevitable errors break the system

Paul
Hewitt

2010

(
http://torontopm.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/the
-
future
-
of
-
futarchy/
, 1/4/
2010
)

Hewitt
is a certified accountant with a research focus in information economics and a frequent contributor to Robin
Hanson'
s blog, a professor of economics at George Mason

and a DARPA researcher

who specializes in
economic predictions


Futarchy assumes

that if all

available, relevant,
information is made available to the public, speculators will be
able to discern fact from fi
ction and forecast the national welfare measure accurately. This assumes that at
there are a sufficient number of informed traders

that have a very good understanding of the issues and
information
and that they have decision models able to make accurate pr
edictions.

I’m reminded of the super
-
human, computer
-
brained, all
-
knowing beings that I met during neoclassical economic theory classes.

I
thought they had died off, but apparently, they’re back!

Forecasting national welfare

under futarchy
is an
incredibly

complex problem.

I don’t think it is even possible for speculators to make reasonably accurate
forecasts of national welfare.
They simply do not possess the knowledge or understanding, let alone a decision
model
, that would allow them to make accurate pre
dictions.

Even if the institution of futarchy provides
speculators with forecasts and asks them to bet on the most likely one, they still do not have the necessary tools
to make that decision.

If the traders don’t have enough information to make an accurat
e forecast, the market
will not create it.

Prediction markets merely aggregate available information held by the participants, they
don’t create new information through trading.

Prediction market proponents understand that each trader’s
prediction is an “a
ccurate” estimate combined with an “error” factor.

The assumption is that the errors cancel
out, leaving only the accurate information reflected in the market price.

I think this is likely to be true, but not
in every case.

Where the individual errors are
large, relative to

the known,
accurate information, the predicting
algorithm is likely to break down.

If you were to consider
a large number of traders, each with a very small
amount of information, it is highly unlikely that the market will function like
a jigsaw puzzle, putting all the
“good” pieces together and cancelling the “errors”.

The
large error factors will prevent any

algorithm from
generating a
reasonably accurate prediction.



Questionable data now and too many factors in the future make accura
te predictions
impossible

Paul
Hewitt 2010

(
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/01/hewitt
-
on
-
futarchy.html#more
-
21327
,
1/6/2010)

Hewitt is cited on Hanson’s blog:
Hewit
t is a certified accountant with a research focus in
information economics
. Robin Hanson is

a professor of economics at George Mason

and a DARPA researcher

who specializes in economic predictions


Whether it is possible for (very) long
-
term prediction mark
ets to be accurate, at the time the decision is made
(not 19 or 20 years hence, just before the outcome is determined).

Attempting to forecast total national welfare
measure

(GDP+) assuming the policy is enacted, which
is based on 20 or more years’ of futu
re statistics. In
those intervening 20 years or so, many new policies will be enacted, and every one of them will be expected to
improve the national welfare. What are the odds of such a prediction market being able to accurately

(and
consistently)
predict

the actual national welfare that will be determined over a 20 year period?

I’m sure Robin
will counter …
both decision markets were subject to the same uncertainty about the national welfare measure.

Of course they were.

This only means that both markets
must have been equally accurate prior to the policy
decision being triggered.

What are the odds?

How could we prove their accuracy? We don’t have very many
long
-
term prediction markets that can be tested.

… David Pennock’s analysis looked at the calibratio
n of long
-
term marke
ts 30 days prior to settlement.



The economy is growing and it’s stable now.

Neil
Irwin
, Washington Post, “Economy forecast to keep growing in 2011,”
12/31
/2010,
http://www.startribune.com/business/112734409.html?elr=KArks:DCiU1OiP:Dii
UiacyKUnciaec8O7EyUr


As 2011 begins,
the U
nited
S
tates
appears poised for its strongest year of

economic
growth

since the recession
began three years ago
.

While plenty of risks remain

that could undermine the recovery,
signposts

for the economy
are

genera
lly
looking up
: The pace of
growth accelerated in the final months of 2010
, according to a variety of indicators,
following a lull over the summer.
A wave of
government efforts

to boost growth is
starting to take effect
,
including a payroll tax cut

beginni
ng Jan. 1
and the delayed benefits of a massive Federal Reserve action

announced Nov. 3.
American
consumers have made progress

paying down their debts and increasing savings.
And
the stock market has risen steadily

in recent months, lifting businesses' con
fidence and consumers' wealth.

More generally,
a recovery that seemed tentative

and halting
a year ago now appears to be durable

and more
entrenched, having weathered its soft patch earlier in the year.

