Just What is the Fiscal Cliff?

via Council on Foreign Relations

Turn on the TV, log into the Internet; whatever one does, they cannot escape the constant stream of 'up to the minute' news about the fiscal cliff. International websites such as MSN even have a disclaimer above their headlines that reads the date and news, for example, December 27, 2012 as of 4:19 PM. This is almost a way of saying that it is the latest news available and is likely to change at any given moment.

The Fiscal Cliff is certainly out there making headlines, but I wonder if everyone actually knows what it is or if it even exists. As seen in the timeline above, the Council on Foreign Relations has laid out what they believe led to the fiscal cliff- a term used describe a bundle of momentous U.S. federal tax increases and spending cuts that are due to take effect at the end of 2012 and early 2013 (CFR). Analysts everyone claim that in order to avoid certain 'deleterious economic effects' Congress and the president should enact legislation concerning the debt ceiling, tax revenue increases, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act.

I wonder if the fiscal cliff really will occur what the government will do to solve or abate it from happening. To what extent could nothing have been done previously because of  lame-duck legislators or a lack of bipartisanship in the United States government? Please leave your comments below.

Plausible Deniability

Fire safety 'precautions', such as this staircase
(via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images)

I was reading an article in the New York Times over the weekend which really opened my eyes to the downfalls of modern day global markets and the current Industrial Revolution. In Ashulia, Bangladesh, the Tazreen Fashions Factory had a horrific fire that killed over 112 people. Similar to the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire of 1911, what started out as a small flame that could have been contained resulted in an astonishing example of lack of workers' rights and safety.

Going back to the Tazreen fire in Bangladesh, the factory, who mostly employs young men and women, which supplies clothing to many countries around the world, including to the United States company, Walmart, and apparel for the US Armed Forces. After reading the article, which featured "mounds of flammable yarn and fabric illegally stored on the ground floor near electrical generators and iron grilles blocking the windows," I first thought that despite the horrible conditions, they sounded like they were from another time (Yardley).  Didn't the United States and other countries in Europe (such as England) go through an industrial revolution over 200 years ago? Couldn't they have helped companies that they are partnered with go through their industrial 'growing pains'? Instead however, they have decided to deny all association.

According to the article, after the fire, "Walmart, Sears and other retailers made the same startling admission: They say they did not know that Tazreen Fashions was making their clothing" (Yardley). In an effort called, 'plausible deniability', the subject commits wrongdoing yet denies the act of ever considering to or actually implementing. I think these brands are committing this offence and not owning up to their mistake.

Walmart and Sears have since stopped subcontracting work to Tazreen Fashions. Some experts have wondered how a company like Walmart, one of the two biggest buyers in Bangladesh and renowned for its complex global supply system, could have been unaware of the connection. After all, the United States has been through an Industrial Revolution already, and could help their partners work through their struggles, but that would first require the United States brands to acknowledge their association with these new countries.

The DREAM Act- An Update

What is the US's role in the scope
of the whole world?

The Dream Act has been a subject of debate for a long time. What started out as a series of legislation discussed statewide and in National Congress ten years ago to give rights and citizenship to undocumented individuals has become a large group that hopes to expand its goals for the future.

In this week's Huffington Post, an article discussed how the group of 'illegal' immigrants now goes by a platform called 'United We Dream'. They hope that in the future, there will be "comprehensive immigration reform that would help the entire undocumented population, not just those who came to the United States as children," (Foley). The group states that they have been subject to extensive racial profiling and have had to jump through numerous, dangerous and expensive hoops to be considered for citizenship. The perspective legislation would also allow non-American born people to apply for a driver's license, access to health care, safe working conditions and equal protection under the law.

If the United States writes or even passes laws like this, they will be subject to a larger influx of people and the issues that come with them. However, I think the DREAM Act and associated legislation is a positive example of strengthening the economy and culture with new people and fresh ideas. In the same article, 'United We Dream' managing director Cristina Jimenez said that no matter what the United States government decides to do, they are going to have to accept the fact that Latinos are a growing majority in America, and political parties should not be taking this fact lightly. Any fluff legislation, like self-deportation or piecemeal immigration, are not part of the solution. The United States will have to take a bold stance either way and not try an interim solution that may be backless.

How do you think the United States should approach this issue? How does their decision impact the entire world?

The Price of a Quality Education

Harvard University

In America today, a college education has a continually growing importance and a continually growing price tag. Many argue that a degree from the Ivy League schools is becoming virtually impossible for most of America to afford and prosper at.

Just this week, I saw that Harvard University, one of the top schools in a country, is offering a free, extension program online. While the courses, such as Computer Science, Shakespeare and the World Wars, cannot be taken for credit towards a degree, they can regardless be taken. As part of the school's "learning initiative", they want to encourage education all over the country.

