Op-Ed columnist, Barbara Ehrenreich, has come to the conclusion that the current economic conditions of the United States has been a test of the American safety net. Ehrenreich believes that what has happened to the government as a result of the recession can be compared to what happened to the Federal Emergency Management Agency after Hurricane Katrina. Ehrenreich uses a story of a lower class American family who found themselves out of work and on the brink of poverty to explain how the government was ill-prepared for such a huge recession.
Ehrenreich does a good job using a great deal of examples to emphasize her point that though the government can “talk the talk”, they can’t “walk the walk”. Ehrenreich’s arguments are very factual and to the point. Instead of just writing from her own point-of-view, she uses direct quotes and incorporates a story into the article which, in turn, supports her firm stance in the argument. Though most political writers only look at the big picture, Ehrenreich’s chose to dig deep and cover a real life story about things that most people and politicians choose to ignore.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Is America like a Frog?
Krugman compares American to frog in the sense that it never realizes the danger it's in while the water is heating and is eventually boiled alive. Creeping disasters are what we are facing these days and as of now we are just sitting while the water is getting hotter. We face disasters in both the economic and environmental realms. While economics are pointing to a second wind of the Great Depression the environmental points towards a total catastrophe in climate change. Krugman points out that climate change is "a creeping threat", the catastrophe will not be apparents for a while and then it will be too late. It's puzzling why the country won't take action when the president and the Congressional leadership now exactly what is happening.
Krugman uses this article as a "here's what's happening, what are you doing to fix it?" article. His analogy of boiling a frog gets across his hopelessness and view of the country's future.It is also a nice visual for the reader.He has a nice balance of facts and opinion.He ends the article by stating he doesn't know the solution, making the reader think about how they themselves might fix it, and again showing his hopelessness.
Krugman uses this article as a "here's what's happening, what are you doing to fix it?" article. His analogy of boiling a frog gets across his hopelessness and view of the country's future.It is also a nice visual for the reader.He has a nice balance of facts and opinion.He ends the article by stating he doesn't know the solution, making the reader think about how they themselves might fix it, and again showing his hopelessness.
The Way We Love Now
Brittany Liebenow
Mr. Glenn
AP Language Arts
13 July 2009
4th Response
In “The Way We Love Now,” Ross Douthat reveals how, despite the public’s love of scandalous romance, responsibilities and pressures drain today’s relationships of spark and compassion. Douthat uses examples from two different essayists, Cristina Nehring and Tsing Loh. Although these women have different points to make about dying love in today’s society, they both trace it back to pressure on families causing the love to seep out of relationships. While this is true on many levels, Douthat also makes an excellent and shockingly true distinction between the upper and lower classes regarding relationships. Although upper class citizens seem to support wild and reckless love, they tend to be more conservative with their own relationships. The lower class, on the other hand, tends to indulge in wild relationships and have many more children. Douthat uses these two points to prove an excellent realization. Upper class citizens who could benefit from having a more reckless love life do not, and lower class citizens who could benefit from being more conservative about their love lives do not. In essence, Ross Douthat argues that relationships may not be living up to peoples’ expectations because of the expectations of love and relationships already established in social classes.
Ross Douthat does a good job of arguing his points by using the outside opinions of well-known essayists. Without these examples, however, I find that his ideas do not make much sense. Even while reading through the second and third time, I find myself having to refer back to the first few paragraphs where the examples begin. This is also fairly difficult because I believe that Douthat could have done a better job of not making those first few paragraphs so complicated and jam-packed. His sentences are long and filled with rich vocabulary, but, because of all the different examples he throws in, the vocabulary does more to confuse than impress the reader. The structure of this article was also very hard to follow. Douthat seems to be so excited with his ideas that he forgets to organize his thoughts in an understandable way. The tone in this essay was not very strong. From what I could gather, Douthat uses an ironic tone. Although this tone is slight, Douthat supports it well by pointing out that love among different social classes today is very ironic.
