Evaluating Barbara

In her last chapter of Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich evaluates her experiment to survive on minimum wage. She highlights a number of challenges that continually face the working poor. In addition, she provides her own explanation for what is holding the working poor back from economic success and security.

Please identify the challenges facing the working poor as explained by Ehrenreich. Then assess her explanation of the obstacles facing the poor. Finally, provide you own evaluation for how our society treats or deals with those living in poverty.

Enough with the fake outrage!!!

As our economy falters, our troops fight two wars, and millions of Americans continue to live without health insurance; our political leaders and noise machine media focus on the important issues: patriotism. I for one am sick of both political parties trying to prove which one is more patriotic. This constant quest for one-up-manship drives Republicans and Democrats to focus on the mundane and unimportant. But why? Why do both parties continue to focus on this patriotism competition?

There are two answers. First, neither party can force their ideological driven vision on all Americans. With Congress closely divided and an unpopular President, both parties are frustrated with their own inabilities. Due to their failure to compromise (or simply a lack of real ideas) politicans are driven to issues that have no real impact. But why patriotism? This is where the second answer comes into play: too many Americans buy into it. If we would demand more from our government; if we would demand more from Washington; if we were not so easily distracted from the real problems our nation faces, and actually demanded something, then maybe things would change in Washington.

Up to now, I have discounted the notions that 2008 was a "throw the bums" out election. Yet, as it becomes clear that Congress and the President have no idea as to what to do to help the American people, I am slowing becoming convinced that Washington has to change. However, that change must begin in the living rooms of America.

Is the media driving this race???

After watching countless hours of media coverage about the race for the Democratic nomination, I was left to ask the question: Is the media driving this race? As Sen. Clinton emerged in late October with a seemingly insurmountable lead in the polls, the media began to build up her chief opponent, Sen. Obama. By simply watching the talking heads, it was clear that the media wanted a story. An inevitable Clinton victory was boring. That surely would not "sell." But what always sells? Conflict! The news markets wanted a story they could sell and so used their influence to create such a story. The Daily Show captured my thoughts perfectly. After watching the clip below, just ask yourself: Was there any doubt that Obama was going to be declared the winner of the debate in Philadelphia?

The Logical Tax Debate

As the President and Congress lock horns over federal spending and tax law, the American middle-class continues to lose. Without legislative reforms, millions of middle-class Americans will be subject to the AMT, which was originally designed to catch millionaires who were not paying their fair share of taxes.

At a time when Republicans are championing calls of patriotism and accusing Democrats of not "supporting the troops" the party of the President needs to reevaluate their patriotic duties. In his weekly radio address, President Bush demanded Congress pass AMT tax reform. His call was the right one, but like he so often does, President Bush mixes a sound principle with unsound specifics. In the same breath in which he calls for tax help for the middle-class, he treatened to veto any AMT reform that raised other taxes to pay for the loss in revenue. So basically, President Bush wants tax reform for the middle-class but not at the expense of large corporations and hedgefund manager, who make millions of dollars.

The President and his congressional allies are therefore asking for middle-class tax reform, but don't want to increase taxes on the super-rich to pay for that lost revenue. But, if taxes are not raised, where will the difference by made up? In reduced social program spending of course. But this spending supports many of the social programs favored and supported by middle-class Americans.

It is time for the Democratic Party to abandon its policies of pandering to select interest groups and frame 2008 as an election built on saving the middle-class. Front and center of this election strategy must be the tax issue. Democrats must get middle-class Americans to ask themselves, why should I support a political party so irrationally against taxes? No one likes taxes, but they are a matter of necessity for any post-industrialized society. Therefore, why should those most able to pay and contribute not be asked to provide their fair share? It is the business executives, bankers, stockbrockers, and hedgefund managers who reap the most benefit from the American economy. They receive disproportionate rewards and therefore they should pay disproportionate costs.

While Republicans have adopted the belief that the only way to be patriotic is to pay out $800 billion for a war without question, they should have already lost the political debate. But Democrats have failed to frame the issue. Tax policy needs to be framed in a patriotic context. Through true and revolutionary tax reform, true change can be achieved.

As Thomas Friedman wrote, in his support for a gasoline tax...

"I can't believe that someone could not win the following debate:

Republican Candidate: 'My Democratic opponent, true to form, wants to raise your taxes. Yes, now he wants to raise your taxes at the gasoline pump by $1 a gallon. Another tax-and-spend liberal who wants to get into your pocket'

Democratic Candidate: 'Yes, my opponent is right. I do favor a gasoline tax phased in over 12 months. But let's get one thing straight: My opponent and I are both for a tax. I just prefer that my taxes go to the U.S. Treasury, and he's ready to see his go to the Russian, Venezuelan, Saudi and Iranian treasuries. His tax finances people who hate us. Mine would offset some of our payroll taxes, pay down our deficit, strengthen our dollar, stimulate energy efficiency and shore up Social Security. Its called win-win-win-win-win for America. My opponent's strategy is sit back, let the market work and watch America lose-lose-lose-lose-lose.'"

How does anyone lose that political debate???

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071117/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

Working Minimum Wage in Maine

Detail what occurred in Chapter 2. Make sure to discuss the events, people, and struggles that Barbara meets. In addition, offer any insights or conclusions that Barbara provides. Make sure to provide textual evidence to justify your response.

What's in a Word?

The United States is currently engaged in a national discussion revolved around our conduct in the War on Terror. Central to this discussion is the question of torture. Should the U.S. use torture against the enemy in an effort to retrieve information? Is torture an effective method of intelligence gathering? Would allowing the U.S. Armed Forces or the intelligence agencies (CIA) undermine our moral principles or hurt our international image? These are tough questions, made tougher by our government's seeming inability to talk straight to us.

Jon Stewart recently discussed this very same topic on the Daily Show. Watch the embedded video and offer your thoughts.

Is She Accurate?

Nickel and Dimed

When Barbara Ehrenreich published Nickel and Dimed in 2001 she was met by praise and criticism. Nickel and Dimed has engendered suppport and comtemnation depending on one's perspective.

Based on your reading of the book so far, post your thoughts and reactions to Ehrenreich's mission and message.

What to do in Pakistan?

The Risky Dance with Pakistan

As the nation of Pakistan teeters on the edge of chaos, the United States is left with difficult questions.

Does the Bush Administration support its ally in the War on Terror, President Musharraf? Should the United States support immediate democratic reforms and the popular appeal of Benazir Bhutto?

It is clear that the U.S. is left with few good options in this situation. Musharraf seems to represent at least some semblance of stability in a volatile region. On the other hand, the U.S. risks losing the moral high ground as it promotes "democracy" in Iraq but denies it in Pakistan.

What is the proper course of action for the United States?

What Should Congressmen Do?

In the study of political science there is a fiece debate as to the proper role of congressmen. Some believe Senators and Representatives should act as delegates, merely representing the views of their constituents. Others argue that these men and women are elected because voters trust their judgement and therefore they should simply vote their conscience and fulfill a trustee model. Other political scientists have tried to combine the two views into a compromise called Politico(some people would call this cowardly).

Your questions: What did Edmund Burke say about this topic (refer to your reading)? Second, what is your personal belief? Which is the proper role for members of Congress: trustee, delegate, or politico? Justify and support your answer.

Two Crazy Senators?