Macroeconomic Advisers
, one leading
forecasting firm,

estimates the U.S. economy will grow 4.4 percent in 2011
; Moody's Analytics expects 3.9
percent growth; IHS Global Insight envisions 3 percent growth.

Any of those numbers would represent an improvement over 2010.
Although official government numbers are
not out yet, gross domestic product looks to have grown 2.7 percent over the past year
, Moody's estimates.

"
The economy is on sturdier legs now
," said Robert Dye, senior economist at PNC Financial Services Group.
"
We're making a transition to a broader, mo
re durable recovery
."



Turn


Goldilocks


the economy is growing at a rate that isn’t too hot or too cold; speeding it
up could risk an inflationary spiral that would collapse growth.

Mark
Gongloff
, Wall Street Journal, “Investors' Forecast: Sunny With C
hance of Overheating,”
1/2
/2011,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703384504576055950354533470.html


Investor optimism is almost as much of a New Year's tradition as hangovers and resolutions:
This January
, like last,
forecasters see the U.S.
e
conomy growing at a rate that is
neither too hot nor too cold
.

For many Americans
, with unemployment hovering near 10%,
it's hard to feel optimistic

in the midst of the current recovery,
but
investors see things differently
: They believe
the economy has mo
re to fear from growing too quickly rather
than too slowly
.

"
Overheating is the biggest worry
," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank in Chicago. "Though it's not the
most likely outcome, my fear is that
rates rise too much, or p
rices rise too much, and
snuff out the incipient
recovery
."

The big concern at the dawn of 2010 was the economy's budding comeback would take a nosedive

concerns that
were borne out over the summer but were
put to rest as the economy rebounded in the final

months of the year with the
help of the Federal Reserve
. Investors worried about the economy overheating this year say
it will be far harder for the Fed
to mount another rescue mission
,
which could lead to a spike in inflation and interest rates that coul
d
derail the recovery

and torpedo market gains
.

Despite those fears,
the vast majority of economists, market strategists and money managers say they see indicators
pointing to a scenario of modest growth and low inflation in 2011. Stocks are at a two
-
year
high, commodities
are rising and bond yields are still very low by historic standards

all bolstering investors' normal start
-
of
-
the
-
year optimism.

Last year, analysts also put high odds on a similarly optimistic scenario
, only to be sideswiped by the Europ
ean debt crisis, the
flash crash in the U.S. stock market and a stalled economy. This year, the forecasters put the chance of another slowdown at
only about 10%, but said
there was a roughly 20% chance of the economy growing too fast.

Investors may have go
tten a foretaste this fall of too
-
rapid growth, when Treasury bonds suffered one of their worst selloffs in decades, driving interest
rates abruptly higher. Rates move in the opposite direction of bond prices and usually rise when investors worry about inf
lation. Some commodity prices
surged as well near the end of the year, a sign that strong growth is boosting demand to a level that could spur inflation.

Unemployment is widely forecast to fall only slowly,
which should help keep inflation pressures in
che
ck
. But
an unexpected surge in hiring in 2011 would put the economy on a much faster track
,
raising the inflation threat, and the bond market could respond by pushing rates higher
.

Rates didn't rise enough this fall to threaten the economy, but a too
-
quick

surge in borrowing costs could slow
growth, or at minimum rattle investors
. The real worry among investors is the Fed, which has been focused for nearly two years on getting
the economy growing again, won't react quickly enough.



Case
-

Warming



1) No im
pact to climate change


the rate of warming is slowing down now.

Science Daily, 5/5

[Science Daily, May 5 2008, “Will Global Warming Take A Short Break? Improved Climate Predictions Suggest
A Reduced Warming Trend During The Next 10 Years”,
<
http://www.s
ciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080502113749.htm
>]


To date
climate change projections
, as published in the last IPCC report,
only considered changes in
future atmospheric composition.

This strategy is appropriate for long
-
term changes in climate such as
predictions for the end of the century. However,
in order to predict short
-
term developments over the
next decade, models need additional information on natural climate variations, in particular
associated with ocean currents.

Lack of sufficient data has h
ampered such predictions in the past. Scientists at IFM
-
GEOMAR and from the
MPI for Meteorology have developed a method to derive ocean currents from measurements of sea surface
temperature (SST). The latter are available in good quality and global coverag
e at least for the past 50 years.
With this additional information, natural decadal climate variations, which are superimposed on the
long
-
term anthropogenic warming trend, can be predicted. The improved predictions suggest that
global
warming will weaken
slightly during the following 10 years
.

