The weekly assignment consists of five parts:
1) Read the assignments. This week's readings is Public Agenda's Federal Budget reading and gives a strong overview of the deficit. If your issue is not the deficit, try to find a reading that connects your issue and the federal budget. This would help you the most in your future research.
2) Take Cornell Notes on the readings. I will collect these notes on Friday in class.
3) Find another credible source on the internet that connects to the reading above. You can use any of the sites I have listed on the right, or more general news sites like nytimes.com.
4) After you read the source that you find, answer the following questions as a blog entry below:
- Write a summary sentence for the text you found.
- How does the text connect to that week’s topic or to the other text you have read?
- What evidence do you have that the text you found is credible?
- Does the author present strong evidence to support his/her argument? Provide an example.
- Create a short synthesis paragraph on the one of the texts and your text.
Keep in mind that everyone else will see what you write below, so please keep it professional. This post is due Thursday, 10/25, by 5:00pm.
5) Come to class on Friday ready to discuss the reading and the text you found!
If you need support or have questions, my office hours are Wednesday and Thursday from 3:15-4:15 in Room 229.
The article I found was “The Obama-Biden Plan” by The Office of President- Elect. It talks about how The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans, builds on the existing health care system, and uses existing providers, doctors, and plans. They also talk about reducing the cost of illness for employers and employees and if you didn’t have health insurance you will have the choice for a new, affordable health insurance option. This article connects to this week’s topic because we are reading about healthcare, Medicare and social security. I feel this article is showing the fellow voters that the Obama care isn’t something bad and it’s supporting the low and middle class people pay for the doctors and clinics. As stated “Under the Obama-Biden plan, patients will be able to make health care decisions with their doctors, instead of being blocked by insurance company bureaucrats” (1). Here it shows that the plan will allow you to get health insurance from doctors and won’t get deny which was a good thing because without health insurance you won’t be able to go to the doctors when you’re sick. This article is credible due to its hyperlinks that connect to healthcare and Obama and Romney’s debate towards Obama’s plan. The office of president-elect does have strong evidence towards the Obama plan because they do give statistics about the amount of money Obama is going to waste on health insurance. “ Barack Obama will pay for his $50 - $65 billion health care reform effort by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year”(). This just mad his argument much stronger because they actually gave an amount of money he will waste and the amount of money American’s will also earn. The office of president-elect would agree with the story “a citizen’s solution guide The Federal Budget “by Harper Collins because these two articles talk about how healthcare affects a certain group of people and how healthcare would be more affordable and accessible for everyone. As Harper Collins states “we need a far more fundamental reform of health care system. Cutting Medicare will hurt seniors without solving the real, underlying problems” (). Here she is stating that without Medicare the elderly people will be the once suffering because 1. They aren’t working so how could they pay for their medications and doctor visits 2. They are the ones that have most sever sickness. President-elect reads “Require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions so all Americans regardless of their health status or history can get comprehensive benefits at fair and stable premiums”(). Harper Collins will agree with the office of president-elect because they both agree on keeping the healthcare and Medicare because many people do use it and need it. They will also agree that they will make it accessible and affordable for everyone. In conclusion in order to go to the doctor and get checked up without health insurance or Medicare you must have hundreds of dollars saved up to pay for it because a hospital bill is very expensive. But thanks to Medicare and health insurances the government pays for almost everything or everything. “Not a lot gets done in life without money”.
ReplyDeleteIn the article “Romney’s Dilemma, How his greatest achievement has become his biggest liability.” it discusses that romney plan to better help people in healthcare, but he is saying to taxes the poor and not tax the rich. Obama argues that the right thing to is to tax the “job creators” and tax the poor less since the poor can barely afford health care.the author to the text this week would agree that raising tax on the poor would destroy the financial gain of the poor and would end in revolting arguments on why this would destroy future generation in the united states. This source is credible because the author Ryan Lizza has wrote many other articles that support obama's health care , it gives details on the flaws with romney healthcare plan. Obama believes that using cleaner air can benefit the poor because then everyone can save money and be better protected and can then afford health care to stay healthy and wise to many other diseases that can arise. Obama wants to spend 56-68 million dollars on healthcare to better protect the health care of those that might lose it due to their financial problems.They will also agree that they will make it accessible and affordable for everyone. In conclusion in order to go to the doctor and get checked up without health insurance or Medicare you must have hundreds of dollars saved up to pay for it because a hospital bill is very expensive. But thanks to Medicare and health insurances the government pays for almost everything or everything. “Not a lot gets done in life without money”Both the article and the class text can be seen as improvements to our healthcare today and can benefit us by reducing the tax on the poor and increase the tax on the rich.
ReplyDeleteIN the text I fond Obama talks about making a new way of creating electricity using natural gas. This idea has caused many political resistance between Orthodox, Environmentalist, and ideologically-deluded advocates. This text connects to this weeks topics because is talking about the new changes in energy that president Obama is trying to make. And it also talks about a new of causing less global warming and renewable energy. This text is credible because it comes from Forbes which is a big company that has a lot to loss if it was a lie. Also the author of this text presents strong evidence because it talks about what the president said and mentions groups of people that are important in this topic like environmentalist and others.
ReplyDeleteThe article I read is called "Will Romney Increase Defense Spending by $ 2 trillion?" by Eugene Kiely. It talks about how Romney will spend more money on military then Obama if he was to win the election for the next 10 years.It would cost Romney $7.8 trillion to phrase in an increase in the Pentagon's base budget while it would only take Obama $5.7 trillion on the base defense budget during the same 10 year period. This article connects to the " Public Agenda's Federal Budget" because in the reading it states how in 2011 theres a budget of $3.6 trillion and America is $1.3 short from that federal budget which means that America is high on deficit. High deficit is bad because thats the money you owe , the more money you owe the less money there will be to spread on long terms ideas. If Romney becomes president his gold is to spend more then the current president Barack Obama , one of the approach the article " Public Agenda's Federal Budget" talks about is spending more on long terms need for the economy such as bridges , roads and science and math education. This is important because these spending would focus and help America now and in the future's generation rather then to spend the money on a defense budget. This source is credible because the website is "org" which mean is a business organization and uses actual quotes from the debate itself , the publisher himself Eugene Kiely is a journalist who has covered government and politics for more than 20 years. Which is found in Factcheck.org. Factcheck is a nonpartisan website which means the person is not part of any party he would simply take evidence from both parties compare it and see which party is worth voting for to help on our issues. This clearly shows that Barack Obama is a better candidate to keep him as president for another 4 years because Eugene Kiely brings out a expert on defense budget Travis Sharp which he states that , " president would spend $5.7 trillion on base defense budget during that same 10 year period a difference of $2.1 trillion". This is important because it showing the president will spend less money then Romney , which is a good thing according to "Public Agenda Federal Budget", " focus on federal spending should be more on long terms need for our economy better roads and bridges , science and math education". This is important because instead of wasting more money on military spending they should use some of the money for things that would make America's future better then it is at the moment.
