Login/Sign Up




THBT Britain should support its aerospace industry
Politics

Alex Osborne
Nov 06, 2013
2 votes
4 debaters
2
1
1


+ Add Argument

1
For


Eleanor Deal
Nov 06, 2013
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Aerospace is the future and the government should be doing everything to keep it in Britain; jump on the bandwagon before it rolls on by. Not just in the 'boldly go' way, but in the realities of where technology is going in the next several decades. Cars are becoming more and more technocentric, planes are rapidly becoming an equally everyday mode of travel, this industry is only expanding and we should be doing everything possible to keep the jobs in Britain as, long term, it will only grow. Getting in on the ground floor of the rising reality of commercial space flight may be a bumpy ride, but to make Britain the home of this expanding industry would do wonders for increasing Britains recognition as a technology hub, rivaling countries which have in the last several decades taken a lot of this infamy away from Europe.

 
Carmel Royston
Nov 06, 2013
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Does it have to have the same structure?

Yes! We should support the aurospace industry in Britain, because we've learned so much from going into space.

We've learned that the earth is round, that there's a hole in the ozone and we've learned how to use satelites in orbit so that we can improve worldwide communication. Space is a fantastic place to learn about the planet we live in and lets face it- who doesn't wanna be an astronaut?

 
Carmel Royston
Nov 06, 2013
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Carmel Royston Show

The aerospace industry is almost exclusively coexistant with the aeronautical industry, ships and planes use many of the same technologies, by not supporting one we are stunting the growth of another.

 
Carmel Royston
Nov 06, 2013
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Rebecca Sarah Cowan Show

Snowball... Thank you for pointing out the many problems in the UK- luckily for us we do have a fantastic business in Shipping and have some of the best ship builders employed in the UK.

We have the NHS which is a social service with inovations and discoveries being made all the time. Why would we deny the same advancements to a different sector?

By sending people to space and studying organisms on other planets, we could discover something priceless- such as the cure for cancer- that wouldn't be a useless endeavour, but we wouldn't know unless we go out there.

 
+ Add Argument

1
Against


Alex Osborne
Nov 06, 2013
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Carmel Royston Show

By not supporting one we give the other an oportunity to grow and expand to fill the gap. One industry sector is succeeding will close the unemployment gap left by the other.
Indeed their mutual coexistance can only be a good thing, allowing one industry sector to thrive in the worldwide market.

 
1 convinced
Rebuttal
There are homeless people on the street, our social services are a mess, schools are losing funding, our prisons are over crowded, and taxes are rising. And this is what for.

There are other countries with their own aerospace programs. They can make the new developments. America has NASA they're learning loads from that, and yet the government shut down our space program years ago because there are far more important things out there.

Like the people who voted them into office. Why waste money on such a useless endeavour when it could be spent helping the people who really matter. Fix yourself before you run of into the unknown.

 
Eleanor Deal
Nov 06, 2013
1 convinced
Rebuttal
There are, to my knowledge, two broad aspects to this industry: the commercial side, and the defense side. Neither of these should be supported by the state in our current situation.

Commercially, having the government interfere and demand any industry keep jobs it can't afford may provide income for those 1800 individuals and their families, but if the company (who let's face it, know their own interests better than the government) cannot afford to sustain this then a lot more people will lose their jobs in the long term. Companies don't cut jobs because they'd like some bad press; they do it to either in response to a drop in demand or to cut costs to prevent a financial collapse. The government needs to stop crying 'recession' and stick to it's own affairs; allow supply and demand to rule the market and businesses will level out in the long term.

If the government is so desperate to keep jobs in these industries, it's welcome to drive up it's demand in those sectors, provide more contracts, but my next point will explain to you why this is not actually in the nations best interest politically and internationally.

