New! Jobs: Coming Soon!

Unemployment rates are through the roof and the meaning of 'living paycheck to paycheck are more relevant than ever.

Fred Barnes, a blogger for NPR writes,

"Employment dipped to 137,960,000 in December 2009. That may seem like a lot of Americans with jobs, but it happened to be the low point in the recession that began before President Obama took office the prior January. Now jump to last month. Employment had risen to 139,573,000, an increase of 1,613,000 people in the workforce in 14 months. That's pretty impressive, right? Quite the contrary. By the standard of earlier economic recoveries, that rate of pickup in jobs is very poor."

I do agree with Barnes when he spoke of Reagan Vs. Obama's plan of action for restimulating our economy. Reagan had the right idea to reduce spending and taxes. Obviously spending more then we have and handing out stimulus checks might boost our economy in the short run, but what happens when that money runs out and there is no more to pump into businesses or even our gas tanks? I agree that if we as a nation reduced our spending and cut taxes then we would eventually get our economy back on balance. It's really a simple PPV chart. The more the government tampers with the economy, the more we end up in a bigger bind.

But is it because we are scarce in the job field? Some such as POP, an anonymous blogger for Pop Economics.  He classifies this job market decline as 'structural unemployment', which is a form of unemployment resulting from a mismatch between demand in the labor market and the skills and locations of the workers seeking employment, as defined by Wikipedia.  The jobs we have today are reinventing themselves to adjust to technology takeover. The types of jobs that used to be in demand are no longer a need and a we as a a society have a new set of demands. Some types of jobs that are newly in demand are biomedical engineers, software engineers, and market analyst for corporations to name a few.

The problem isn't just that there aren't enough jobs, but that they are rapidly changing to what our society demands. I also agree on this basis, but at the same time, will these jobs continue to be in demand for years to come? Would it be worth getting a degree in some of these fields, or will something better come along now that technology is rapidly changing day to day?

Articles:

http://www.popeconomics.com/2011/01/05/2011s-job-market-the-separation-of-the-haves-and-have-nots/

http://www.npr.org/2011/03/22/134759150/weekly-standard-reagan-versus-obama-on-jobs

Obama'don't'care

Is basic healthcare a right? This is a controversy politicians are arguing today more than ever.

Have you ever heard of the saying "If it's not broken then don't try to fix it." I would think this pertains to our healthcare system. Many would argue that America's healthcare is the best in world. Besides, not many countries get to decide what doctor they would like to see, nor do they get the freedom of choosing to have the best care money can buy. I thought America was all about choice, and if I want to have the best primary I can afford without having to wait in lines to receive my annual check up then I will.

The problems with Obama's health care proposal are contradictory to what he is trying to accomplish. Senator Chuck Grassley urges "by having government run the health care industry, this would drive private insurers out of business and lead to a government takeover of the health care system." Simply put, driving out the competition in turns causes people to lose jobs, and all this time I thought Obama's plan was to open more job opportunities for people hurting in the recession

Professor Regina Herzlinger of Harvard Business School makes this correlation to a car dealership by stating, "the high-cost cars and absence of entrepreneurs and competition will skyrocket costs and force government to ration cars." This rationing of health care is kind of like the rationing that was done back in WW II with butter, gasoline, and bread to insure the soldiers were prepared and taken care of.  “The government, through Medicare or state Medicaid or other programs, keeps costs lower as much as possible in order to keeps taxes lower, or to expand care to others, both considered to be the greater good,” argues Trisha Torrey, About.com Guide, What Is Healthcare Rationing? But the problem with the healthcare bill is that it imposes new fees and taxes directly onto the consumer in turn causing the premium to increase well before the bill is even established. The problem is that the with the new health bill is that consumers don’t have the choice of receiving a procedure even if they have the money. Who says that expanding care to others is for the greater good? “Some of us want to reduce the overall cost of the legislation, try to reduce the government’s role, make it harder for illegal immigrants to get benefits, allow alternatives to the individual mandate and harsh penalties, and reward states with extra Medicaid dollars if they pass medical malpractice reform,” explains Senator Grassley. And I agree 100% with this new bill still does not fix our health care system it just creates a bigger mess along with making more people, such as myself angry, because people who make over $100,000 are taxed more which means they have to compensate for those who still don’t have health care.

Senator Grassley also goes on to point out that "The bills will cause insurance premiums for scores of people, especially those who are relatively young and healthy, to go up, not down... after forcing premiums to go up, the legislation makes it mandatory to buy health insurance."  This again goes back to choice, if we as Americans don't have a say on the healthcare we receive and are forced to pay for something the government deemed ' fair for all ' then we are not practicing the constitution our forefathers stood for. We ultimately will become a socialist nation.

Higher Education

                                

After reading an article titled: “Well, Naturally We’re Liberal,” by Jere P. Surber, he goes on to explain why liberal arts professors are, well, liberal. His first point goes into an explanation of the correlation between professor’s level of education and their income. He claims that liberal arts instructors are paid the lowest despite their more advanced study in their subject than their science and business counter parts. He also states “there are few opportunities for liberal-arts scholars to supplement their incomes by serving on government and corporate boards, filing patents and licenses, and, of course, obtaining generous research grants.” He summarizes his argument by saying that “Those who have less and want more will tend to support social changes that promise to accomplish that; those who are already economic winners will want to conserve their status.