ReplyDeleteThe text " Public Agenda Federal Budget " informs us about the many ways the United States government is going to approach one of the issues that the U.S is facing. Deficit is the united states problem the we're facing ,Deficit being the amount by which a sum falls short of some reference account(Wikipedia). This basically means that the united staates is spending more money than what they got to spend. The text" Public Agenda's Federal budget" gives a great overview about the deficit issue we're facing. For Example, the text lists 3 wys the U.S can approach the issue. The first approach that the text listed was 'make a log-term investment and raise revenue to cover the cost" this means that the U.S should balance their money and only invest on long term needs for the economy. The U.S should only waste money whe they need it. The second approach that the text introduces was " focus on social security and medicare" this indicates that we need to pay more attention on the medical need of the people, because if we don't act now our social security and medicare will end up braking up the budget because of all the money we would be dumping in order to keep the program running. The third approach the text introduced was "to keep taxes low and reuce the size of the government" this means that we should keep taxes low because it would help our economy to grow and allows us american to retrieve the money the we lost. The text that I found can help me explain the topic of the united states deficit problem . "CEO's Calls For Deficit Action" from th wall street journal is a credible source because its a highly visited website and if it would publish invalid information it would loose its viewers.This text brings up points about how the CEO is saying that no matter which political party win they should increase taxes because they think this way is more beneficial and more efficient tactic to retrieve all the money they lost, and the can get out of this deficit problem.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/us/politics/obama-faces-test-as-deficit-stays-above-1-trillion.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
ReplyDeleteThis week i read an article based on the federal budget deficit on the United States. The article i read is called “Obamas Faces Test as Deficit stays over $1 Trillion dollars” that the deficit on the United States is over $1 trillion dollars and might just go a little over board. Obama stated “ that the deficit he inherited is actually on a path to be cut in half just a year later than he promised” i don’t agree with the statement barack obama has made because since there nominating a new president there might be a chance were money is going to be given to the both presidential candidates by multiple source to help them win the election. The United States is facing federal budget deficit because the United States have been borrowing money and resources from other countries which have cause them to be in serious debt. The United States would use the money for military access and other stuff which would help the United States and also for political help. In order to fix the deficit
“Mr. Obama wants to combine spending cuts and tax increases on upper-income households to close the fiscal hole without fundamentally reducing the role of government or altering the government guarantees at the heart of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.”. This is going to be more helpful since the upper class are getting more money they should be able to be taxed more. On the other side if Mitt Romney becomes president then debt will grow to 86 percent on domestic product. And with Barack Obama the debt growth will only increase 5 percent from the 73 percent of debt growth it is already on. If barack obama stays president it will be benifitcal because the budget deficit will slowly decrease. This source is credible because it is coming from the new york times website and is also coming from sources of the committee for a response federal budget and also from a former head congressional Robert .D. Reischauer. The author is showing that he is a nonpartisian because he is in no side because the author is giving details from both Mitt Romney side and Barack Obama side.
The text which I used was from the website www.ssa.gov/pgm/medicare.htm which has to do with social security and medicare. In this website it breaks down medicare into four groups which are hospital insurance, medical insurance, medicare advantage and prescription drug coverage. This summary connects to this week article “A Citizens’ Solutions Guide: The Federal Budget”. “The Federal Budget” talks about the United States government expenses over the last few years and breaks down where that money has been contributed to. The summary from the website also talks about medicare and how it can be assigned to senior citizens and people with disabilities. The summary from ssa.gov and “The Federal Budget” connect to each other because the “The Federal Budget” talks about how 2/3 the U.S governments budget is being spent mostly on social security, defense, interest on national debt, medicaid and medicare. The summary from the website talks about how medicare and medicaid are being spent on senior citizens and people with disabilities. If you think about it a large population of this country is consisted of senior citizens and people with disabilities. Financially the government would have to spend a lot of its money of medicaid and medicare, which is bad because the economy is not so good right now because of the deficit. The summary from ssa.gov is credible because it was published by The Official Website of the U.S Social Security Administration, the text was also submitted just a couple days ago on 10/19/12. The ssa.gov website is the official website of the U.S Social Security Administration it is centered mostly around medicaid and medicare for senior citizens and people with disabilities. Although the government is investing its money into its health plans, it has a lot of trouble paying off its debts with other countries.
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how Obama has brung us into more debt during his presidency and hes trying to cut as many as unnecessary spending as he can and it mostly talks about things they can do to reduce the deficit and mostly talk about Social Security, defense, Medicare, Medicaid,and interest of the national debt. By the year 2022 we will be in debt for $25.9 trillion and will keep increasing throughout the years. By 2016 which is the end of Obama’s presidency the debt would increase by 87%. This text connects to the week topic because they both have to do with how America is overspending and on ways we can be less in debt and America is going to be owing much more money if we keep overspending and is going to hurt our economy each year. This source is credible because its from a well known news organization called CBS News and if they post any false information online they would not have the good reputation they have today. The author presents strong evidence by showing statistics and a graph to make their argument strong.. “The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.” Ever since Barack Obama has taken presidency the amount of debt has increased. Both authors talk about the deficit and the economy of the United States and ways it can be improved. In “A citizens Solutions Guide, The Federal Budget” and “National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush” both writers discuss on ways that the United States can prevent from being even more in debt and how America is struggling to get out of the recession they are having. We are trying to have the least amount of unnecessary programs. The debt is going to affect America in the long run because like both texts say, in a few years the debt is only going to get worse unless we start cutting unnecessary programs and other things that just decrease our economy and if the US keeps borrowing money from other countries the amount of money that we owe is just going to decrease drastically.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/
