Even though they may have a good price for the quality and quantity the monies is not helping our economy grow. Once again we are sending money out helping other countries grow while we as a whole are here in the U.S. struggling. I can understand the need to buy steal, iron or any other manufactory goods cheaper if they can be found on foreign land, even though it make take away plenty of money. However, the use of these materials may be used to build new stuff that will help the grow economy and cause more jobs. I believe with using the foreign countries we as the United States need to make sure the steel, manufacture goods and anything else is of good material and we will not put out more money than needed because “we” decided to trust them.
A Letter to the Editor It is Walter Cuffey's opinion that providing free housing and healthcare naturally would diminish people's desire to work for the government and pay their taxes, which in the long run would lead the country to bankruptcy. This contradicts Congressman Jesse Jackson Junior's opinion who believes it simply would create millions of jobs in the housing and health care industries and because of that generate a greater economic prosperity. I do not believe that the free housing Jackson mentions is meant to be expensive and luxurious. However, by free housing I imagine, he in point of fact means shelter, so that no-one in America have to live on the street. Once you have got a roof over your head, a solid base to return to,
Some people think that by accepting the bill they will have to let everyone in, other citizens believe it is unfair for them; they believe they will take most jobs and in some cases take away a citizen’s job. Another factor why people oppose to it is because they believe that undocumented people do not pay their taxes. Another con would be that more people would be inspired to cross to the United States. There are many contradictory statements that make the bill seem like its benefiting undocumented students without anything in return, when in reality it would help
The body parts and organs that were named have been successful in treating the patient’s condition. Discuss whether or not these artificial organs can permanently replace the original human organ. I believe in this day and time, that completely ruling out regular transplant would not be fair because there are so many people waiting for a transplant. I feel as though artificial organs cannot permanently take the place of original human organs because a patient might not react as well to an original human organ rather than an artificial one. My theory also is that eventually people will start bidding on artificial organs and the richer people will have say over a family that doesn't have a lot of money.
But a country such as Turkey, seeing as no trade agreements have been made between them and the US, would not be so ideal because of larger tariffs and borders between the trading industries. As an economist, one must agree that there must be a delicate balance between outsourced industries and industries on the home front. It would be best to lean towards more American products so employment rates would be much higher, but with high employment comes great inflation. The costs of many products would skyrocket if we did not have industries that had very low employee wages in other countries. And if there is too much outsourcing, there would be no jobs.
Week 3 Checkpoint- Modern Challenges in Immigration I have heard people say that America is “the land of opportunity”. That people come to America from all over the world to earn a better life for themselves and their families. When their country is only offering extremely low paying jobs and poor health care they choose to come to America to earn more money and get better doctors for their children. With the opportunities like that available to them, who wouldn’t want to come to America? There is however one major downfall of trying to do the right thing and becoming a legal resident; the cost of the applications and other fees are outrageous.
They can raise and lower it. If they wanted to make it higher or lower, they could. This is usually the most important piece because people don’t want to pay taxes, even if it is to benefit the country. Having our money taken away is not what people want without good reason. Our representatives have to decide on what the cost of improvement is and if the people really want or need it.
If justice is conceived of as being about what individuals would choose were they unaware of who they are (Singer) then people would surely chose an impartial universalist approach to redistributive justice as advocated by Singer if they did not know whether they were a citizen of the USA or Europe. Singer believes that governments give priority to their citizens over the far more urgent and desperate needs of those further away. I believe Singer is right about this because, in most cases the governments don’t give much thought about helping kids with disabilities as much as they do to war or raising tuitions rates like the U.K just
Having a third of our population without healthcare may sound bad; however, some would argue that we are sticking to the roots of our founding fathers who wanted the power to be in the people. They wanted less government control and more individual responsibility to make it or break it. When referring to the idea of “make it or break it”, in this sense, it refers to whether or not the people were successful enough to pay for healthcare or whether they were less fortunate and were not successful enough to pay for health care. This is what makes America so great, while it does create a third of the population to have no healthcare, it generates brilliant thinkers and entrepreneurs that makes our great society what it has become today. Having a third of the population without healthcare allows hard working Americans that own businesses, or who have worked hard to make the amount of money they have, to be taxed fairly and not to have to pay higher taxes for other Americans who were less fortunate and could not afford healthcare.
Being an educated or skilled immigrant would most likely mean that the steps to naturalization, as in the mandatory costs and testing, would be less of a challenge to fulfill. In Chapter four of the text Racial and Ethnic Groups (REG), it states that “The brain drain is the immigration to the United States of skilled workers, professionals, and technicians who are desperately needed by their home countries.”(REG, chapter four, p. 103) This would cause some reluctance in my decision to migrate to America from China. The fact that I would be possibly taking away something that benefits my native country could cause some second thought. This may not be a major factor if the political system in China had a negative effect on my economic advancement. The same could be said if I was looking for an education in America and eventually decided to stay instead of returning to China because of the lack of opportunity for growth.