Mr. Glenn
AP Language Arts
13 July 2009
4th Response
In “The Way We Love Now,” Ross Douthat reveals how, despite the public’s love of scandalous romance, responsibilities and pressures drain today’s relationships of spark and compassion. Douthat uses examples from two different essayists, Cristina Nehring and Tsing Loh. Although these women have different points to make about dying love in today’s society, they both trace it back to pressure on families causing the love to seep out of relationships. While this is true on many levels, Douthat also makes an excellent and shockingly true distinction between the upper and lower classes regarding relationships. Although upper class citizens seem to support wild and reckless love, they tend to be more conservative with their own relationships. The lower class, on the other hand, tends to indulge in wild relationships and have many more children. Douthat uses these two points to prove an excellent realization. Upper class citizens who could benefit from having a more reckless love life do not, and lower class citizens who could benefit from being more conservative about their love lives do not. In essence, Ross Douthat argues that relationships may not be living up to peoples’ expectations because of the expectations of love and relationships already established in social classes.
Ross Douthat does a good job of arguing his points by using the outside opinions of well-known essayists. Without these examples, however, I find that his ideas do not make much sense. Even while reading through the second and third time, I find myself having to refer back to the first few paragraphs where the examples begin. This is also fairly difficult because I believe that Douthat could have done a better job of not making those first few paragraphs so complicated and jam-packed. His sentences are long and filled with rich vocabulary, but, because of all the different examples he throws in, the vocabulary does more to confuse than impress the reader. The structure of this article was also very hard to follow. Douthat seems to be so excited with his ideas that he forgets to organize his thoughts in an understandable way. The tone in this essay was not very strong. From what I could gather, Douthat uses an ironic tone. Although this tone is slight, Douthat supports it well by pointing out that love among different social classes today is very ironic.
Boiling the Frog
In the article “Boiling the Frog”, Paul Krugman uses the metaphor of a boiled frog to represent a serious problem America is facing. That problem is the difficulty of responding to disasters that creep up on you a bit at a time. The boiled frog refers to the proverbial frog that when placed in a pot of cold water that is gradually heated never realizes the danger it’s in until it is boiled alive. Krugman asks “Is America on its way to becoming a boiled frog?” Our nation is constantly facing disasters these days and the recent policy actions take a substantial amount of time to have their full effect. Using the example of the economy, Krugman explains how the Obama stimulus plan wasn’t as strong as it should have been, therefore, all the signs are pointing to a “jobless recovery”. According to economic forecasters, we need another round of stimulus to help pull the economy out of its deep hole. Now that the free fall is over, all sense of urgency has vanished.
Along with the economy, another major problem is climate change. The rise in temperatures could completely disrupt life as we know it, if we continue on our present path. Climate change is a creeping threat that won’t be apparent for decades, but, if we wait to act until the crisis is obvious, catastrophe will already be inevitable. The alarming thing is that so little is happening when the political situation seems to be favorable to action. It is clear that the government understands the environmental and economic issues perfectly well but they are unwilling to put plans into action to fight off disaster. If we don’t fix the problems now, America could be like the boiled frog, not realizing its danger until it is too late.
Along with the economy, another major problem is climate change. The rise in temperatures could completely disrupt life as we know it, if we continue on our present path. Climate change is a creeping threat that won’t be apparent for decades, but, if we wait to act until the crisis is obvious, catastrophe will already be inevitable. The alarming thing is that so little is happening when the political situation seems to be favorable to action. It is clear that the government understands the environmental and economic issues perfectly well but they are unwilling to put plans into action to fight off disaster. If we don’t fix the problems now, America could be like the boiled frog, not realizing its danger until it is too late.
Trials By Firefighters
The controversy over the New Haven multiple choice standardized testing firefighters are put through has reached a new level of chaos. Lani Guiner and Susan Strum forcefully expressed their opinions of the standardized test in the article “Trial By Firefighters”. Which, not only does the test decide which firefighter is ready for a promotion, the results have had consistently polar results when it comes to a white or a minority. Recently, the Supreme Court ruled for the test needing to stay in effect to help add rigor to the promotion expectations by using book smarts. With this a new question arises, if firefighters are mainly using street smarts and problem solving on the job, why would it be necessary to test them with book smarts to account for sixty percent of their promotional scorings? By using common sense and logic, one would come to the conclusion that it doesn’t. Standardized testing may have worked at some point in history however, with a fast paced society around, it contradicts most tools you need in life to be successful. Firefighters should not be tested at all with book knowledge. Doing this would eliminate the races getting treated differently and even the playing fields. This is not to say however, that firefighters should not have some sort of mental challenge. Firefighters need to be tested by problem solving under pressure in addition to tests done about the city, with various facts about the buildings included.