The article “Romney’s tax plan wouldn't cut the deficit” Erskine Bowles explains how Romney's plans wouldn’t cut the deficit since his tax proposal is very similar to the Simpson-Bowles plan. The Simpson-Bowles plan, was created by a bipartisan group of senators. The Simpson-Bowles plan is designed to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion. This text connects to the reading of “The Federal Budget” since one of the main topic of this election is the deficit and the people want challenger and the president to say what are their plans in order to fix it. In this text they mention other topics such as social security , medicaid and medicare and how they would be affected if the deficit were to increase. This source “Romney’s tax plan wouldn't cut the deficit” from the Washington Post written by Erskine Bowles, who served as chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, was co-chairman of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. The author Bowles quotes the creators of the Simpson-Bowles plan, “How I wish it were. I will the first to cheer if Romney decides to embrace our plan. Unfortunately, the numbers say otherwise. His reform plan leaves too many tax breaks in place and as a result, does nothing to reduce the debt.” According to the Simpson-Bowles plan creators the idea of the Simpson-Bowles plan would be a great plan to be used in the upcoming years but Romney has different perspective than their plan.“The Federal Budget” provides a clear argument on the deficit and how the government borrows money from programs such as social security and medicare to cover up the difference. Therefore, if they lower taxes it would help spur economy, while high taxes are negative for businesses since it would reduce jobs. Fortunately, Bowles text explains how challenger Mitt Romney wants to establish a defence cut , not just domestic programs should be cut. Romney has backup Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan to “limit entitlement spending.” This plan might take in action if Romney wins the 2012 election.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24sun4.html
ReplyDeleteThe article “How the Deficit Got This Big” is about the actions taken by Georg W. Bush and President Obama which caused the the deficit in which we are found in 2011 and gives some solutions on how to cut the deficit. Just like the class reading this New York Times article is about the deficit. This text is not only credible because its from the New York Times, a well known newspaper that if it gives fuels news it would lose people, but also the authors Teresa Tritch before joining the New York Times in 2004 she used to work at Money manager in Washington D.C. Teresa Tritch uses dates, presidents policies and data on how was the economy in the times previous presidents. As the deficit grows the government is lacking the ability to find solutions to cut down the deficit. Teresa Tritch states that “from healthy surpluses at the end of the Clinton era... to nine straight years of deficits...” The to authors can agree that through the years America's deficit keeps on increasing and America’s economy keeps on getting worst be the years. In “The Federal Budget” Public Agenda says “And the projections are that this is going to get worse, rather than better, because of two long-term trends:”
The article I found is about Romney being wrong on the deficit. He said that when Obama took office deficits “multiplied … by a factor of four or five”. This is wrong because when Obama became president the deficit was already running at $1.2 trillion. It says that The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the fiscal year 2009 deficit at $1.2 trillion two weeks before Obama took office This article connects to the text I read because it also talks about the deficit. The text says the types of debts that the government has and how to decrease the deficit.This text is credible because it is from a nonpartisan trusted sight. The author presents strong evidence to support the argument because statistics are used and facts said by Mitt Romney on a recent debate. Mitt Romneys' false information on the deficit shows that he is trying to make Obama look bad so that people can favor him.This made him look bad instead because the statistics were wrong and it was a Republican's fault that the deficit was so bad. Bush was the President before Obama and the deficit was nearly $1.2 trillion. If Bush would have done his job the country wouldn't have that big debt. The text about The Federal Budget has information on how to improve the deficit. A lot of money is being spent on things like Social Security,defense,Medicare, and interest on the national debt. It states that federal money should be spent on long term needs of the economy, trim benefits on Social Security and medicare, and keep taxes low and reduce the size of government. This would reduce the amount of money spent and the deficit would decrease. The article I read and the class text both talk about the deficit being high and it needs to be improved.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/romney-wrong-on-deficits-auto-bailout/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe text I found is called “ The Best Ways to find Health Insurance if You are Self-Employed in 2012”. Kerry Hannon is this article explains that if you’re self-employed, or retired it’s harder to find and have health insurance. The Affordable Care Act is a 2010 healthcare reform law in which is intended to tackle this self-employed on health insurance issue. When you under 65 you purchase health insurance through state insurance exchanges. There’s many more programs that can be helpful for self-employed people, that are looking for the right health care.
ReplyDeleteThis text connects to this week’s topic because it has to do with health care and it’s problems. The text from this week talk the things that the government needs to change about the health care. One thing stated in this week’s article is that since the health care cost is increasing that means theres ways government can keep up with the cost of Medicare and Medicaid. In my article that i found it states that health care that was offered for people who retired before the age of 65 the Medicare will cover the majority. Both articles state facts for a specific audience. Their audience are people who are looking for the right health care and ways that health insurance can be improved or reform.
The author’s argument from my article is that if you’re self-employed or retired you can get the right health insurance plan for that would best fit your needs. The author included ways to find the right health insurance for you. For example if you retired and is looking for health insurance some companies give you the option of buying health insurance through the company plan. The companies might subsidize a portion of the premiums, if not it can be pricey. This article i found is credible because it found on a well-known website, Nytimes.
Synthesis paragraph:
Even if you retired or are self employed theres always a solution for you when it comes to receiving and choosing the right health insurance that fits your needs. The Affordable Care Act is the 2010 healthcare reform law that is intended for people that retired before they are 65 and can purchase health insurance through state insurance exchanges. I believe this is a fair option for those who want to retire before 65 because they still have the opportunity to get health care. If you have a medical problems and have been uninsured for 6 months , many states have the high-risk pool program that will and can help you. Even though people might not have health care this high-risk pool program is a way people can receive healthcare if needed as an emergency.
The New York Times article “Federal Deficit for 2012 Falls to $1.1 Trillion” by Annie Lowray is about the deficit amount has decreased in the past year. This article connects to the week’s topic of the deficit because the article describes changes that occurred in the current deficit. The deficit is the money added to the amount of money that the U. S owes. The article talks about how the current deficit drops from $1.3 trillion dollars to $1.1 trillion dollars. The article that I research is credible because it is a New York Times which means that it is a big company that would not risk the bad recognition. Annie Lowray supports her argument on the deficit decrease from $1.3 trillion to $1.1 trillion because when she demonstrates statistics that together brake down the total deficit cost of the United States of America.The weeks topic of Federal Budget and the article “Federal Deficit for 2012 Falls to $1.1 Trillion” by Annie Lowray connect in the way that both discuss the budget of the American government for things like military etc.
ReplyDelete-Garmandy Candelario
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/business/federal-deficit-for-2012-fiscal-year-falls-to-1-1-trillion.html?_r=0
The article, “Test for Obama as Deficit Stays Over $1 Trillion”, written by Jackie Calmes, informs the reader how this year’s presidential candidates are fighting to reduce the annual federal deficit. They address key concepts like the current situation, how to address the causes of the annual deficit and how will the next president will reform programs to send less and reduce the annual deficit in the next decade.
ReplyDeleteBoth the article “Test for Obama as Deficit Stays Over $1 Trillion” and the text “Public Agenda Federal Budget” give the idea that the United States has the economic problem that once government spends more money than they actually take in, is being backed up by a deficit. Both articles surround the idea the deficit should be fixed and reduced over the decade(s). The article explains how the presidential candidates are addressing this issue in order to reduce the deficit, while the text surrounds around the idea of where the government get revenue, states suggestions as to how the nation as a whole can reduce the 16$ trillion dollar deficit. Furthermore the text also states how the government uses their revenue to fund the programs that are run across the nation to help those in need.
