Nation’s Budget: in shambles
Why: Low tax revenues, high spending, both related to the recession and looming demographic aging crisi
What to Do: Do what has to be done.
Problem #1: Low tax revenues
Solution: Raise top tax rate on rich to 70% and cut bottom tax rate on poor to 10%
Result: Higher tax revenues, as the majority of revenues come from a minority of top income earners, more than offsetting the cuts for the poor. Greater income equality, increasing marginal dollar utility by transferring income from rich to poor, therefore lifting total spending, boosting the economy.
Argument Against: This is the definition of socialism, depriving economic freedom.
Response: Economic freedom in a capitalist economy is an illusion, as people are forced to participate in employment, or die. The rich use this to exploit workers through unreasonably low wages. Higher taxes on the rich is just paying for the public services and benefits that they don’t pay workers enough to purchase on their own. The more money in the hands of workers can then be used to maintain low personal debt, further strengthening the foundation of the economy.
Problem #2: High spending
Solution: Narrow the number of people eligible for benefits by raising retirement age from 65 to 70, establish more requirements for eligibility , and cut early benefits 20%, and remaining benefits 10%. Change private healthcare system from treatment-based to preventative, through use of new technologies. End wars in Middle East, and and all open combat operations. Focus on domestic national security and sideline policing of foreign world.
Result: Cutting benefits reduces strain on Social Security system, preventive medicine costs less in the long-run than ongoing treatments, and drawing down active military operations cuts unnecessary war-based spending that most foreign countries don’t really want.
Argument Against: Politically impossible, technically unfeasable, and dangerous for world situation.
Response: Grow a pair, because the working/retired population ratio is shrinking fast, and somebody’s got to work to pay for it all, work TOGETHER and increase funding for R&D, and we simply don’t have the resources to maintain our empirical military dominance of the world, much to the dismay of foreign peoples. *sarcasm*
Problem #3: A Baby Boom generation of politicians who are short-sighted, and can’t agree on anything important.
Solution: Vote them out in 2012, and elect politicians who aren’t solely focused on the next election, with a complete disregard for long-term consequences, and understand that short-term pain is a small price to pay for a past of political and financial recklessness and a future of lasting prosperity.
Result: A better livelihood for our children and grandchildren.
Argument Against: Try and think of one.
Response: Whatever it is, it’s BS.
For those of you thinking I’m some political nutjob: I’m 16, and actually have a future I hope I can look forward to. Do the right thing.
I’ll take any responses.
I’d say that the first solution is somewhat simplistic, rich already contribute disproportionately to taxes and consumer spending, taxing them more would reduce consumer spending. Many people would also just relocate their money elsewhere where taxes are lower. I’d agree that taxes on the rich need to be raised to increase revenue, but 70% is somewhat extreme and I’d make it lower. I also don’t think making taxes lower for the poor is fair. A better way to increase revenue might to be put in place taxes, regulations that increase manufacturing.
I agree with number solution number 2.
That problem isn’t limited to baby boomers. You can’t tell me the average young person who loves MTV isn’t short-sighted. It’d be better just to get politicians who aren’t out of touch.
"Ambivalence toward change." Ambivalence refers to
a-mutually conflicting feelings.
b-genuine enthusiasm.
c-fear or dread.
d-lack of emotion.
For most Cincinnati workers before the Civil War, a manufacturing job
a-guaranteed a decent livelihood.
b-depended upon worker skills.
c-encouraged the "manly virtues."
d-imposed a form of "wage slavery."
Of the following economic indicators describing conditions in Philadelphia, which one DECREASED from 1820 to 1860?
a-upward occupational and residential mobility
b-downward occupational mobility
c-proportion of craftsmen in the laboring class
d-percentage of unskilled wage earners in or near poverty
All of the following factors contributed to American economic growth from 1820 to 1860 EXCEPT the
a-abundance of natural resources.
b-increasing population.
c-maintenance of low tariff rates.
d-influx of European capital.
pro lifers, please actually read my points before responding
I could probably never have one myself, but it is absolutely none of my business — nor is it anyone else’s and especially not the government’s — if other women make that decision for themselves. I do agree on a late-term abortion ban except in medical emergencies and in the cases of rape and incest, because the fetus would be viable outside the womb. The thing is though — and most people don’t think of it this way — is that the vast, vast majority of abortions are performed very early on in the pregnancy. Very, very few women, if any, are going to decide in the 6th month that they don’t want the pregnancy anymore.
