Don't be a Kermudgeon

One of our recent class discussions got me thinking about the U.S. Census Bureau; it's purpose and how it's received by the American public. Filling out the census form once every 10 years per household is important, no--it's crucial to having prosperous communities and receiving federal funding in our local communities among many other things that effect all of us.

I understand there is a popular mistrust in our government and it's policies, and I am one of those people, too. I also understand how it can be perceived as an invasion of privacy. Is it really necessary for them to know, even indirectly, that my brother came to live with me for a few months because he had no where else to go? Many of us are just plain scared of why this information is needed, scared of repercussion. 

Honestly, if the government wants information about us, then they'll find a way to get it. We basically give out more information to our cell phone provider than we're willing to give a form that is sent by the government. It's not difficult to look at pictures of our homes and yards via satellite maps, or just google our names on the internet and look at our social networking pages--there are tons of ways to get very personal information without ever asking us. 

We have to get over these insecurities and feelings of violation and be willing to grasp the bigger picture. The government needs to know where populations are growing to know where to construct new roads, build newer and bigger schools, provide more sources for jobs, and something else that I didn't realize until I looked into it--this information also helps distribute among states the seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. How is this not important? I also started to wonder about natural disasters, and how vital the information on the census could be for emergency services to prepare and be capable of handling such distress--and guess what--the census is involved with that, too!

I know there is a lot of corruption when it comes to our government, but I really think that the census is important at this time especially. We need to track everyone, not to annoy them or invade their privacy, but to plan for our future (We know we have a "problem" with illegal immigration, we have for a very long time, it's not going to go away just because we are afraid of being truthful on our census forms). Just think of how many more jobs can open up for future generations with more information about the nation's people and economy.

 

Media Matters: Hate Fox News

With how twisted and poisonous our media-world has become in the U.S., I appreciate any acknowledgment of misinformation in our media, and I suspect exposing these falsehoods is the aim of many of the political blogs out there. Media Matters takes pride in "correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media," because to them, the media does matter.

In July, a 45-year-old man was caught by California police and charged with attempted murder of police officers. This article doesn't focus on that though, Tides CEO... focuses on the assassin's intentions and motivations of that day. The suspect admitted having a plan to kill "important members" of a low-profile non profit organization called Tides and the American Civil Liberties Union. Although the author, Media Matters Staff, doesn't say too much, it seems that this establishment supports the Tides CEO in his claim that Fox News' conservative, Glenn Beck-- fueled the assassin with motivation for the almost attempted murders.

Even though this article is very short and is dominated by a letter written by Tides CEO, Pike Drummond, I thought it important to critique because of what this blog stands for and how it effects readers. I feel the website is taking a stance on the issue by printing the letter written by Drummond to large companies like Geico, and JP Morgan Chase, asking them to stop their advertising with Fox News, hoping to put a stop to Glenn Beck and his power to motivate hate crimes.

I think the intended audience is very broad, but foremost it is for liberals, and those who watch news on television, and unfortunately those who for whatever reason, watch Fox News. Media Matters' primary focus is to "systematically monitor...news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible..."  yet there is no credibility behind the author of this article, it only says "staff." It does not correct any misinformation that Glenn Beck or Fox News put out there, it only suggests a way to stop Fox News, and it's is to stop them with the influence of money and power. They also completely ignore the fact that this man, Byron Williams, is insane and psychotic. To think that murder will start a "revolution" is sick, so he is obviously sick. I can't ignore the part where William's says he looked to Beck as more of a teacher than a newscaster, but is this hard and fast evidence of Beck condoning mass murder?

There may not have been much of an argument on Media Matter's side in this article, so I'll ask--what is its purpose other than adding more fuel to the fire and adding to the political polarization in our country? (Those who spend their time hating one news organization for being partial to a specific party are only adding to the problem). I don't know that money and a heart-felt letter from an organization seeking social change, fairness, and equality will give Glenn Beck a soul, or stop Fox News from producing. 

(And for the record, I do not like Glenn Beck, and I do not like Fox News, but I do love Subaru and they advertise on Fox. So what does that make me?)

Critique of Taking On China

     I never thought about whether it is a good or bad thing for the American public to have opinion sections in our "news" before. Some people say I am an opinionated person, but when it comes to topics of which my knowledge is minimal, I do not pretend to have an opinion, and I like to hear other's arguments to better understand the situation, but now I am not so sure that is the best idea. I chose Taking On China, an article evaluating the current economic conflict concerning China on The NY Times website. I chose to critique this article being as I am not an economist I thought I could hold back my instinctual opinions and look at it objectively.

     At first I thought this article's intended audience was strictly economists or those interested in international/domestic trade balance, but now i see that any American with some regard to our economy can read this and evaluate for themselves given the hands-on experience with the outsourcing of American jobs. 

     The author's main argument is that China's "predatory currency policy" is not only toying with their citizens, but ours, too, and that China is "flaunting its contempt" with the U.S., thus further effecting our economy. His choice of words clearly attacks China's policies and conveniently, they lend to his claim that U.S. officials need to initiate sanctions against China. He claims that U.S. policy makers have been "incredibly, infuriatingly passive in the face of China's bad behavior..." 

     I think that the author shows a good display of logic in his outlook of the American economy, and also the concept that you can scare or force others to do what you want them to do. We all know that though. However, I do not think he is logical when he says that emerging nations (China in this case) "could and should" help get the world economy out of its slump (I think he means to give us back the upper hand). He doesn't touch on corporate-government team player, and whether they benefit from ties with China, whether it's investments or taking advantage of their cheap economy. 

     I am glad that you have to search for this article under the opinion section because I do not think it presents a very balanced argument. If someone is looking to be pointed in one direction or the other, or someone is seeking reaffirmation of their own sharp economic standpoints, then this article effectively could handle both, but that's about it. 

     This article was posted on The New York Times website on September 29, 2010 by author Paul Krugman, American economist, and winner of the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in economics for his work with the New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography.

Taking On China