This source is credible because it was published by the New York Times, which was first founded in the mid 1800’s, also this publisher still holds a high reputation for distributing up to date daily news. Jackie Calmes can be considered a very important role to the source’s credibility because Calmes, writer of the article, has been working with this publisher and providing political articles since early as 2000. Not only does Calmes explain the situation, but she states the problems of the nation and statistical data, and approximates on how much the national debt is.
Jackie Calmes argues that while having higher taxes can indeed reduce the 16$ trillion dollar deficit, she seems to have a democratic perspective when she states, “[Romney] would inject more private sector competition into Medicare to rein in the quickly growing costs of health insurance for older people and would limit Medicaid payments to fixed amounts to the states” (Calmes). Calmes claims that if Romney is voted to be president, his plan to aid the sick and the elderly would be heavily reduced, which in the long run could reduce the deficit in the next decade, but could impact the limit spent on medical insurance. Simply put, health problems may arise from limited spending of medical aid. Calmes also argues against Mitt Romney’s choice to reduce federal medical aid by judging his idea, “Because Mr. Romney would delay his Medicare changes for a decade to exempt current beneficiaries and those nearing eligibility, the savings would not help him keep his promise to balance the budget in 8 to 10 years” (Calmes). This argument states that not only would the problem be addressed after a decade, the annual deficit would not change until his second term (if elected), which by that time the nation’s debt would have jumped by the end of his terms in power.
“Test for Obama as Deficit Stays Over $1 Trillion” discusses the idea that the government should ratify new laws, or canons that help reduce the annual federal spending on the nation. While Obama sides with reducing the annual spending with raised taxes on higher earning income citizens, Romney wants to reduce the spending on healthcare while reducing taxes on middle class and the low income class, which can surely reduce the deficit but jeopardize the medical aid help for citizens and the elderly. The text “Public Agenda Federal Budget” agrees, stating, “We need to make sure everyone pays their fair share” along with “[raising] revenue to cover what we spend”, meaning we should have less spending for medical help, social security funds and the defense which are programs that should be or not be necessary to help citizens.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/us/politics/obama-faces-test-as-deficit-stays-above-1-trillion.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
The article I am using this week is called “Obama’s claim that ’90 percent’ of the current deficit is due to Bush policies” The author of this article, Glenn Kessler, writes about how Obama blames ex-President Bush for the United States deficit issues. The deficit issues has become so overwhelming to our government that President Obama has called our current economic standing point “...the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression” (President Obama’s interview on 60 minutes). While the article presents interesting statistics that show that President Obama has spent a large chunk of money, just as ex-President Bush. Obama’s defenders, however argue “… that [Obamas] policies to combat the recession were intended to be temporary. But [Obama] has also supported permanently extending the Bush tax cuts for Americans making less than $250,000, which by itself will shrink federal revenues for years to come. That means these are no longer Bush’s tax cuts, but Obama’s” (Glenn Kessler). This article connects too many other texts I have encountered this week because I have been doing research on the deficit issue, and the Public Agenda: Federal Budget article talked about how the deficit is affecting us, and how it can be changed. Public Agenda also touches on the issue of what happened to make the deficit issue so big. The article I found this week is credible because it is a news article from the Washington Post, a big news organization. Also the author of this article, Glenn Kessler, is a journalist from the Washington Post who is in charge of the popular “Fact Checker” column. Kessler uses strong examples to present his argument in his article by using charts and statistics. For example, in a chart entitled “Changes in deficit projections since January 2001” it shows that under the Bush’s presidency, the cost of his administration policy increased the deficit issue at 59% while under Obama’s presidency, the cost of his policy increased the deficit only by 12%.” Public Agenda: Federal Budget” and “Obama’s claim that ’90 percent’ of the current deficit is due to Bush policies “, both have common issues, government spending. In the Public Agenda, the first approach they had to reducing the deficit issue is by “Letting all or at least some of the Bush tax cuts expire to help reduce the deficit” (Pg 4). But as my found article explains “[Obama] has also supported permanently extending the Bush tax cuts…” (Kessler). Meaning that while Obama has different plans for his presidency, they are not much different than Bushes.
ReplyDeleteThe article “Presidential debate 101: Did Obama really double the deficit?” written by Peter Grier two days after the first 2012 presidential debate explains the results through the debate. During the debate, both candidates were discussing the issues on national debt, which is currently about $16 trillion dollars. Presidential candidate Governor Mitt Romney accused the accumulation of the deficit on President Barack Obama, stating that the deficit doubled after Obama’s first term. Romney’s accusation was false and Grier explains that the deficit during Obama’s term was $1.4 trillion dollars and now, in 2012, it decreased to $1.1 trillion. However, the deficit still has increased and it looks like it is going to remain that way. Grier’s article relates to this week’s reading on The Federal Budget because the reading explains step-by-step about the deficit issues, why there is a deficit, and what increases the deficit.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between both is that the reading explains what causes the deficit while the article explains the total amount of the deficit as of today. In the reading, the deficit is caused by Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense, and interest on the national debt.
The author Peter Grier has been working with The Christian Science Monitor as the editor since 1979. Grier used the 2012 first presidential election to prove his argument on the deficit. Grier uses a direct quote from Mitt Romney about Obama’s deficit change. Romney said that “The president said he’d cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it. Trillion-dollar deficits for the last four years”. Grier, of course, explains that this was false.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/business/federal-deficit-for-2012-fiscal-year-falls-to-1-1-trillion.html?ref=nationaldebtus
ReplyDeleteThe article “Federal Deficit for 2012 Falls to $1.1 Trillion” by Annie Lowrey describes the idea that the deficit of this year has been the lowest since 2008, yet the deficit went beyond half a trillion dollars. This text connects to the week’s topic because both the article and this week’s topic describes the idea of deficit and the U.S.’ budget surplus, meaning that there’s more money coming in than going out. Also, this explains how the state is not budgeting, therefore is affecting the federal budget. This text is credible because it’s from NY Times and that organization would lose drastic amount of viewers if they would post false information. Annie Lowrey uses strong evidence to support her argument in various ways. For example, Lowrey states, “Corporate income taxes were a ‘major contributor’ to the rise in overall receipts, the administration report said, climbing to $242 billion, from $181 billion in 2011”. This demonstrates that the author uses statistics to support the argument and prove the given idea. In other words, the use of statistics used from other locations makes the argument and idea stronger. The deficit is mainly discussed worldwide because it’s based on our country’s debt and we the individuals are increasing the country’s debt. Therefore, we have to realize in many ways that we are the ones who are actually creating the debt and convince other people to decrease the idea of increasing the debt.
