The Instigator
Senator
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SloppyJoe6412
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

A Bill to Improve the Infrastructure of Large Airports

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
SloppyJoe6412
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/10/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 542 times Debate No: 40292
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Senator

Pro

A Bill to Improve the Infrastructure of Large Airports
1 : A Large Airport is defined as an airport that
2 : handles Twenty Five Thousand or more passengers per day and
3 : has a customs office.
4 : Infrastructure improvements are defined as:
5 : a. Re-pavement of Controlled Aircraft Movement Areas
6 : b. Updates of computer assisted landing systems
7 : c. Updates of navigation systems
8 : d. Improvement of runway run-off areas
9 : e. and updates to airport lighting systems.
10 : A total of 10 Billion dollars will be put towards the
11 : completion of this program with the option of an additional
12 : 5 Billion Dollars with approval of the Congress.
13 : This program will be overseen by the Federal Aviation
14 : Administration.
15 : This legislation will take effect immediately upon passage.
16 : All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby null
17 : and void.
SloppyJoe6412

Con

I accept this debate. For politeness' sake, since Pro has used his first round to outline the bill but has not really given any reasons why it is a good idea, I defer to Pro to state why should the bill be passed first.
Debate Round No. 1
Senator

Pro

because it good
SloppyJoe6412

Con

I was hoping you were going to try a little harder... oh well.

Why should we invest in airports? Is it because of safety? If that's the case the decision should be made on a marginal improvement rate basis, that is, compare the number of fatalities due to insufficient airport safety we have now to what we could have after the improvements, then divide the cost of improvements by that difference and get a dollar vs. safety improvement ratio. Than compare this to the same ratio for other transportation systems (highway, train, etc.) Without going too deep, and admitting I don't have a detailed statistic in hand, it seems that aviation would offer a very low safety improvement against a brutally high cost. In plain English, a waste of money. I'm pretty sure highway transportation has a much higher potential for lowering significant fatality figures, so even if the cost is not cheap the improvement ratio should be much better.

So if safety is not the main driver, could there be a good reason to increase air traffic? While Americans keep a high geographic mobility (we move anywhere for a better job, a romantic relationship or any other reason), personal travel is on the decline. If our kids move out of state, we might visit with them for Thanksgiving or Christmas, but frequent visits are becoming a thing of the past. Air travel is kept alive by business. And a potential increase of business travel is quite impossible to justify -as teleconferencing becomes more and more common, the need to travel for meetings, conferences and the like is less and less justifiable. Of course there is still need for physical work (you can't fix equipment via GoToMeeting) but the overall trend should be for business travel to diminish.

The response to air safety is mostly emotional. Every time there is a big accident it makes headlines, media and people ask for more safety and money is thrown -often for meaningless purposes. But on a rational basis, not only air travel should not receive fresh money, it should be left to decline to a lower level, where it already is for other, more sensible countries where people only fly if they have a really good reason.
Debate Round No. 2
Senator

Pro

Senator forfeited this round.
SloppyJoe6412

Con

Why do people propose debates if they don't want to debate????
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
This is a massively retarded bill
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
SenatorSloppyJoe6412Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't really have good arguments and he also quit.