So we're tightening the purse strings on the government, as we constantly have been for the last few years. The privilege of being a developed, somewhat 'superpower' state is that we are in a position of setting examples. We must bear in mind that how we handle the recession we're so frightened of will influence how other nations handle their financial issues. Think of the example we can set if we say: 'The first thing we can cut is defense.', 'We aren't planning on instigating any conflicts, and we've got plenty of defense infrastructure already thank you very much.' 'We DON'T need to be investing in our nuclear program, if anything we need to reduce it.'. We do not need to be wasting government money of propping up institutions we can do without. The nuclear program is at the front of that. To be a P5 nation that doesn't just talk about reducing its nuclear, reducing it's military, but actually follow through; the message we send to the international community is astonishing. Of course it also has the benefit of saving us money by pulling out of unnecessary spending and allows industry to rise and fall as capitalism expected; but to have that political bonus, why would we not jump on that?

 
Carmel Royston
Nov 06, 2013
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Carmel Royston Show

Britain's in a huge recession, why the hell should we invest in something we don't have the right infrastructure to support?

 
Alex Osborne
Nov 06, 2013
0 convinced
Rebuttal
1. Stop using my arguments.
2. The aerospace industry is is one that is mostly privatised anyway.
With the exception of the UK Space Agency the aerospace, and indeed the aeronautical industry within the UK are all publicly traded, therefore they are not our job to keep afloat.
We spend billions of £ on ships and defence, and the British Aerospace industry is kept afloat by that spending. The fact that a couple of thousand people might lose their jobs because we don't need any more aircraft carriers is not the public's fault. We should not have to support ANY industry that doesn't create its own revenue.

To sum up: If it doesn't bring money into our economy through its own means then it has no place operating in an open market, its workers are essentially on an insanely expensive welfare scheme.

 
Eleanor Deal
Nov 06, 2013
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Carmel Royston Show

It's not the governments job to prop up failing industry, regardless of how transferable their skills may be. If we're going to interfere in that way, why not just privatize the whole thing? I'll tell you why; because we do NOT have the money to be wasting supporting one of the worlds largest industries, that can survive well enough on it's own, when it's just cutting a few weeds to preserve the health of it's own garden. They know what they're doing, let them do it, and let's focus the government's attention on problems that are actually our business to tackle.

 
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: Carmel Royston Show

The aerospace, and marine industry do have several elements in common, but ship builders will still have jobs if we get rid of the aerospace part.

The NHS is understaffed, and subject to many of the budget cuts I mentioned earlier. If more money were given to them then they could find a cure for cancer here on earth, and a lot quicker too than blasting off in search of possibly non-existent organisms in space. You say they discover things all the time. Why not give them a chance.

We have sent satellites, and rovers, and probes, and in all this time we've only gotten as far as Mars. And found nothing.

In any case, none of this solves the underlying problems in the UK. We are wasting money. Stop.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

britain death government politics uk 2008 2009 9/11 abortion Afghanistan america Arizona AU bad Baha BBC bias Biden boycott Britain bush canada capitalism Censorship cheney children China Christianity church cia Clinton Cold War commonwealth communism Communist congress conservative conservatives conspiracy Constitution Corruption country crime death debate defeat Democracy democrat Democrats detention discrimination drugs economics economy education election elections Ethics EU Europe Euthanasia evil Fascism feminism Fight France Frankie freedom Freedom of speech freedoms french gay Gaza george bush Georgia global global warming goverment government Great Britain Guantanamo Bay guns Health Health Care Healthcare Hillary hillary clinton History Hitler homosexual human rights illegal illegal immigration immigration india iran Iranian presidential election iraq islam Israel japan Jewish juggernaut justice Karl law laws legal legislation liberal lies marijuana marriage mccain media Medicine mexico middle east military monarchy money moral morals Mugabe Muslim Muslims news North Korea nuclear nukes Obama objective Oil opression Osama pakistan Palestine Palin Panda paradox parliament peace petition philosophy policy politicians Politics polygamy power president Prime Minister prisoners protest Public Affairs punishment queen race racism religion republican Republicans revolution right rights Rove russia Saddam Sarkozy Security sex socialism Society South Korea sovereignty Supreme court tax taxes terror terrorism terrorist terrorists Tibet torture Troop U.S. uk un united nations united states us usa vancam vote Votes voting war washington weapons wmd women world wrong