The article I read is called “How the Deficit Got This Big” Deficit the amount by which a sum of money falls short of the required amount. America has came across several situations in which they have fell apart due to money situations. Teresa Tritch discusses how when George W Bush ran the office he caused deficit year by year the amount would go higher. In the year 2002 the budget fell into deficit. Tritch quotes “In January 2009, just before President Obama took office, the budget office projected a $1.2 trillion deficit for 2009 and deficits in subsequent years, based on continuing Mr. Bush’s policies and the effects of recession”. Revealing Bush negative impact on the economy and financial stability in America. In the graphs shown in the article it is revealed Bush tax cuts and war spending were the biggest increase in surpluses to deficits from 2002 to 2009. This connects to what we are learning in class because we are learning about how both Romney and Obama discuss the issue of deficit and each have their own unique way of fixing the economic problem. Obama has also developed several plans in which have saved a lot of money but has increased more deficit. In the near future America will suffer if deficit keeps increasing due to many programs but not only are the programs needed they help out several low income families in chronic financial situations. This text is credible due to the fact that it has visual graphs to support how deficit has increased throughout the year comparing Obama and Bush. It also represents many quotes and uses statistics. The article was also found in the new york times therefore it is a dependable news company. It is also revealed deficit increased due to many war spending's on Bush's part but deficit has increased through Obama's part because of many programs he has created to help the poor and families not only war.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/opinion/sunday/president-obamas-medicare-proposals.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteThe text that i read is about President Obama’s Medicare Proposals to help lower the deficit that the united states is facing which is up $16 trillion dollars. Obama is planning to cut $248 billion dollars from the next decade from medicare which brings controversy from both sides which will affect the lower class. Obama plans article relates to this weekend reading which is about the deficit and how its affecting the United States over the $16 trillion of dollars that the U.S is in debt. Also it talks about the different plans that the government have in order to fix the deficit which also talks about the both types of plans the plan that would benefit the people and the plan that would benefit the country. It also talks about what the United states pay for which ⅔ is for Medicaid, Social Security, and Defense. The plans been taken by the government is to help the economy of the country which will affect alot of type of people which is the lower class.The source is credible because the article is from the New York Times one of the most reliable source for new yorkers if they put information that is not valid they would lose customers. The author of my text shows a stronger evidence by providing statistics such as when it says about wants to lower the deficit by 248 billion dollars on cutting it from medicare over the next decade.
Synthesis Paragraph:
These two text show how the United States is been affecting from the deficiting which Obama is trying to cut down of medicaid and medicare which will affect the lower class. “The more painful the solutions becomes” this shows that the more the United States wits the more the deficit is going to grow and the more is going to affect the people in the country. Which medicare is still going to help out the elderly and the people that retire which will benefit them.
The article that i found is “Obama predicts a deficit deal, immigration overhaul in 1st year of 2nd term if re-elected” from the New York Times the article is mainly about how Obama belief that if he is re-elected that he will help the deficit and the issue on immigration by coming to an agreement with lawmakers . This text is about how our president will say anything or even try to do anything to be stay in power even by fixing by saying that he is going to fix the deficit that he believes that he did not cause that his administration caused this. What makes this text credible is that it’s from the New York Times which is a major news source and it is also from the Associated Press which is an American news agency and operates in 243 news bureau. The author quotes Obama when he says “grand bargain” on the deficit within the first six months but says it “will probably be messy.” this is letting us know that even though things might get rough and look like that the state is in trouble that it is mainly because he is trying to fix the deficit. The author also quoted obama when he said “so alienated the fastest-growing demographic group in the country, the Latino community.” this lets us know that even though where are becoming a place where most immigrants are coming the most that he s going to do something that will help everybody.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/business/federal-deficit-for-2012-fiscal-year-falls-to-1-1-trillion.html?_r=0
ReplyDeleteThe “Federal Deflicit for 2012 Falls to $1.1 Trillion” is an article explaining how the deficit is at about 1.1 trillion but was 1.3 trillion in 2011. This article relates to this week’s topic because it talks about out debt and how it has decreased . The text I found is credible because the publisher is from a big organization with a good reputation called The New York Times. The publisher presents strong evidence because she shows both sides a republican and democratic view of our deficit. For example Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin said “A debt crisis is coming. We can’t keep spending and borrowing like this. We can’t keep spending money we don’t have.” Even though Obama has decreased the deficit republicans don’t think his doing it fast enough. Annie the publisher also uses a democrat view when she states “ Democrats have argued that the economy needs near-term support as well as long-term deficit reduction and have cautioned that too-severe budget cuts would unravel the social safety net.” This means that people who are cutting the savings are affecting the social safety net and without the safety net the government would have to protect and hold less people. Americas deficit is important because it takes away the peoples rights by taking away some individuals healthcare benefits.
The article that i have found this week is called “Obama Economic Plan: Expect the Debt to Increase Exponentially Under Obama”. This article talks about how Obama’s plan to decrease the deficit and help fix the economy might not really work at all. The author quotes “Ignoring the fact that the president's most recent budget proposal makes few such "tough cuts," an interesting new factoid on government spending in America shows raising taxes on the wealthy to shrink the deficit is not only inefficient, but simply won't do the job. Earlier this week, the thinktank Just Facts showed in a chart that total government spending is consuming more of our economy than in the history of the country, including during World War II.” This means that throughout the years the deficit of the U.S. which means that Obama’s plans might help the people but eventually the plan will become a failure because spending more money will add to the Debt, meaning a higher deficit, possibly leading to an economic depression. This article relates to the reading of this week called The Federal Budget because in the reading number 5 talks about Intergovernmental Debt which is the Debt the Government has taken from programs to aid other programs like Social Security , and Welfare. The website where i got this article from is a credible source because the. The website gives information on world issues including politics , gay rights , immigration and other diverse news. And they are a Bipartisan when it comes to the debate and the election of Obama Vs Romney. Regardless of who becomes president the Deficit will be one of the hardest problems to overcome.
ReplyDeleteThe article I have chosen is by Associated Press writers Stephen Ohlemacher, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Sam Hananel, and Andrew Taylor in Washington, and Daniel Sewell in Cincinnati who also contributed to this article, which is called “Obama Unveils Deficit Reduction Plan, 'Buffett Rule' Tax On Millionaires”
ReplyDeleteIn this article, Obama tells his audience that he planned to tax the upper income making families more so that they could possibly generate over 3 trillion dollars towards the deficit to decrease it and furthermore, he promises that he would veto any and every Republican attempt to pass a law or policy that would go and cut Medicaid or Medicare. “I will not support any plan that puts all the burden for closing our deficit on ordinary Americans” is the quote I found that supports the claim that Obama had said. This article connects to this weeks reading because Obama is making demands for Congress to pass new policies so that the deficit could go down due to either raising taxes or cutting back on military expenses. The differences between this weeks reading and this article is that the reading this week was on a overall point of view while this reading was more specific to taxes and Republican ideals that need to be re-checked. The authors and co-writers on this article are considered experts in their political field. An example of the strong evidence proved in this reading is when the author says “$1.5 trillion in new revenue, which would include about $800 billion over 10 years from repealing the Bush-era tax rates for couples making more than $250,000. It also would place limits on deductions for wealthy filers and end certain corporate loopholes and subsidies for oil and gas companies.” or when “$580 billion in cuts in mandatory benefit programs, including $248 billion in Medicare and $72 billion in Medicaid and other health programs. Other mandatory benefit programs include farm subsidies and federal employee retirement benefits. The plan would reduce federal workers' paychecks by 1.2 percent over three years, saving the government about $21 billion over 10 years.” Which are examples that uses statistics to prove their points.