I found this argument quite entertaining because I found a counterargument from Professor David Rubinstein from the University of Illinois at Chicago. In his argument he states “The life of a professor is far more attractive than that of most government employees.”  He emphasizes on the fact that his life as a professor has worked to his benefit because what others deem as “work” he sees as something he had been doing since grad school that interested him. He also continues to explain that his “benefits nearly doubled his salary,” which include a paid semester off to conduct research, 3 months of summer off, holding his classes on his own schedule, being able to show up in jeans, and seminar lectures where he can kick back and let grad students do the talking.

When speaking in terms of the pay rate, Professor Rubinstein found that “compared with professionals in the private sector, college professors are underpaid, though according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, “by rank, the average [salary] was $108,749 for full professors.” I don’t know about you, but making over $100,000 average to do what I love sounds like a win to me.

I would say the latter of the two seems to be headed more in my direction. Although not every University professor has the exact same benefits and pay rate across the board, the benefits of becoming a teacher/professor are about the same, especially when talking about vacation time.

Professor Rubenstein also included a statistic in his findings that I thought was interesting. He found “The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the quit rate for government workers is less than one-third that of the private sector. Applications for federal jobs exceed those for the private sector by at least 25 percent, and when workers move from private to federal employment their earnings, according to Princeton’s Alan Krueger, increase by 12 percent.” It seems to me that working for the government does actually pay off. As my great grandfather said, “always try to find a job within the government because they will take care of you.” I think the reason why quit rate is so high in the private sector is because there are less opportunities as well as benefits to keep individuals happy and families fed.

Because I am one of the brave souls determined to become a high school and some day higher education professor, I think that reading both views on the point lead me to the direction of the conservative side yet again. It is so easy to blame the government for not getting enough out of the system, but I think if more people were educated and knowledgeable on educational views and the actual facts, then more people would see the government is actually taking care of higher education professors.

Articles: http://chronicle.com/article/Well-Naturally-Were-Liberal/63870/
          
              http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/fat-city_567621.html?page=1

What Liberals Think Conservatives Think On Education

Since the 1790’s the Republican and Democratic Party has had differing views on who is actually right on the matter at hand. This has led to today’s misconceptions each party has on the other.  Liberals tend to think us Republicans are racists, against the government, don’t care about the environment, and think only the wealthy should attend a higher education institution.

And on the topic of education, while the last statement might not entirely be untrue, I, as a conservative, have an explanation that follows.  

Democrats believe that conservatives want to keep the rich wealthy and the poor in the slums when it comes to disagreements on an education perspective. I agree that education is almost the only way to advance in one’s life. Unless you have prospered off a get rich scheme watching a late night infomercial, you need education to advance in your professional life to gain a respectful as well as a financially stable position in society. According to OnTheIssues.org, a Democratic website that defines it’s standpoints, stated that, “Democrats know that the key to expanding opportunity is to provide every child with a strong foundation of education. We will also help expand educational opportunities for college by making college tuition tax deductible, expanding Pell Grants, and cut student loan interest rates.” According to The National Center for Education Statistics, “Sixty-six percent of all undergraduates received some type of financial aid in 2007–08 and in 2007–08, federal Pell Grants were awarded to 27 percent of all undergraduates at an average of $2,600.”

I’m sorry, but expand Pell Grants through financial aid? The federal government should in no way impose with who gets into college because of the money a student is granted. According to the book Academically Adrift, higher education institutions are now looking at the money students receive and compete for those students. Which is ironic because I thought college was about getting accepted based on the grades you received in high school?

The statistics on the amount of students who receive at least some form of financial aid, to me, is astronomical. According to the number, that means more than HALF of undergrads receive financial aid. I mean, I know we are in an economic slump, but you’re telling me that more than half of all students qualify for some type of award?

Maybe I’m being cynical because I didn’t qualify for anything but loans this semester, but then again, I am also one of those rare students who work my ass off to pay for my own tuition and books because I don’t have the privilege of mommy and daddy handing be a blank check to give to the bursar. Either way, I still believe that education should be rooted from personal responsibility and accomplishment, not the amount of money the government deems you necessary because your parents didn’t make enough money or because you didn’t get high enough grades.

Sources: 1. 2006 Democratic Party Congressional Promise Nov 1, 2006

   2. http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Democratic_Party_Education.htm

              3. http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=31

CLICK LINK TO WATCH VIDEO: <iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FiQJ9Xp0xxU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

From Where I Stand . . .

Politics: I know, it’s the first thing on everyone’s mind at 11:47 after we realized we are still alive and have yet another day to carry out. But even if it was on the backburner for just a minute, I think it would be safe to say that this is a hot ticket issue especially with the upcoming 2012 presidential election.

I understand that for young people today, this might not be the first thing they care about especially when they have alcohol to consume and college exams to take, but I think the problem is the youth is uneducated, confused, and more prevalent, intimidated by the understanding of the word politics and how it directly affects them.

This is why I made this blog. I want people to realize the importance of having a voice, and most importantly, knowing where you stand.

I am a Conservative.

This can be disheartening to some and others might see me as selfish and coldhearted, but either way this is where I stand.

And how do I like my tea? I like it made from a strong foundation of hard work this country was built on and of course, tax-free. I have gone to the Washington D.C. Tea Party Express rally on September 12, 2009 for the Healthcare protest and Glen Beck’s “Restoring Honor” on August 28th 2010 and from what I have witnessed, I am a Republican for the shear fact that I believe in individual responsibility, the free market, and the right to order a Big Mac with all the extra Mac sauce I’d like.

This is my voice to the youth to understand my point of view and rhetoric to influence and have others understand the crisis the United States is facing because our increased sensitivity and wanting to be equal.