“Trials By Firefighter” feels as if the authors are trying to control your opinions bluntly. It is obvious that Guiner and Strum feel strongly about the issue, so much so that in many instances it felt as if they were fighting for a couple different issues instead of just focusing in on one and really going at it. At times throughout the article, it was a struggle to differentiate whether they were fighting because the tests were racist, illogical, or unneeded. The most troubling part as a reader comes with the last line, “In so doing, city officials demonstrate that their decisions are wiser than the Supreme Court’s.” In adding this last line to their article, it opened a whole new can of worms. Was the article talking about the issues within the test the whole time or was it trying, and epically failing, to make the reader realize the Supreme Court serves no actual justice when the city makes better judgment calls anyways?
“Trials By Firefighter” feels as if the authors are trying to control your opinions bluntly. It is obvious that Guiner and Strum feel strongly about the issue, so much so that in many instances it felt as if they were fighting for a couple different issues instead of just focusing in on one and really going at it. At times throughout the article, it was a struggle to differentiate whether they were fighting because the tests were racist, illogical, or unneeded. The most troubling part as a reader comes with the last line, “In so doing, city officials demonstrate that their decisions are wiser than the Supreme Court’s.” In adding this last line to their article, it opened a whole new can of worms. Was the article talking about the issues within the test the whole time or was it trying, and epically failing, to make the reader realize the Supreme Court serves no actual justice when the city makes better judgment calls anyways?
Obama's Big Missile Test
Op Ed #4
Obama’s Big Missile Test
By Philip Taubman
A world without nuclear weapons is believed to be a world without war. This assertion has been made hypothetically for the past decade, yet it is only now within our reach. President Obama recently outlined a plan in Prague that might make this peaceful vision a reality. Many struggle, however, calling this vision, “peaceful.” Philip Taubman, author of the article Obama’s Big Missile Test, questions the validity of Obama’s attempts to remove all nuclear weapons off the face of the earth as well as whether or not his attempts are peaceful at all. His response to President Obama’s arms reduction is not stated plainly, yet the evidence he offers and the intended tone of the article reflect a negative stance on the issue. Taubman emphasizes how Obama has very little support from Congress and the Pentagon, and his influence on the periodic Nuclear Posture Review, a handbook issued by the Pentagon that regulates nuclear production, must be hindered. Taubman continues to stress that a world without nuclear weapons is not a peaceful world. A large nuclear stock has in previous years been an intimidation factor, especially during the Cold War. The United States has one of the largest and most advanced nuclear arsenals in the world, which despite the current economic turmoil has kept countries such as North Korea and Iran from taking over. Removing this arsenal would be devastating to not only our homeland security, but to the security of the world. Obama’s arms reduction plan seems irrational to Democrats and Republicans alike, and puts the well- being of our country at risk. His plan is raising concern to the public who are now wondering whose side Obama is on.
Although Philip Taubman did not openly state his opinion in the article, it can easily be inferred by his tone that he was concerned about the issue and disagreed with Obama’s plan. The article was well written and factual, and contained no opinionated statements. Taubman did, however, use factual evidence to reveal his opinion. A note at the bottom of the article stated that Philip Taubman is a consulting professor at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. His position there seems to parallel with his perspectives on international security. His position also adds validity to his claims, because he must be knowledgeable about international security to work in that field. Taubman makes his opinion visible also by making slight jabs at Obama. He hints at Obama’s apparent lack of experience in foreign affairs, and mocks his vision of a world with no nuclear weapons. The article presents Obama as almost naïve. Each comment directed toward President Obama was, however, backed by fact.