Rubi Perez
ReplyDeleteOctober 25, 2012
Civics/Mr.Rochowicz
Blogpost #5
The article I chose is called “Health Care Repeal And Replace Obamacare” written by a republican bipartisan. This article is mainly about an expert speaking about the “Obamacare” and how it should be abolished. This article connects to the reading that we are reading in class, “ The Federal Budget”. They connect because they both talk about the debt that the United States has been pilling up in health care. The first article, “ Health Care Repeal And Replace Obamacare” mentions, “When was the last time a massive government program lowered cost, improved efficiency, or raised the consiste of service? Obamacare will violate that crucial first principle of medicine” do not harm”. while in “ The Federal Budget” the expert says,” Our infrastructure is aging and this undermines our prosperity, If we don’t keep it up to date we’ll pay the deficit because although Barack Obama has improved on helping those in need of medicine, he has not really helped most citizens. The source I found is credible because it comes from a website from the civics blog that obtains information that is relevant from a professional expert that can be relied on by being a political bipartisan who is a republican.
1. "The Obama-Biden Plan" talks about how the government run health care with higher taxes and/or letting the insurance companies operate without rules . President Barack Obama and Vice president Joe Biden believe that these extremes are wrong and that’s why they’ve proposed a plan that strengthens employer coverage. The "Obama-Biden plan" provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans. The existing health care system providers, doctors, and plans. This means patients will be able to make health care decisions with their doctors, instead of being blocked by insurance company bureaucrats. Barack Obama will pay $50 - $65 billion for health care reform effort by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year and retaining the estate tax at its 2009 level.
ReplyDelete2. The article "The Obama-Biden Plan" is connects to this week’s topic because in class we are reading about healthcare and Medicare. President Obama is improving the health care system because he knows a lot of people can benefit form this. This plan is helping the the lower and middle class to make better decision when it comes to their health care.
3. The text "The Obama-Biden Plan" is form the website http://change.gov. This site is for the office of the President-elect and office of the Vice President-elect, as recognized by the Presidential Transition Act of 1963. The Presidential Transition Act alloweds the administrator of GSA(General Services Administration)to provide services and support to the office of the President-elect beginning the day after the election until 30 days after the inauguration to support the orderly transfer of executive power after a general election. This site provides information to the public in support of this important public purpose.
4. The article give a lot of evidence,
"Make Health Insurance Work for People and Businesses -- Not Just Insurance and Drug Companies." This show that small businesses can also benefit form the The Obama-Biden Plan. "Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year." This is strong evidence because it show numbers and this help people see the impact.
5. The "The Obama-Biden Plan" gives good information about his plan. Unlike Romney, Obama gives specific details when he is explaining his plans. Many People can afford Health care thanks to President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Thanks to health care people cans afford health insurance options. Obama plan for health care is cost a lot of money but is helping the economy grow, in due time we going to play the debt back.
http://change.gov/agenda/health_care_agenda/
Braley Rosario
ReplyDeleteOctober 25, 2012
Civics/Mr.Rochowicz pd.2
Blogpost #5
Based on the reading I found about Energy. It is all about how the Green Mountain Coffee Roasters make a lot of money selling individual servings of ground coffee. But they found a way to generate even greater profits..... That's related to energy. This is connected to the topic that was learned in class because it takes a lot of money to start buying new materials needed to accumulate energy. So President Obama states “My plan will keep these investments, and we’ll keep reducing the carbon pollution that’s also heating the planet, because climate change isn't a hoax. The droughts we've seen, the floods, the wildfires — those aren't a joke. They’re a threat to our children’s future. And we can do something about it. That's part of what’s at stake in this election,” taken from "Obama energy team circulates memo to greens on climate". Matthew L.Wald agrees by saying " Renewable energy sources like wind and solar are getting a lot of attention these days as a way to reduce the impact of energy use on the environment". This helps the community because there's bad pollution in the air and it takes a lot of money to renovate new technology to improve the energy around the world, but it causes harm. This is also related to the deficit issue/budget. Stated from the "Federal Budget" " The government spends more than it takes during a given year". This means that from all the new energy sources that are being renovated and being bought, the money comes from the government, and not from the people's pockets. This article I chose is credible because it was written by a person and was published by the New York Times. But in the article it uses specific people like Gov. Elliot Spitzer. Matthew agrees what Obama is trying to do but others don't for example " if buying an extra- efficient air-conditioner costs an additional $1000,a homeowner might hesitate". This I agree with because wasting a lot of money can cause harm to yourself, but if it is needed then just buy it.
Even if you don't want no energy,energy is always needed in homes and in the outside of the community. Obama wants more energy and Romney wants to reduce coal. This seems unfair because coal is always needed to give heat and make railroad trains work and run. " Efficiency is the steak". This shows that enthusiastic supporters don't want air pollution but more efficiency. This all makes everything better. That's why " Renewables are the sizzle".
