Issue #2 -Offshore Outsourcing



Recently, a large number of American companies have been hiring companies or workers from other countries to do work that was once done within the U.S. border. This outsourcing is greatly increasing the rate of unemployment for Americans. Many highly skilled U.S. workers have lost jobs because of this and are trying to make the Federal Government place trade barriers to limit outsourcing. Some think that the government should provide incentives for companies that keep their jobs in the U.S. Many people believe that the liberalized trade policies are what is encouraging this recent rise in outsourcing. Outsourcing allows companies to get the same amount of work done, but at less cost for the company because they can pay the foreigners less. When jobs are sent offshore, many Americans are left with far fewer employment options. Outsourcing is continuing to go on because it can save consumers money and increase a companies profit with the low wages they are able to pay their workers outside the U.S. Outsourcing was started to try and tackle the issue of inflation.

Outsourcing is becoming a real problem for the U.S. With unemployment rates at an all time high, outsourcing seems like the most illogical solution to help in these rough fiscal times. Outsourcing will keep unemployment high and wages low for the American worker. Of course a company is looking to find a way for them to make the highest profit possible, which outsourcing may allow them to do. However, it is ultimately a viscious cylce hurting the American economy. It may be helping a few big businesses but it is hurting small business and the average american immensely. Companies that previously provided a large number of Americans with jobs have now turned to outsourcing, eliminating many job opportunities which is not what will help the high unemployment rate whatsoever. Yes it is nice to provide a more cost friendly product for consumers but at what cost will that come to our economy? The jobs that outsourcing has taken away from U.S. workers is not worth the slightly lower prices. Without jobs, americans can't pay for all of these extra products anyway. Outsourcing does more harm than good for our economy and our citizens. Ultimately, it is helping everyone BUT the U.S. Since 1986, 15 million high-paying manufacturing jobs have left the US and American workers. Pretty soon it will be hard to find any product that can be labeled "made in the U.S." if this trend continues. Basically, that means relying on other countries almost completely for our economic success. That is not what the U.S. needs, especially when other countries own huge parts of us due to our huge national debt. Outsourcing is basically thee only issue that I can unfortunately admit to agreeing with Obama on. He agrees that there needs to be more government restrictions on outsourcing. He states being opposed to shipping jobs overseas. He agrees that globalization is a good thing and we cannot shy away from it and completely stopping outsourcing would be bad. But we can't keep providing tax breaks for companies who ship most all of their jobs overseas. The tax breaks should be going to those American companies who employ americans, so they can have more money to pay the American workers higher wages than the outsourced workers. This way they can still,without outsourcing continue to produce products at a lower cost while now being able to help with the issue of american unemployment.

To learn about Tax Reduction, view my classmates blog: http://the-brack-blog.blogspot.com/2011/02/reducing-taxes-issue-1.html

To lear about The Budget Deficit and Social Security, view my classmates blog: http://ksteffss1.blogspot.com/2011/02/budget-deficit-and-social-security.html
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Norma_Sherry/out_sourcing_america-job%20loss%20and%20unemployment.htm

U.S. businesses stepped up hiring in December

In December, government jobs fell by 10,000 but private employers boosted their hiring, adding 113,000 jobs. These rates were enough to drive down the unemployment rate to 9.4% from 9.8%, a small distance but headed in the right direction. Another reason for the drop in the unemployment rate is that the government no longer counts people that have stopped looking for work as unemployed. Even though more people were hired than in previous months, the increase in payroll gain was smaller than the 145,000 the economists predicted. Over the past three months, the economy has added an average of 128,000 jobs, which is enough to keep up with the population growth. Nearly double is needed to significantly reduce the unemployment rate. A report Thursday said that fewer people applied for unemployment benefits over the past month than in any four-week period in more than two years. A decrease in layoffs has consumers feeling better about the economy. This past holiday shopping season was the best in four years. A payroll tax cut coming this month will give Americans more money for the new year. Overall, Jobless rate is likely to keep falling but very slowly.