“Just to make things clear: we are not stating that anthropogenic climate change won’t be as bad as previously
thought”, explains Prof. Mojib Latif from IFM
-
GEOMAR. “What we are saying is that
on top of the warming
t
rend
there is
a long
-
periodic oscillation that will probably lead to a to a lower
temperature increase

than we would expect from the current trend during the next years
”, adds
Latif. “
That is like driving from the coast to a mountainous area and crossing s
ome hills and valleys
before you reach the top
”, explains Dr. Johann Jungclaus from the MPI for Meteorology. “In some years
trends of both phenomena, the anthropogenic climate change and the natural decadal variation will add
leading to a much stronger tem
perature rise.”


2)
Long
-
term climate change predictions are impossible

IPCC 01
(
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/50
1.htm
) The IPCC
is the foremost proponent of the anthropogenic warming theory.


Improve methods to quantify uncertainties

of climate projections

and scenarios, including development and
exploration of long
-
term ensemble simulations using complex models.
T
he climate system is a

coupled
non
-
linear chaotic system, and therefore the
long
-
term prediction of future climate states is not possible.

Rather the focus must be upon the prediction of the probability distribution of the system's future possible
states b
y the generation of ensembles of model solutions. Addressing adequately the statistical nature of
climate is computationally intensive and requires the application of new methods of model diagnosis, but such
statistical information is essential.


3) No cre
dible evidence proves that warming is anthropogenic

Singer
, distinguished research professor at George Mason and Avery, director of the Center
for Global Food Issues at the Hudson Institute,

2007


(S. Fred, Dennis T,
“Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,50
0 Years”

Pages 7
-
8)

The Earth has recently been warming. This is beyond doubt
.
It has warmed slowly and erratically
-
for a total of about 0.8 degrees Celsius
-
since
1850. It had one surge of warming from 1850 to 1870 and another from 1920 to 1940. However,
w
hen we correct the thermometer records for the
effects of growing urban heat islands and widespread intensification of land use, and for the recently
documented cooling of the Antarctic continent over the past thirty years, overall world temperatures
today

are only modestly warmer than they were in 1940, despite a major increase in human CO
2

emissions
.

The real question is not whether the Earth is warming but why and by how much
.
We have
a large faction o
f

intensely interested
persons who say the warming is

man
-
made, and dangerous. They
say it is driven by releases of greenhouse gases

such as CO
2

from power plants and autos, and methane from rice paddies and cattle herds. The activists tell us
that modern society will destroy the planet; that unless we radic
ally change human energy production and consumption, the globe will become too warm for farming and the survival of wild spec
ies. They
warn that the polar ice caps could melt, raising sea levels and flooding many of the world's most important cities and fa
rming regions.

However,
they don't have much
evidence to support their position
-
only (
1) the fact that the Earth is warming, (2)
a theory that doesn't
explain the warming of the past 150 years very well,

and (3) some unverified computer models.
Moreover, t
heir credibility is seriously weakened by the fact that
many of them have long believed
modern technology should be discarded whether the Earth is warming too fast or not at all.

Many scientists
-

though by no means all
-

agree that increased CO
2

emissions
could be dangerous. However, polls of climate
-
qualified scientist show that many doubt the scary predictions of the global computer models.
This book cites the work of many hundreds of researchers, authors, and coauthors whose work testifies to the 1,500
-
y
ear cycle.

There is no "scientific consensus," as
global warming advocates often claim. Nor is consensus important to scienc
e.

Galileo may have been the only man of his day
who believed the Earth revolved around the sun, but he was right! Science is the pr
ocess of developing theories and testing them against observations until they are proven true or false
.
If we can
find proof, not just that the Earth is warming, but that it is warming to dangerous levels due to
human
-
emitted greenhouse gases, public polic
y will then have to evaluate such potential remedies as
banning autos and air conditioners. So far, we have no such evidence. If the warming is natural and
unstoppable, then public policy must focus instead on adaptations
-
such as more efficient air
conditi
oning and building dikes around low
-
lying areas like Bangladesh. We have the warming. Now
we must ascertain its cause.


4) Climate record proves that C02 does not cause warming

Lewis, Institute of Economic Affairs, 2007
(Richard, Global Warming False Alarm
s,
www.
globalwarming
hype.com/upld
-
book403pdf_.pdf)


Their tree leaf studies confirm earlier criticism of the

ice core research and demolish the very basis of the
global warming case.
To put the whole

matter in a long
-
term context it is worth pointing out

that
fifty million years ago the CO2

concentration of 2000 ppmv was almost six times
higher than it is today but the air

temperature was only 1.5 degrees higher.


