The Government Shutdown

Evidently the time for America, my time, is coming to a very gloomy realization that this can't keep happening. As our debt rises and our government can't figure out a way to fix it is alone embarrassing enough that government officials, the people Americans vote for to run the country, can't and couldn't get their act together on something as simple as funding. The debt we have accumulated is more than any country alone could handle. All the goods and services provided in the last decade and more have basically been paid for with monopoly money. That is how fake the countries credit reliability has turned out to be. If you can't pay for it, don't buy it. Thats a rule everyone needs to abide by, especially the government. If your government can't control its own spending then I guess why do its citizens? This shut down seems to be more of a good thing then a bad one. Everyone needs a learning experience of what it would be like not to have government benefits and people in government need to see the pros and cons to certain employees and certain programs left without funding. What is essential?  What is non-essential? Two immense questions that should be addressed now. Yes, if non-essential personnel is left without jobs now in the government, why should some of them be rehired? Obviously unemployment would go up but does the government really need some of these people? Does the government need to mandate healthcare and tax those who don't like it and have previous plans? If nothing else will people see the future thats coming straight at them and can they put their foot down finally saying that this isn't the right way for a government to run. Efficiency above all else should be the outcome of this relatively long shutdown when it comes to its end. If we do default however, it would be terrible and unbelievable, but it would for one thing be incredibly interesting to watch unfold no matter how terrible.

Kenya's terrorist attacks

It is definitely sad to say but in truth the terrorist acts spawned in Kenya, while in the past would have been surprising, are now to me very much part of day to day life. Terrorist actions claim the lives of many around the world and although I believe the scale of attacks that take place are getting smaller, the actions are almost becoming more and more personal as the acts of violence around the world are perpetuated by smaller groups if not single people. I'm not sure which is more alarming, a group with a leader to keep them in line, or people operating of their own accord. Kenya has seen many acts of violence taken place against its own people, from single and massive bombings, to gunman, grenades, and gas. Some events kill and wound 100s, while others have only injured or just resulted in the death of the terrorist taking action against innocent civilians. It would be and I guess will be, interesting during my life to see the events of terrorism and random acts of violence either increase, decrease, or stay the same. The question anymore is when or if it will ever stop.

Naval Yard Shooting

The Naval Yard shooting was perpetuated by a former solider, Mr. Alexis,  discharged honorably by the Military. This man was seen as a trusted member of the base after applying to be a contractor there to work on the site. His history before consisted of more recently, after leaving the airport in Virginia, an allegation that he was being followed by three men hunting him with a "microwave machine". He was also known for getting angry easily, once using a gun to vent frustration, and on several occasions he went to the Veteran's affairs department for mental health treatment. Because of these incidents, it does surprise me someone like him would be allowed to work on a military base with access to the things on base. To be honest, I can't really see a correlation between this event and readings we have done over the last few weeks. This was about mental health, and a violent action that occurred from someone's deteriorating mental status. If this could be at all relatable is that maybe humanity in this instance is too trusting of what it's already comfortable with. A man formerly in the navy with a good record from his military career working at a base seems harmless, but what doesn't change on the outside can easily on the inside. Enlightenment thinkers from our reading may have responded to this that society is too trusting, but events like this didn't happen in the 18th century, and therefore no current event on terrorism or mental health can be put together with anything from the 18th century because it simply isnt the same, and was less documented. A quote from Ronald Reagan speaks the best of this, "trust, but verify"

Blog post week 4, Swift and Smith

I really enjoyed the satire by Swift and the second reading by Smith on the commerce of towns and how it improved countries. Swift seemed to mention the degradation of society in Ireland and how to improve it in a satirical way through the children. It was definitely a good change in the reading and more interesting to read. That goes the same for the Smith reading. Swift didn't actually write on something I could relate to my life experiences or situation but I just found it to be something I could get into and understand his meaning in the writing. Swift talked about the problems in Ireland and how a way to fix it basically seemed to be to sell and or eat excess children spawned from prostitution. This was a little bit funny if I understood it correctly. 

In Smiths writing, I again found it interesting when he wrote on how the commerce of towns by farmers, merchants, and other such people in the more re-surging societies from the dark ages into the later medieval and pre industrial era. The idea that merchants and farmers built up the economy under the barons and lords and kings and made more of a difference is impressive. The people in this time period maintained livelihoods with the smallest aspects of life, a whole sheep for rent for a year sometimes in Scotland it said. Things taken for granted today were so difficult to attain in that time period and its strange to think of how things were priced then, and how they're priced now. We have so much and can have so much and maybe thats what Smith was getting at, that we can get these things but our predecessors would have been happy with a sheep for a year. You can make things last longer than you think and live off the land more successfully than you would have thought. Smith says you can reach a higher status and encourages its allowance, but he also makes it clear that its also just as good and maybe even more simple to be simple.

Hutcheson and Smith reading analysis

I started off with the reading by Adam Smith. I didn’t understand it all too well, but it was clear to me, or so I think, that the primary purpose of his writing was to inform people on the feelings of others in a society and how understanding those feelings yourself would be quite difficult to attain. He mentions compassion, sympathy (of course), pain, fear, and moreover references humanity and where its future lies. Again, this particular reading was especially “out there” I think in terms of getting a grasp of a basic understanding of what it was that I read. Definitely finding a summation of this reading could help me find a way to connect this to my own life, but as for now that would be very hard for me to find a proper connection.

Hutcheson however seemed to make more sense to me. He noted that Humans, animals, and nature all had to get along and live in the same place and be able to work and function side by side. He also noted that things will shift and morph and change based on a few different happenings around that area and part in nature. I think that sounds a lot like college and what students cope with here. We’re in a new environment trying to function properly, respectfully, and openly in this new unfamiliar place.  Things change in your life, they don’t and wont ever be the same and I think that’s the message he was getting at, as long as you can adapt to the changes around you and find yourself in the right place, you can thrive in whatever place you deem is beautiful.  

The Bubble Economy (test post)

There is a frequently told tale in Washington of the 1990s prosperity, and Bill Clinton is its hero. In this story, President Clinton performed the hard work of bringing down the deficit and balancing the budget. He raised taxes and contained spending, but the pain was rewarded by low interest rates and a growth boom that delivered the lowest unemployment rates in more than three decades. It‟s a great morality tale, but it has little to do with the actual economic history of the decade.

During the first half of the Clinton era, the economy experienced very modest growth. Workers saw little benefit because wages were essentially stagnant. Then, in the late 1990s, a stock bubble emerged, and growth took off and real wages started to rise. This extraordinary period of bubble-driven growth was the main factor in flipping the government‟s budget from deficits to surpluses. The Congressional Budget Office‟s (CBO) projections from May 1996 (after all the tax increases and spending cuts had been put into law) showed the government running a deficit of 2.7 percent of GDP in 2000. Instead, that year saw a surplus equal to 2.1 percent of GDP, which translated into a shift from deficit to surplus of more than 5 percentage points of GDP (about $750 billion in 2011 dollars). Not one dollar of this shift was attributable to fiscal restraint. (pg. 38 Dean Bakers, the end of loser liberalism Making markets progressive.)

"According to CBO, the net effect of legislated changes over this period was to increase the fiscal year 2000 deficit by $10 billion Pg.38 . Rather than higher taxes or spending cuts, the entire cause of the shift from deficit to surplus was better-than-expected growth and lower-than-expected unemployment. In its 1996 projections, CBO assumed that the unemployment rate would be 6.0 percent in 2000." (pg. 39 Dean Bakers, the end of loser liberalism Making markets progressive)