It is very good news to hear that jobs are finally being generated and they are coming from private businesses, which is what we need to grow our economny. Outsourcing is not good in keeping up our economy. If small business can prosper, the US will be in much better shape. A tax cut will also be nice as long as it goes to everyone across the board, regardless of income. The wealthy work for their money as well so they deserve one too. I feel like there may be a little false hope in the issue however because of the fact that even when people stop looking for jobs, they are no longer counted as unemployed when in reality that is what they are. Hopefully, more new jobs will begin to regenerate and unemployment can slowly go down. I feel that technology has a bit to do with the problem in unemployment becuase now machines can do jobs that people once did.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40960689/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/

DC-bound plane loses radio contact, pilot erred

On Saturday, the U.S. capitol had to be evacuated due to a pilot turning his radio to the wrong frequency and losing contact with air traffic controlers as he was approaching Washington. The Federal Aviation Administration is reviewing the pilot error. The loss of contact also lead to the clearing of the House and Senate office buildings. F-16 fighter jets were scrambling to get into the air but the plane was able to regain radio contact with the air traffic controlers. It is unclear how they re-established contact. The airline continues to work with local authorities to investigate the incident, it is unclear how many passangers were on board.

My first thought is, did the passangers know that they had lost radio contact and caused so much havok? If so, i would be incredibly scared. 911 all over again perhaps. I think the pilot should most definitely be investigated as to why he lost contact and how he was able to regain it. I wish i knew how the frequencies changed, then this article would make much more sense to me. I hope the passangers on the flight recieve some kind of gift since they were on this flight considering how they had to feel knowing they lost contact causing the clearing of the house, senate, and capitol. The pilot should not be able to fly again until the cause for the disconnection is found.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40872591/ns/politics/

Mexico border city has record drug killings in '10

On Saturday, an official stated that Ciudad Juarez had it's bloodiest year ever with 3,111 people killed in drug violence. The city has seen its homicide rate soar to one of the highest in the world since turf battles broke out in 2008 between gangs representing the Juarez and Sinaloa cartels. In 2008, 1,587 people were killed in drug violence, and in 2009 the number increased to 2,643. The bloodiest month in Ciudad Juarez was last October when 359 people were killed related to drug war. President Felipe Calderon launched an offensive against cartels when he took office in 2006 and since then more than 30,000 people have been killed in drug violence nationwide.

The recent rise in drug violence is unbelievable to me, and so many people are suffering because of it. I would think that this high activity of cartel violence has caused many people to leave the city, at least I hope people are doing that to try and stay away from the violence. Sometimes i think it would be much simpler if the drugs were just legalized so there could be some system so there wouldn't be so many slain. But legalization would just bring more problems so i really don't know what a good solution would be but i hope there is one soon. I am very thankful that I am not living there however, i can't imagine how fearful i would be just simply walking down the street.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40874295/ns/world_news-americas/,

Police: Houston store owner kills 3 would-be robbers

In a jewelry store in Houston on Thursday the 17th, two men were prettending to be shoppers in the store. A third person burst into the store and stated it was a robbery, then all three men pulled out guns. They took the store owner's wife and tied her up in a back room. As the guys were trying to tie up the 52 year old store owner, he pulled a handgun out of his waistband and shot and killed one of the suspects. Then he shot and killed the two other suspects.The owner was in critical but stable condition after sufferring from gunshots to his shoulder, abdomen and legs. The wife was not hurt. Police are looking for a fourth subject who may have been the getaway car driver.

I don't understand people. If they have the time to plan a robbery and the will power to do something like that, they should be able to have the will power to go get a job and make their own money instead of stealing other peoples'. I always wonder what is going through the head's of these robbers. They clearly have no morals. I think it was completely neccessary for the store owner to take matters into his own hands and use his gun to protect himself and his wife. If the robbers were cruel enough to steal and think they could get away with it, they deserve some punishment. No, they wouldn't have to be killed but something should be done. I probably would have shot them to just wound them, not kill them but i suppose in the moment one wouldn't really be thinking about that. I am just glad that the owner is going to be okay and his wife is unharmed. I hope the police are able to find and punish the fourth suspect.