5) Even if all global emissions stopped today
-
past emissions make warming inevitable

Nich
olas
Stern

Head of the British Government Economic Service

2007

(Former Head Economist for the World Bank, I.G.
Patel Chair at the London School of Economics and Political Science, “The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review”, The

report of a team c
ommissioned by the British
Government to study the economics of climate change led by Siobhan Peters, Head of G8 and International Climate Change Policy

Unit, Cambridge University Press, p.
11
-
13)

Additional warming is already in the pipeline due to past a
nd
present emissions.

The full warming effect of
past emissions is yet to be realised
. Observations show that
the oceans have taken up around 84% of the
total heating of the Earth
’s

system over the last 40 years36.
If global emissions were stopped today
, s
ome
of this heat would be exchanged with the atmosphere as the system came back into equilibrium,
causing an additional warming
. Climate models project that
the world is committed to a further
warming of 0.5°
-

1 °C over several decades due to past emissio
ns
37.


Nitrogen emissions from fossil fuel use are key to ocean biodiversity and cancelling out
warming

Texas A&M ‘8

/“ATMOSPHERE THREATENED BY OCEAN POLLUTANTS,” Targeted News Service, May 15,
Lexis/


A large quantity of nitrogen
compounds
--

emitted

into

the atmosphere
by humans through the burning of fossil fuels

and the use of nitrogen fertilizers
--

enters the oceans and may lead to the removal of some carbon dioxide

from the
atmosphere, concluded a team of international scientists led by Texas A&M Uni
versity Distinguished Professor of Oceanography and Atmospheric
Sciences Robert Duce.

The team of 30 experts from institutions around the world presented its conclusions in the current issue of the journal Scien
ce.

Human
-
caused
atmospheric nitrogen compoun
ds are carried by wind and deposited into the ocean
, where they act as a
fertilizer and lead to increased production of marine plant life. The increase in plant life causes more carbon dioxide to be

drawn from the atmosphere
into the ocean
. This process re
sults in the removal of about 10 percent of the human
-
caused carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere
, thus potentially reducing the climate warming potential, according to the team's paper.


There’s no offense


CO2 increases are inevitab
le because of human exhal
ations

Lovelock ‘9
, Consultant of NASA, former president of the Marine Biological Association, and Honorary
Visiting Fellow of Green Templeton College, Oxford (James, The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning:
Enjoy it While You Can, 74
-
75)


It is surpri
sing that politicians could have been so unwise as to agree on policies many decades ahead.
Perhaps
there were voics from scientists who warned of the absurdity of such planning, but if so they do not
seem to have head. Even if we cut emissions by 60
perce
nt to 12 gigatons a year, it wouldn't be enough. I have mentioned several times before that breathing is a potent source

of carbon dioxide,

but
did you know that the
exhalations of breath

and other gaseous emissions by the nearly 7 billion people on Earth,

their pets, and their livestock
are responsible for 23 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions?
If you add on the fossil fuel burnt in total activity of growing,
gathering, selling, and serving food, all of
this adds up to about half of all carbon dioxide

emissions.
Think of

farm
machinery, the transport of food from the farms
, and the transport of
fertilizer, pesticides,
and the fuel used in their
manufacture; the road building and maintenance;

super
-
market operation

and the packaging industry; to say not
hing of the
energy used in cooking, refrigerating, and serving food.

As if this were
not enough, think of how

farmland fails to serve
Gaia as the forests

it replaced di
d. If, just by living with our pets and livestock, we are responsible for nearly half th
e emissions of carbon
dioxide,
I do not see how the 60 percent reduction can be achieved without a great loss of life
.

Like it or not,
we are
the problem
--
and as a part of the Earth system,
not
as
something separate

from and above it. When world leaders as
k us to follow them to
the inviting green pastures ahead, they should first check that it really is grass on solid ground and not moss covering a qu
agmire. The only near certain
conclusion we can draw from the changing climate and people's response to it i
s that there is little time left in which to act. Therefore my plea is
that
adaptation is made at least equal in importance to policy
-
driven attempts to reduce emissions. We cannot
continue to assume that because there is no way gently to reduce our number
s it is sufficient merely to improve
our carbon footprints.

Too many also think only of the profit to be made from carbon trading. it is not the carbon footprint alone that harms the
Earth; the people's footprint is larger and more deadly.