Sources:
1. http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/263339-memo-to-activists-were-talking-about-climate-
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/business/29efficient.html?pagewanted=1&ref=energyefficiency
Dubiel Tavarez
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose is called" Obama vs. Romney: Where their energy policies differ" This Article talks about both what Obama and his opponent Mitt Romney and there say about the energy in the united states and how that Obama and Romney have a lot of thing similar to each other they both what an Energy sources that could help people in America this article is creatable because it's written by the Washington Post which is a one of the biggest news paper company out there. I think the author of this article would have been thinking what both Obama & Romney have been saying about which is the better Energy source to help the United States.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/postlive/obama-vs-romney-where-their-energy-policies-differ/2012/09/10/2b6c9e56-f9c8-11e1-a945-6cd36411d000_story.html
The article I choose is called "Romney Pledge Puts Focus on Public TV" written by Brain Stelter and Elizabeth Jensen. This article has to do with the presidential candidates issues about "Big Bird" Sesame Street and PBS. How the money being distributed to PBS and programing has a big cost. This article connects to the reading we read "The Federal Budget" by Public Agenda. They connect because the first article talks about how "Big Bird" and PBS are a problem to the economy as quoted "...but "Sesame Street" directly receives only $4 million a year from PBS. The group returns about $2.5 million to PBS through an arrangement that shares revenues from merchandising and other income streams, making the net cost to taxpayers $1.5 million". This article expresses thoughts and opinions on how much Sesame Street and PBS are getting paid. While the second article talks about how The Federal Budget is increasing , as quoted "... It also has huge implications for the health of the economy, which makes it especially critical as the nation continues to struggle out of the economic problems that began in the financial crisis of 2008". One article talks about how Sesame Street and PBS are bring money/economic issues, while the other shows how the economy has had a crisis since 2008. The article I found online is credible because its branched from the New York Times, a universal newspaper that is strongly trusted. The author of the article I choose online has too many opinion of whats happening with the programing luckily all the opinion he has brought in has been from executives from the programs. Like for example here "We sprang into action quickly," said Ms.Kerger, who "dropped everything" the day after the debate to answer questions from the news media". Stated by the PBS Chief executive Paula A. Kerger. He shows here that one of the big boss stopped everything to focus on this because its every impact that these programs are wanting to be shut down and lower down their pays.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ssa.gov/medicare.comIn this website it breaks down medicare into groups which are hospital insurance, medical and insurance. this week article is A Citizens
ReplyDeleteSolutions Guide: The Federal Budget . The Federal Budget talks about the United States government expenses over the last few years and breaks down where that money has been contributed to. It talks about medicare and how it can be assigned to senior citizens .The ssa.gov and “The Federal Budget” connect to each other because the The Federal Budget talks about how 2the U.S governments budget is being spent mostly on social security, defense, interest on national debt medicaid and medicare. This talks about how medicare and medicaid are being it a large population of this country is consisted of senior citizens.Financially the government would have to spend a lot of its money of medicaid and medicare, which is bad because the economy is not so good right now because of the deficit. The ssa.gov is credible because it was published by The Official Website of the U.S Social Security Administration, the text was also submitted. The ssa.gov website is the official website of the U.S Social Security Administration. Although the government is investing its money into its health plans, it has a lot of trouble paying off its debts with other countries. also it has been a difficult because many people do not have medical insures and they need the government help on it
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/1005/Presidential-debate-101-Did-Obama-really-double-the-deficit
ReplyDeleteThis article, “ Presidential debate 101: Did Obama really double the deficit?” talks about the first presidential debate and what was really said in the debate. This article mostly talks about what Governor Romney was saying to President Obama and what he was saying true. The article focused on one statement Governor Romney kept saying to Obama that made Obama a weak president. The statement was about President Obama actually doubling the deficit and with his mistakes is has actually made the country in a tight situation that needs to borrow money. But this article gets the real statistics and actually proves the statements that Romney used were false.
This reading connects to this week’s topic because in the reading of, “Public’s Agenda: Federal Budget” mentions a lot of information about the deficit and how is worked out. It also states why the deficit is really important for the nation. Why we should care about this the deficit if it only concerns the government decisions. As well, where do we stand now with this deficit slowly increasing.
This article is credible because it comes from a well-known organization of news and gives the best-updated news globally. The author as well is known for the best news coverage and has searched the facts carefully to prove that Romney was just stating facts. Peter Grier started his career since 1977 and since has continued reporting to the nation with the most updated news. A surprising fact was that he also served as Pentagon correspondent and that’s a highly qualified job. Pentagon is part of the nations powerful places and working there must have been tough to get in. As well won some awards for his reports.
The author gives evidence by going outside of the debate and searching the real numbers that are prove the statement to be wrong. Romney says, “ the deficit has doubled under President Obama” but the author easily argues that with that Romney is completely wrong. Well not exactly but it’s been close to the double. The author facts are not officially calculated but an estimate they have so far, and so far the deficit is at 1.1 trillion dollars. If it were double, it would have been at $2.8 trillion dollars and that would cause the country is a crisis. The author is also stating some facts that included the former president Bush and how Bush left Obama with a deficit of 1.4 and how Obama is trying to clear out cost of the deficit but can’t with the republicans going against his plan.
The deficit is a huge topic for this years candidates and it would also measure the plans the candidates are offering to banish this deficit. If deficit doesn’t get any lower then the nest generation would have more of a complex solution. From the article “Federal Budget” states, “Social Security and Medicare for the huge baby boom generation will have to come from somewhere” (Public Agenda). The Medicare is a huge part of the country and many people are relying too much on it. But the Medicare is also being used to pay off the deficit and Obama said, “ Bush used credit to pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well as the Medicare prescription drug program” (Presidential Debate 101). Overall the deficit needs to get fixed to help out the people and the nation and as well to make the country much better.
Raymond Pina
ReplyDeleteOctober 25, 2012
Civics
Mr.Rochowicz
Blogpost #5
One major problem America is facing is the ever growing number of our nation's deficit and with the upcoming presidential elections this is a now trending topic in recent debates.The two presidential candidates President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney give their approach on how to handle the deficit.Over the years our government has been spending more money than they have , about 16 trillion in debt. Our government spends the revenue they receive on programs such as Medicare,Medicaid and other expenses.In the publish article by The New York Times called “Test for Obama as Deficit Stays Over $1 Trillion” by Jackie Calmes. Calmes writes on the plans the two candidates would do about the deficit if they get voted into office. The New York Times is a well respected newspaper that have been around since 1851 and has won 108 Pulitzer prizes. Calmes was the chief political correspondent for The Wall Street Journal's Washington bureau and back in 2005 she was awarded the Gerald R. Ford Journalism Prize. Calmes reported the statistics on how much the candidates would cut and reduce. In this week reading called “ A Citizens Solutions Guide: The federal Budget ” was made by a nonpartisan group called Public Agenda.Public Agenda gives us three different approaches to America’s deficit problem .It seems that Romney supports approach three and Obama favors a bit of approach one. Right now I don’t know what candidate's deficit solution I support. I like our government to have a bigger safety net but have it closer to the ground. Connecting to the Mr.Rochowicz slideshow in class on debating how big should the safety net be. I say the government needs to help everybody who needs the help but to some extent and not have them depend on the government help so much. Too many people depending on the government would led to a bigger deficit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/us/politics/obama-faces-test-as-deficit-stays-above-1-trillion.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Dean Baker’s article “Leave it Alone ; It’s Irrelevant to the Deficit” is all about the government’s safety nets that the government provides for the people of the United States, which are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.Baker mostly projects how the government give out these programs to help us but its taken from our pockets when it supposed to be from a separate program.He also argues that the government trying to cut theses programs and raising taxes which will stimulate more spending causing to boost the economy. Dean Baker’s article connects to the Public agenda “A citizen’s SOlution Guide The Federal Budget” because they both state solutions into fixing the problem of the deficit but at the same time demonstrate both side of people who agree with eliminating some safety net and rising taxes and people who oppose this idea the government is offering.Some evidence that I found on Dean Baker’s article that make’s credible is that it was taken from a well known and respected website which is the New York times.This network has millions of viewers also they have a newspaper sold in New York and a lot of people depend of the articles and news papers articles to get there news.Also Dean Baker is a “ an economist and the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research,[also] is the author of "The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive". Dean Baker uses strong evidence to prove his point.This is demonstrated when he states “The budget deficit was just 1.2 percent of gross domestic product in 2007. Before the collapse of the housing bubble the deficit was projected to remain low for the next decade and the debt-to-G.D.P. ratio was actually falling. This would have been the case even if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to continue”.This quotation demonstrates that Baker knows what he is talking about and what side he is in by using statistics that are relevant to his ideas and opinion.The deficit the United States is going through since 2008 is a clear example of how the government takes the citizens money to fix problems that the government originally created.Dean Baker quoted how speaker Boehner and Barack Obama believe in “cutting some successful social programs” that he believes will not bring up the deficit.Meaning that the public has nothing to do with the deficit the United States has been in since 2008 and the decisions the government wants to make aren’t the appropriate measures to solve this problem. While the Public agenda argues that “raising taxes just gives the government more money to waste.Although the deficit has something to do with the government having a high safety net taking money and programs away from the public will not solve anything.