Most late-term abortions are due to medical necessity, either for the mother’s health or because the fetus isn’t developing properly. These are, for the most part, wanted children. Many devastating birth defects — like anencephaly, which I dare you to Google — don’t manifest until later in the pregnancy and in some cases after the legal cutoff for an early-term abortion. I’ve heard of women more or less forced to carry stillborn or severely malformed children (who only survive maybe 15 minutes outside the womb, in agony) to term, simply because no one is willing to perform an abortion for them. If a woman chooses to carry such a pregnancy to term, that’s her choice, but to force her to do it is, I think, a form of torture.
Think of it this way, also. Say that you’re sick and need a life-saving organ. Say that my organ would be a match, maybe the only match. You would die if I didn’t donate it to you. Nonetheless, I am not legally compelled to donate my organ to you, even if you’re my parent or child or other relative. So why should a fetus, unable to survive on its own outside the womb, be allowed to hijack its mother’s livelihood without her consent, when a living breathing person could not?
You ask why people just don’t use birth control and condoms. Condoms break, and there are people out there who view oral contraceptives of any kind as a form of abortion, especially the Plan B pill. What’s your advice for a girl in a rural town whose lone pharmacy won’t issue her the pill? I’d also like to see these people give more support to women who choose to keep their children and be more supportive of early childhood education, children’s health services and the like. Too often, it’s not that they care about the child or what happens to it when it’s born. To them, it’s about punishing women (and it’s always women) for having and enjoying sex. A baby should not be a punishment.
Finally, on the issue of adoption: I respect any woman’s choice to put her child up for adoption. But no one owes anyone else a baby. Women are not brood mares, and this reminds me uncomfortably of The Handmaid’s Tale. And the adoption and child welfare infrastructure is such in this country that even adoption and/or foster care is no guarantee of happiness. Children with special needs or illnesses or who aren’t perfect blonde angels are hard to place. There are hundreds of thousands of unwanted children already in the U.S. Adoption is not always a happy ending or a cure-all and to think that it is is naive.
Also, to pro life men, Do you want a bunch of female politicians, the vast majority of whom are not doctors, making medical decisions about your cock and balls?
If they think a clump of cells is enough of a human being they are crazy enough to believe anything.
I could probably never have one myself, but it is absolutely none of my business — nor is it anyone else’s and especially not the government’s — if other women make that decision for themselves. I do agree on a late-term abortion ban except in medical emergencies and in the cases of rape and incest, because the fetus would be viable outside the womb. The thing is though — and most people don’t think of it this way — is that the vast, vast majority of abortions are performed very early on in the pregnancy. Very, very few women, if any, are going to decide in the 6th month that they don’t want the pregnancy anymore.
Most late-term abortions are due to medical necessity, either for the mother’s health or because the fetus isn’t developing properly. These are, for the most part, wanted children. Many devastating birth defects — like anencephaly, which I dare you to Google — don’t manifest until later in the pregnancy and in some cases after the legal cutoff for an early-term abortion. I’ve heard of women more or less forced to carry stillborn or severely malformed children (who only survive maybe 15 minutes outside the womb, in agony) to term, simply because no one is willing to perform an abortion for them. If a woman chooses to carry such a pregnancy to term, that’s her choice, but to force her to do it is, I think, a form of torture.
Think of it this way, also. Say that you’re sick and need a life-saving organ. Say that my organ would be a match, maybe the only match. You would die if I didn’t donate it to you. Nonetheless, I am not legally compelled to donate my organ to you, even if you’re my parent or child or other relative. So why should a fetus, unable to survive on its own outside the womb, be allowed to hijack its mother’s livelihood without her consent, when a living breathing person could not?
You ask why people just don’t use birth control and condoms. Condoms break, and there are people out there who view oral contraceptives of any kind as a form of abortion, especially the Plan B pill. What’s your advice for a girl in a rural town whose lone pharmacy won’t issue her the pill? I’d also like to see these people give more support to women who choose to keep their children and be more supportive of early childhood education, children’s health services and the like. Too often, it’s not that they care about the child or what happens to it when it’s born. To them, it’s about punishing women (and it’s always women) for having and enjoying sex. A baby should not be a punishment.