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40713870/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

Issue #3 Safe to Eat?

The recent issue of the large health care reform has made many issues dealing with health, hot topics to discuss and find not just a partisan agreement on change but a bipartisan agreement. Such as the issue of the increasing number of people suffering from food poisoning from now not only meat, but fresh produce as well. One thing that people argue is that health comes at a price that people have to be willling to pay. There have been several reasons for the large increase of food borne illness in the past couple years. One of them is that Americans, in an act to try and eat more healthfully, are consuming a greater amount of fruits and vegetables. Unlike meat, fresh produce is usually eaten raw, where if it were cooked, the high heat usually will kill off harmful microorganisms. A lot of the produce goes through incredibly large scale processing and distribution factories, which means things can get overlooked easier, and if there is an outbreak, a larger number of people can be infected. The issue is over whether or not there should be new safety regulations installed for the nation's supply of fruit and vegetables.Meat and Poultry in the nation are highly regulated but produce has fallen beneath this standard.The recent common outbreaks of food borne ilness has caused some people to say that there should be one central agency responsible for ensuring the safety of the U.S. produce. They say more money should be put into the funding of the FDA so there can be more inspectors hired to monitor the many produce facilites, hopefully ensuring customers that their products are safe to buy and eat. However, other people are saying that the increase in funding for the FDA will spike the cost of producing fruits and vegetables, and that expense would be passed on to customers. Detractors say that the more expensive produce will push buyers away and reverse public health efforts to get Americans to try and eat more healthfully.

Personally, I think that increased funding to hire more people to regulate facility conditions would cause people to stop buying so much produce. The increase in cost to produce fruits and vegetables that would casuse the higher produce prices would stear people away from purchasing such a large amount of produce. I think one needs to look at the large picture, at least Americans are headed in the right way when trying to eat more healthfully  by buying more produce. However, people in these tough economic times, don't have the extra money to spend on higher priced produce. I think it would be much more beneficial for the regulations to stay the same and the people who are buying the produce can do the work to make them clean and safe to eat, the safety should be in the individuals hands. If they are too lazy to take proper precautions, if they get a food borne illness it is their own fault. Making safety regulations higher for produce would not be a good thing, it shouldn't happen it would only cause a downfall in the econonmy of produce and the already poor health of most Americans.Just like Grist said in an article talking about the positives and negatives of a raise in regulations. He also agreed that the raise would hurt the economy, especially small farms. The regulatory power would eventually wipe out small farms.
 http://www.grist.org/article/food-2010-11-02-wanted-your-informed-opinions-on-the-food-safety-reform

To view issue number 1 view my classmate's blog at:
http://rachelrachrachel.blogspot.com/2010/11/issue-1-comprehensive-vs-incremental.html

To view issue number 2 view my classmate's blog at:
http://daniellescurrenteventblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/issue-2-ensuring-quality-care-for.html

SF supervisors pass 'Happy Meal' regulations

Lawmakers in San Francisco have approved legislation to hopefully force fast food chains such as McDonald's to stop serving such unhealthy kids meals or at least stop serving toys with them. The board of supervisors voted 8-3 for passing an ordinance that would limit toy give aways for meals with excessive calories, sodium, or fat. It also requires there to be a serving of fruits and vegetables in each meal. Supervisors say the law would make San Francisco the first major city to try and reduce child obesity. McDonald's disagrees with this law however, saying it restricts parents; ability to make choices of what their children eat.

I think this is a really smart thing they are doing. Obesity is a big problem in the country and something needs to be done about it. If kids learn to eat healthy at a young age, it is sure for those good habits to stick with them throughout their life. At least have a positive impact on them. Kids have to be taught how to eat right and stay healthy. Toys are a motivating factor for children and I feel if they were given out less with the really unheathly meal choices and put with foods that are better for you, more kids would be likely to get the meal that is better for them with having the incentive of a toy. What San Francisco is doing is a good start. Other cities and states need to look at what they are doing and follow along. McDonald's and other fast food places can get over themselves.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39975952/ns/business-consumer_news/