ReplyDeleteBased on the reading I found about Energy. It is all about how the Green Mountain Coffee Roasters make a lot of money selling individual servings of ground coffee. But they found a way to generate even greater profits..... That's related to energy. This article I chose is credible because it was written by a person and was published by the New York Times. But in the article it uses specific people like Gov. Eliot Spitzer. This is connected to the topic that was learned in class because it takes a lot of money to start buying new materials needed to accumulate energy. So President Obama states “My plan will keep these investments, and we’ll keep reducing the carbon pollution that’s also heating the planet, because climate change isn't a hoax. The droughts we've seen, the floods, the wildfires — those aren't a joke. They’re a threat to our children’s future. And we can do something about it. That's part of what’s at stake in this election,” taken from "Obama energy team circulates memo to greens on climate". Matthew L.Wald agrees by saying " Renewable energy sources like wind and solar are getting a lot of attention these days as a way to reduce the impact of energy use on the environment". This helps the community because there's bad pollution in the air and it takes a lot of money to renovate new technology to improve the energy around the world, but it causes harm. This is also related to the deficit issue/budget. Stated from the "Federal Budget" " The government spends more than it takes during a given year". This means that from all the new energy sources that are being renovated and being bought, the money comes from the government, and not from the people's pockets. This article I chose is credible because it was written by a person and was published by the New York Times. But in the article it uses specific people like Gov. Eliot Spitzer. Matthew agrees what Obama is trying to do but others don't for example " if buying an extra- efficient air-conditioner costs an additional $1000,a homeowner might hesitate". This I agree with because wasting a lot of money can cause harm to yourself, but if it is needed then just buy it. Even if it gets useful continue to use it.
ReplyDeleteEven if you don't want no energy,energy is always needed in homes and in the outside of the community. Obama wants more energy and Romney wants to reduce coal. This seems unfair because coal is always needed to give heat and make railroad trains work and run. " Efficiency is the steak". This shows that enthusiastic supporters don't want air pollution but more efficiency. This all makes everything better. That's why " Renewables are the sizzle", which means that they have substitutes in the real world and can replace anything and contribute a lot more. In the big picture, this means that renewables are the most efficient that is needed to prevent pollution and global warming in the near future.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteElmis RodrigueZ
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/19/obama-deficit-plan-buffet-rule-taxes-medicare_n_969403.html
The article I chose is titled “Obama Unveils Deficit Reduction Plan, 'Buffett Rule' Tax on Millionaires” by Jim Kuhnhenn. This article is about how Obama is going to handle the deficit by taxing the richest of Americans to help cut soaring U.S deficits by more than $3 trillion, also He promised to veto any effort by congressional Republicans to cut Medicare benefits for the elderly without raising taxes as well. This article is relevant to the class reading because both pieces talk about the deficit of the United States and about possible solutions to cut down the on the deficit. In class we learned that health care costs are rising and that republicans want to reduce aid to elder citizens on Medicare as a way to reduce costs. This article is credible because it is from the Huffington post, a credible news source founded in 2005 by Arianna Huffington and other columnists. In 2012, The Huffington Post became the first commercially run, United States digital media enterprise to win a Pulitzer Prize(Wikipedia) . The article by Kuhnhenn shows the argument that he agrees with Obama’s plan of taxing the rich more than poor when the author states” The president's proposal, which he challenged Congress to approve, would predominantly hit upper-income taxpayers and would also target tax loopholes and subsidies used by many larger corporations”. This is saying that the rich and those who have loop holed their way out of taxes would pay more since they have the means to do so. The article’s suggestion and Obamas suggested plan are related because they both fight for the same thing, higher taxes on the rich and keep the safety net from which many america is saving wide and strong. If both Obama’s plan and the plan suggested in the reading would come into effect the deficit of the United States would be considerably lower if the rich find it in them to do the virtuous thing.
The text that I selected is “President Obama’s Medicare Proposals” to help lower the deficit and how would it impact the people that have medicare and how would it benefit the nations economy facing up to $16 trillion dollars in debt. The article that I selected connects to this weeks reading “Public Agenda’s Federal Budget” because it talks about how lowering the cost of medicare would lower the deficit within a decade but shows both positive and negative sides into this solution. This Text is credible because it came from the New York Times a highly well recommended news site that has been around since 1851 and is still a trusted news site to new yorkers. The author of the article that I choose has strong evidence for example he says how much would the deficit lower if they cut medicare “It is true that he would trim only 4 percent from a projected $6.3 trillion in net Medicare spending over the next decade”. This shows that if obama cuts medicare it would create problems for people that can't afford the medicine. But also older americans would get a reduction on the cost of their medicine which is beneficial to them also high income families that could afford to see a doctor and buy their medicine would have to pay more due to the fact that there medicare would be cut. Which this would be beneficial to low and middle income families as their medicare coverage increases which would put more money in their pockets.
ReplyDeleteSynthesis Paragraph:
Medicaid and medicare play a big part in the nations economy and also in the deficit. Even though obama is planning to cut both programs from the rich is beneficial to low income families and middle income families because they would get more coverage and the Affordable care act would have more people cover which is also a good part of Obama’s medicare proposal. In my opinion I think this would benefit a lot of people that need the money for other purpose and it would be good taxing the rich more and cutting their healthcare due to the fact that they can afford it and others can't.