T
hey cause fas
ter warming


because large emission reductions remove sulfate aer
osols which
cool the Earth

Lovelock ‘9
, Consultant of NASA, former president of the Marine Biological Association, and Honorary
Visiting Fellow of Green Templeton College, Oxford (James, The

Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning:
Enjoy it While You Can, 55
-
56


In 2004, two IPCC contr
ibutors, Peter Cox and Meinrat A
ndreae, raised the question:
What happens to global warming if this
pollution haze suddenly disappears
? Their paper in Nature wa
rned that if the haze disappeared
, global heating would intensify
,
and dangerous change could be the consequence
. In 2008, a group led by Peter Scott, from the Hadley Centre (part of the
Meterological Office), examined this phenomenon in a careful and wall
-
drawn paper in the journal Tellus:
"
global dimming
," they revealed, is
complex, even as a purely geophysical problem. According to their calculations the sudden removal of haze
could lead to

either a modest or
a
severe increase of heating
. I know begin to

see why my wise friend Robert Charlson is so loath to commit himself on pollution aerosols and
climate change. Even so, there was little doubt among any of these distinguished climate scientists that the present pollutio
n haze reduces global heating,
or t
hat its sudden removal could have serious consequences. I suspect that we worry less about global heating than about a global

economic crash, and
forget that we could make both events happen together if we implemented
an immediate, global 60 percent reduct
ion of emissions.

This
would cause a
rapid fall in fossil fuel consumptio
n
, and
most of the particles that make the atmospheric
aerosol would within weeks fall from the air
. This would greatly simplify prediction and we could at last be fairly sure that gl
obal
temperature would
rise;
the removal of the pollution aerosol would leave the gaseous greenhouse unobstructed and
free at last to devastate what was left of the comfortable interglacial Earth
.

Yes, if we implemented in full the
recommendations made at
Bali within a year, far from stabilizing the climate,
it could grow hotter

not cooler
. This is why I said in The
Revenge of Gaia, "We live in a fool's climate and are damned whatever we do."


CO2 stays in the air longer than SO2


that means there is only
a risk of f
ast warming if we stop
emitting

Monastersky, 91



Richard, Staff writer for Business Net News, “CO2 limits may initially worsen warming
-

carbon dioxide and global warming”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n7_v139/ai_10381518


Policies designed to control fossil
-
fuel emissions might temporarily hasten the greenhouse warming before ultimately limiting the global temperature
rise, according to calculati
ons by climate researcher Tom Wigley. Yet that possibility should not deter efforts to control greenhouse
-
gas emissions, he
says. Wigley, of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, says

the real message of his findings is that success will not
come easily. "It might take decades for even a strong
policy to produce some noticeable response," he says. More Articles of Interest Polluted dust storms reduce global warmi
ng Stay tuned. (Washington Briefs).(Senate Environment Committee plans to

limit... NWF Urges Congress To Pass Clean Power Act
-

Brief Article Sulfur
-
climate link called insignificant Releasing Sulfur to the Atmosphere Could Counter Global Warming Related Results
Polluted dust storms reduce global warming Gr
eenhouse gases Warming hysteria.(LETTERS) Stay tuned. (Washington Briefs).(Senate Environment Committee plans to limi
t... NWF Urges
Congress To Pass Clean Power Act
-

Brief Article advertisement Wigley's calculations spotlight a highly uncert
ain arena in climate
-
change scenarios: the influence of sulfur dioxide (SN: 8/25/90, p.118).
Like carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide is produced by the combustion of fossil fuels. But while carbon dioxide gas traps heat,
sulfur dioxide turns into

tiny
sulfate
droplets
that reflect sunlight back toward space
. These sulfate "
aerosols" also cool the Earth's surface

indirectly by
making clouds more reflective. Scientists don't know the strength of such cooling effects, especially the effect
on clouds
. But if sulfa
te aerosols have an important influence,
policies that limit fossil
-
fuel use would
exert two opposing forces on the climate by reducing emissions of
both the warning gas and

the cooling
gas
. To investigate the outcome of that tug
-
of
-
war,
Wigley calculated

how various pollution controls would
affect the carbon dioxide "forcing" and the sulfate aerosol "forcing." His study, detailed in the Feb. 7 NATURE,
represents the first attempt to quantify the impact of both direct and indirect aerosol effects
. Because

carbon forcing appears to dominate aerosol forcing
, a policy that cuts emissions would
eventually limit a temperature rise
.