Finally, on the issue of adoption: I respect any woman’s choice to put her child up for adoption. But no one owes anyone else a baby. Women are not brood mares, and this reminds me uncomfortably of The Handmaid’s Tale. And the adoption and child welfare infrastructure is such in this country that even adoption and/or foster care is no guarantee of happiness. Children with special needs or illnesses or who aren’t perfect blonde angels are hard to place. There are hundreds of thousands of unwanted children already in the U.S. Adoption is not always a happy ending or a cure-all and to think that it is is naive.
Also, to pro life men, Do you want a bunch of female politicians, the vast majority of whom are not doctors, making medical decisions about your cock and balls?
based on the first two answers. Can I assume nobody will actually read the points I bring up?
Why did people against slavery believe that they could force their views on others? The NERVE of those people!
Why does every government in the world believe that they can focibly conscript men for military service? What NERVE!
You are tribal and poor villagers living in the Narmada Valley in India.Since the 80′s State and Federal Governments have been implementing a huge project "development to construct several dams along Narmada Valley to generate hydro- electricity. The dams have and will continue to displace hundreds of thousands of indigenous people and poor communities from their land. Governmental promises to provide housing and livelihood for displaces villager have often stop the Narmada project has grown. the movement employs non- violent ( ahimsa) strategies including rallies , hunger strike refusing to leave villagers being flooded by raising waters.
question:
1) Identify some key values and principles that are found in your faith and spiritually traditions which help in this understanding of your situation
- education
- reconciliation
- gathering information
- peaceful dialogue
- interfaith groups and organizations
- meetings and exchanges with all community leaders
- meetings between groups, individual families, stakeholders, and other participants
- sharing of knowledge
- emphasis on mutual strengths rather than on differences and disagreements
- community workshops
- self-help groups
- empowerment of the poor
- special care and protection of children, students, the elderly, and the disabled
- establishing rapport with local leaders and representatives
- sharing goals and experiences
You are tribal and poor villagers living in the Narmada Valley in India.Since the 80′s State and Federal Governments have been implementing a huge project "development to construct several dams along Narmada Valley to generate hydro- electricity. The dams have and will continue to displace hundreds of thousands of indigenous people and poor communities from their land. Governmental promises to provide housing and livelihood for displaces villager have often stop the Narmada project has grown. the movement employs non- violent ( ahimsa) strategies including rallies , hunger strike refusing to leave villagers being flooded by raising waters.
QUESTION:
1) From you faith perspective, suggest strategies that support the worldview that "ANOTHER WORLD IS POSSIBLE"
2) Discuss "AHIMSA"
3) if you were in the shoes of the villagers , being ( community leader) or an( ordinary citizen) what will you do to resolve conflict?
5) what was the federal gov’t doing to resolve the conflict?
I am thankfully being re-graded and re-defined in my job and have been told to think of some possible job titles for myself. I want to sound quite impressive but without having one of those ‘pretentious’ titles. Can anyone give me a few suggestions and ideas? Serious ones only please ….this is my job/livelihood we are talking about!!! )
To give you an idea, I work in a mainly administrative/office role but my areas include project administration, publicity and profiling (inc press contact, website, events organisation etc) staffing support and office management/procedures and so on and so on….
Can you make me sound as impressive as I actually am? I would be really grateful.
We made some preliminarily surveys on local birds. We held exhibition in a nearby park. Public showed overwhelming interest. We are going to form a bird lovers’ society, for which we seek a suitable name. The main ideas are :
1. Each member will watch the immediate neighborhood / public parks, but compare notes with rest
2. Aim is to encourage & disseminate knowledge & sympathy for birds.
3. Efforts to increase the variety of resident & seasonally visiting birds.
4. Amateur members : mainly students, morning walkers, bird lovers who want to write project papers for their college semester & such other bird lovers.
5. We shall put up boxes / pipes for birds nests, bird feed, bird bath etc. Will need wide local sympathy, to avoid disturbance & theft.