I think this sounds like a nice opportunity for those who cannot afford any type of education otherwise. The school also offers evening and online courses for a less expensive price tag for a Bachelor's degree. What do you think? To what extent do you think this program is worth the time of the faculty and its participants even though its not for credit?

Petraeus Scandal: Civil Liberties Under Fire

David Petraeus

Whatever one may think about the recent scandal involving the former C.I.A. director and four-star general, David Petraeus, the most important item to pull out of it is the fact that in attempt to find out more incriminating evidence, the government has violated his civil liberties.

Upon reading an article from The New York Times, I learned that the C.I.A. has violated his personal privacy by going through personal information such as emails and online photographs in an action called 'cyber-stalking'. According to Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union,“This is a textbook example of the blurring of lines between the private and the public.” I agree with Romero: what began as a personal matter between two women and one married man, has become a high-trafficked issue appropriate for the tabloids, and certainly not one to be performed by such a high ranking official. Constitutionly, Petraeus has the right to his own privacy and intimacy. But, the fact that he is who he is in the Central Intelligence Agency and the women who has he has had an affair with, Paula Broadwell, also had high power with her security clearance as his biographer, they are in fact putting themselves out in the open in the public.

I find this issue between the C.I.A. and the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) to be fascinating. To what extent do you think that government officials should be subject to the fine line of public and private accounts? How has this been viewed and used in the past? 

The Public Transportation Debate

Whether it is getting to work, running errands or just getting around, people all over the United States are faced with the choice of transportation: personal or public? A lot of times, personal cars are the object of choice because of convenience and popularity. However, with the price of gas increasing due to pollution and depletion of fossil fuels, the public mode of transportation is becoming more mainstream. In the recent Presidential campaign, both major party candidates discussed how they hoped under their administration the United States would become energy-efficient, ie no longer at the mercy of foreign oil companies. With this in mind, I am surprised that there are not more accommodations and funding provided to increase usage of this communal mode, such as trains, subways and buses.

Growing up in Chicagoland, I have always been very used to using our local train system, the Metra. In today's Chicago Tribune, there was an article about the constant rising of train fares in Metra. According to Metra's new chairman, Brad O'Halloran, Metra will be introducing possible fare increases of up to 10 percent because "Metra customers would rather have regular, small increases that reflect rising costs, than large hikes". I am not sure I agree with this. Although regular, small increases due seem natural because of uncontrollable factors like inflation and usage, I do not think they occur at a steady state. In fact according to the same article, "Metra's Feb. 1 fare hike was the agency's biggest ever. The average increase for most regular riders was about 30 percent." This does not seem to be regular or consistent. In order to become more established and mainstream, Metra, along with other companies must find a middle ground when charging their customers.

I think the way people travel is a clear representation of what their society is really like. In fact, this trend of increasing fares inconsistently is not just in Chicago, but all over the country, including our nation's capital, Washington D.C. According to a Washington Post article, in June, "rail passengers faced average increases of about 5 percent." In reality, this is the third time in five years that the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority had raised its fares. But what I really wonder is, if administrations want people to use public transportation, why don't they make it the fare structure more holistic and self-explanatory?

Hurricane Sandy: What the Public Knows

Hurricane Sandy's predicted route, via
The Washington Post

Despite everything that has been going on this weekend, such as the World Series and the upcoming Presidential election, all anyone seems to be talking about is the upcoming Hurricane Sandy.

What was originally dubbed as a "Frankenstorm" by news sources is now attracting public attention, including newspapers and government officials. In today's Washington Post there were numerous articles about how there is "potential for widespread destruction and disruption for millions" of locals up and down the eastern coast of the United States. In one such article by Paul Schwartzman, Ann E. Marimow and Annie Gowen from The Washington Post, it is mentioned how several public officials, including Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, said "This is a serious, killer storm. People should hunker down and prepare for extended days of power outages and dangerous weather". In response to statements like this, the Washington Post finds that "hordes of anxious shoppers are crowding into supermarkets and supply stores", where no precaution is too small. Area schools have also been shut down through the early part of the new week for safety.

I find that this is a direct contrast to what we have been studying in class about how information is often kept from the public during 'perilous' times. Despite the connotation that we have been studying in class about 'perilous times' being during a war, the United States is in the middle of one, and is under threat of a serious (Category 2 hurricane) tropical storm. During WWI for example, the Committee on Public Information was set up in order to inform the American public of what they needed to know, and nothing more. While this group no longer exists today, I think the US is still wary of what information they make aware to the public and how it is interpreted. After all, allowing too much information about Hurricane Sandy, for example, could cause a mass panic and bad results that would take a long time to recover from.