But Wigley found that
the aerosol effect would delay the climate's
response to any emissions control strategy and would reduce the
overall effectiveness of such policies. Since
the cooling power

of sulfate aerosols
remains unknown, Wigley tested a range of cases
. In a scenario where
aerosols exerted considerable effect, fossil
-
fuel limitations enhanced greenhouse warming for more tha
n three
decades before beginning to slow the temperature rise. That's
because carbon dioxide stays in the
atmosphere for more than 100 years, while aerosols fall out within days.

Thus,
controls would
rapidly reduce the aerosol cooling, and only later begin

to curb the carbon dioxide warming
,

he
found



Environmentalists have always engaged in fearmongering despite their claims being totally
false

The Economist 97

[PLENTY OF GLOOM,
http://mscserver.cox.miami.edu/msc491/Readings/PlentyofGloom.htm, DECEMBER 18
]


In 1865 an influential book by
Stanley

Jevons argued
with

equally

good logic and

equally

flawed premises

that Britain would run out
of coal in a few short years’ time.
In 1914, the

United States
Bureau of Mines predicted that

American

oil
reserves would

last ten years.

In 1939 and again in 1951, the Department of the Interior said American oil
would last 13 years. Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong. This article argues that
predictions of ecological doom
,
including recent ones,
have such a terrible track reco
rd that people should take them with pinches of salt

instead of lapping them up with relish.
For reasons of their own, pressure groups, journalists and fame
-
seekers
will no doubt continue to peddle ecological catastrophes

at an undiminishing speed
.

These p
eople
,
oddly,
appear to

think that having been

invariably
wrong in the past makes them

more

likely to be right in the future.

The rest of us might do better to recall, when warned of the next doomsday, what ever became of the last one.



Case
-

Solvency


1.

The cap isn’t even close to being met.

Don
Sears
, eWeek, “H
-
1B Visa Cap for 2011 Has Not Been Met Yet,”
9/3
/
20
10
, http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT
-
Management/H1B
-
Visa
-
Cap
-
for
-
2011
-
Has
-
Not
-
Been
-
Met
-
Yet
-
484142/


With less than one month before fiscal year 2011 b
egins in October, there are about 30,100 available visas for

technology companies to apply for through the temporary work visa program known widely by its specific government designation
, “
H
-
1B

visa.” The H
-
1B program is used by technology companies, unive
rsities and others in the United States to employ skilled foreign workers for temporary work
installments usually lasting several years.


2.

No worker shortage


their ev is based on false allegations by corporations.

Gene
Nelson
, IT professional, “Foreign

workers take jobs away from skilled Americans,” 8/21/
2008
,
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/node/1304


Wealthy advocates of H
-
1B visas have industriously worked to keep this employer
-
designed program hidden
from middle
-
class Americans
, who are outraged w
hen they learn how it harms them.

In 2002, Nobel economics laureate Milton Friedman correctly identified
the
1990
H
-
1B visa program as a "government subsidy"
because it allows employers access to imported, highly skilled labor at below
-
market wages.

False
allegations of worker shortages have been a popular approach
. But
American colleges and
universities graduate
four to six times

the number of students needed to fill openings in technology fields
that are generated by retirements and business expansion
.


B
ad job market deters foreign students.

Matloff 06

[Norman, professor of computer science at the University of California, Davis. He has written extensively on use of work visa
s in the
tech area, and on the offshoring issue. “Best? Brightest? A Green Card G
iveaway For Foreign Grads Would Be Unwarranted”, May 31,
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2006,0531
-
matloff.shtm]


First,
these proposals arise in response to the longtime claim by

Intel and other large
technology companies that an
insufficient number of U.S. s
tudents pursue graduate study in tech fields. This,

say Intel
et al.
,
is why they hire a
number of H
-
1Bs from U.S. university graduate programs
. Critics respond that this is just a pretext for hiring cheap, "indentured" foreign
workers.
[4]

The "free green card" proposals also comprise a response to the academic lobby, as U.S. universities have seen
their foreign applicant pools for graduate programs shrink

in recent years.
Students i
n other countries are less
interested in study here these days because the U.S. job market is poor while opportunities back home are
burgeoning.

[5]

This is causing academics to pani
c, since their lucrative federal research funding depends on
having the "bodies" to work in the labs. Graduate study at the PhD level is unattractive to American students
because the graduate assistant stipend is so low
, as is the salary premium paid to Ph
Ds in industry
.
[6]

Thus the
universities view the drop in foreign applicants with great alarm.