Obama’s Big Missile Test
By Philip Taubman
A world without nuclear weapons is believed to be a world without war. This assertion has been made hypothetically for the past decade, yet it is only now within our reach. President Obama recently outlined a plan in Prague that might make this peaceful vision a reality. Many struggle, however, calling this vision, “peaceful.” Philip Taubman, author of the article Obama’s Big Missile Test, questions the validity of Obama’s attempts to remove all nuclear weapons off the face of the earth as well as whether or not his attempts are peaceful at all. His response to President Obama’s arms reduction is not stated plainly, yet the evidence he offers and the intended tone of the article reflect a negative stance on the issue. Taubman emphasizes how Obama has very little support from Congress and the Pentagon, and his influence on the periodic Nuclear Posture Review, a handbook issued by the Pentagon that regulates nuclear production, must be hindered. Taubman continues to stress that a world without nuclear weapons is not a peaceful world. A large nuclear stock has in previous years been an intimidation factor, especially during the Cold War. The United States has one of the largest and most advanced nuclear arsenals in the world, which despite the current economic turmoil has kept countries such as North Korea and Iran from taking over. Removing this arsenal would be devastating to not only our homeland security, but to the security of the world. Obama’s arms reduction plan seems irrational to Democrats and Republicans alike, and puts the well- being of our country at risk. His plan is raising concern to the public who are now wondering whose side Obama is on.
Although Philip Taubman did not openly state his opinion in the article, it can easily be inferred by his tone that he was concerned about the issue and disagreed with Obama’s plan. The article was well written and factual, and contained no opinionated statements. Taubman did, however, use factual evidence to reveal his opinion. A note at the bottom of the article stated that Philip Taubman is a consulting professor at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. His position there seems to parallel with his perspectives on international security. His position also adds validity to his claims, because he must be knowledgeable about international security to work in that field. Taubman makes his opinion visible also by making slight jabs at Obama. He hints at Obama’s apparent lack of experience in foreign affairs, and mocks his vision of a world with no nuclear weapons. The article presents Obama as almost naïve. Each comment directed toward President Obama was, however, backed by fact.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The Human Equation
As many of you may know; Obama is pressing to pass another stimulus. The whole country is impatiently watching and waiting for this so-called elixir for our economy. Even the economic experts of our nation are calling the end to this recession imminent. Amidst this optimism, Bob Herbert calls for a reconsideration of this euphoric attitude and reveals that an economic recovery is far more difficult than simply passing a few plans. What Herbert concentrated on was employment. He argues that Obama’s stimulus and other economic plans are all missing the “human element”, which is to say that they all ignore the importance and the severity of the unemployment rates. He also argues that the stimulus allocates too little to address this employment problem. Ultimately, Herbert wants the nation to reassess its approach to this economic recession and put employment as one of its top issues. He believes that joblessness is the main obstacle to economic recovery.
I believe Herbert makes a very good point in addressing the lack of positive results from Obama’s economic plans. I thought he does a really good job in pointing out the problem and offering a solution. He first supports his claim with statistics and then he explains why these statistics are important. He states that unemployment rates are important because a healthy economy needs people driving it. He also offers a solution to the problem; This solution he calls “rebuilding America”. In this proposal, Herbert affirms that the government should conduct programs that would get jobless people simple jobs such as repairing, designing, etc. Overall my beliefs are along with that of Herbert’s. I also believe that our economic problem could not be solved b just giving money to the free market, but rather it should be solved by getting people back into the free market.
I believe Herbert makes a very good point in addressing the lack of positive results from Obama’s economic plans. I thought he does a really good job in pointing out the problem and offering a solution. He first supports his claim with statistics and then he explains why these statistics are important. He states that unemployment rates are important because a healthy economy needs people driving it. He also offers a solution to the problem; This solution he calls “rebuilding America”. In this proposal, Herbert affirms that the government should conduct programs that would get jobless people simple jobs such as repairing, designing, etc. Overall my beliefs are along with that of Herbert’s. I also believe that our economic problem could not be solved b just giving money to the free market, but rather it should be solved by getting people back into the free market.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)