6. Engage very poor local population, including ex bird catchers, who have lost livelihood due to strict ban on most birds.
7. Increase local participation to ensure safety of birds & reduction of habitat disturbance.
8. Encourage trees which attract more variety of birds than presently available. Consequential environmental improvement.
Christopher Morgan from London died of Mesothelioma in March 2010 from asbestos exposure during his apprenticeship in Hatton Garden where he unknowingly inhaled asbestos fibers. He was neither informed of its dangers nor given protective equipment. Weekly, 20 tradesmen die from this killer. The need to take this risk arose as working with asbestos provides a substantial income and is a means of livelihood for the uneducated that are also oblivious to its harms
That was my short introduction for my project work.
My teacher placed a "NEED?" next to it.
Did i not stress the need for Christopher to take the risk?
you should probably quote it. so that it doesnt seem to be included in your project, more so as support of evidence. try and find an article on the net and quote it
Okay i just this its freaky how this is all happening b4 2012 not saying its going to happen i just skimed though the article
GENEVA (AFP) – The UN warned on Monday that "massive" loss in life-sustaining natural environments was likely to deepen to the point of being irreversible after global targets to cut the decline by this year were missed.
As a result of the degradation, the world is moving closer to several "tipping points" beyond which some ecosystems that play a part in natural processes such as climate or the food chain may be permanently damaged, a United Nations report said.
The third "Global Biodiversity Outlook" found that deforestation, pollution or overexploitation were damaging the productive capacity of the most vulnerable environments, including the Amazon rainforest, lakes and coral reefs.
"This report is saying that we are reaching the tipping point where the irreversible damage to the planet is going to be done unless we act urgently," Ahmed Djoghlaf, executive secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, told journalists.
Djoghlaf argued that extinction rates for some animal or plant species were at a historic high, up to 1,000 times those seen before, even affecting crops and livestock.
The UN report was partly based on 110 national reports on steps taken to meet a 2002 pledge to "significantly reduce" or reverse the loss in biodiversity.
Djoghlaf told journalists: "There is not a single country in the world that has achieved these targets, we continue to lose biodioversity at unprecedented rate."
Three potential tipping points were identified.
Global climate, regional rainfall and loss of plant and animal species were harmed by continued deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, the report said.
Many freshwater lakes and rivers were becoming contaminated by algae, starving them of oxygen and killing off fish, affecting local livelihoods and recreation for local populations.
And coral reefs were collapsing due to the combined blow of more acid and warming oceans, as well as overfishing, the UN found.
UN Environment Programme (UNEP) director general Achim Steiner underlined the economic value and returns of "natural capital" and its role in ensuring the health of soil, oceans and the atmosphere.
"Humanity has fabricated the illusion that somehow we can get by without biodiversity or that it is somehow peripheral to the contemporary world," Steiner said.
"The truth is we need it more than ever on a planet of six billion heading to over nine billion people by 2050."
The report argued that biodiversity was a core concern for society that would help tackle poverty and improve health, meriting as much attention as the economic crisis for only a fraction of the cost of recent financial bailouts.
It advocated a new strategy to tackle the loss alongside more traditional steps such as the expansion of protected natural areas and pollution control.
They included attempts to regulate land consumption, fishing, increased trade and population growth or shifts, partly through a halt to "harmful" or "perverse" subsidies.
Globel warming !!!!!
I don’t concern myself with old predictions about 2012 etc…not worth it. I do worry about the intransigence of vested interests preventing timely intervention to move past the current hurdles facing life on the planet.
AGW is very real and very understated by the IPPC. They have taken the most conservative estimates, reality is already overtaking them. Loss of biodiversity hs happening now at increasing rates, we could prevent most of that cheaply and relatively easily if we wanted to. There is no political will to do so.
We are trapped by humanities selfish greed to make life for the next generation extremely difficult.
History will look back at this time and they will say "What selfish ignorant bastards" "They knew the damage and danger, they had the means to avert it and they chose not to lift a finger" "Worse yet that advocated to hasten it"
We are all going to die, its the human condition, no one gets to live forever. But we will not all die soon. We will get to see the beginnings of the misery we are sowing. The deaths will be slow and painful.
)