Saturday, May 23, 2020
Part A: Legislation Summary and Status H.R. 628: Mental Health in Schools Act of 2013 was introduced on February 13, 2013 by Grace Napoliano Grace Napolitano, D-CA32. H.R. 628 is expected to dispense national capital of nearly $200,000,000 each year form 2013-2017. The way that this policy is designed, only three federal individuals are responsible to give out grants to help communities and schools with mental health in the school system. The three individuals are: the secretary, secretary of education and the attorney general. The reason for this delivery was to help meet mental health individualÃ¢â¬â¢s needs by providing necessary support and partnership. A comprehensive mental health school program established under H.R. 628 may give children have or still experiencing trauma in oneÃ¢â¬â¢s life the proper tools to deal with his emotions and mental illness without causing extra harm on the individual. The way policy H.R. 628 works, it expands resources for mental health care in or outside of schools. This policy has expectations to grant schools contact to local organizations that deals with mental health. This legislation will provide preparation and training to employees at the school district, local volunteers, students families and as well, to the children. H.R. 628 Mental Health in Schools Act of 2013 is encouraging members of the community to be educated on mental health within the schools and ways they can help deal with a mental illness. The more individuals who areShow MoreRelatedSetting Up Sucide Prevention Programs1427 Words Ã |Ã 6 Pagescause of adolescent deaths (Caine 1), is practically ignored. Many schools only offer hot lines for suicidal students. While some schools have implemented suicide prevention programs and the government has recognized teenage suicide as a growing problem, effective solutions need to be discovered and funded to prevent these catastrophic deaths. The U.S. federal government should develop and fund suicide pr evention programs in high schools, while focusing on strategies ranging from coping mechanisms toRead MoreMental Health And Its Effects On Children993 Words Ã |Ã 4 Pageswake up one day and have a mental illness and realize you have money to afford help but know you can t let it just slide? Even though mental health is expensive, it is needed as an aid for the illnesses of the people getting help. Mental health funding helps the citizens that can t afford the help for it. They provide a stress free environment for families and citizens since they don t have to worry about the expenses of the help. Some people believe mental health is funded enough or even fundedRead MoreSchool Safety And Security Has Been An Issue On Many Administrators1075 Words Ã |Ã 5 Pages Beginning at the turn of the century, school safety and security has been an issue on many administratorsÃ¢â¬â¢ minds. There have been over one hundred and forty school shootings since the turn of the century and the whole country is on watch. The most recent event at Sandy Hook made the citizens of America plead with the government for stricter laws, and safer schools. Is the Government doing enough to provide the right schools with the right resources? In April 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan KleboldRead MoreThe Right And Bear Arms1663 Words Ã |Ã 7 Pagescontrol, school shootings wouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t happen like the one at sandy hook elementary school. But the guns used in the mass shooting were all legally gotten. And furthermore legislation that was proposed afterwards wouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t help stop it from happening again. Even though something is wrong with our gun regulatory system, most legislation proposed in congress wouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t really do anything to revolutionize gun control. Gun education in schools would do more for our future than more restrictive legislation. GunRead MoreDiane Feinstein s Life For Serving The People Of California Essay1671 Words Ã |Ã 7 PagesCalifornia and across the country. Mayor legislative accomplishments During DianneÃ¢â¬â¢s Feinstein first term as California s first female Senator, she was a co-author of the Gun Free Schools Act and the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act, both signed into law in 1994. That same year, Feinstein also led legislation banning the manufacture, sale, and possession of military-style assault weapons, which was also signed into law the same year. Feinstein was the author of The Comprehensive MethamphetamineRead MoreDiscrimination Against People With Disabilities1729 Words Ã |Ã 7 Pages People with Disabilities Mental and physical disabilities are often not well understood. With lack of understanding comes discrimination against people with disabilities. However a growing trend of awareness from the media, advocate groups and development of legal mechanisms have helped provide justice to these people and continues to improve the situation. 18.5% of AustraliaÃ¢â¬â¢s population (4.2million Australians) has a disability. This is a surprisingly large number, however only about 6% of theRead MoreMental Health Awareness And Improvement Act802 Words Ã |Ã 4 PagesMental Health Awareness and Improvement Act The shortage of aid for treating mental health disorders is often disregarded as inconsequential because of a lack of awareness surrounding the subject. Both the general public and policy makers seem blind to the prevalence of the problem, even though mental illness affects 1 in 5 Americans and costs the country an estimated $247 billion dollars annually (Blumenthal, 2015). The Mental Health Awareness and Improvement Act of 2015 was written to address mentalRead MoreObesity Is A Growing Health Disparity1596 Words Ã |Ã 7 Pagesphysical and mental health, however the population of the United States have disconnected from the outdoors causing a rise in health issues such as obesity, depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and other chronic diseases (Bates Stone, 2015). Obesity is defined as a disorder involving excessive amounts of body fat that can increase risks for health problems, such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some leading causes of preventable death (CDC.gov, 2016 ). Obesity is a growing health disparityRead MoreRhetorical Analysis to Defend Mental Health in Schools Act Essay876 Words Ã |Ã 4 Pagesfloods, and devastating fires, which have had an immense impact on our childrenÃ¢â¬â¢s physical and mental well-being. I felt an obligation to take part in supporting laws that would help address the underlying causes of such tragic events. One of those causes I believe is lack of early detection, prevention, and intervention of mental health issues in our society. I feel we should genuinely value the mental health of our children in our society if we want to mend this great Nation. The psychological well-beingRead MoreRhetorical Analysis to Defend Mental Health in Schools Act Essay762 Words Ã |Ã 4 Pagesshould really value the mental health of our children in the society if we want to develop this great Nation. The psychological well-being of our children affects us both directly and indirectly whether we accept this fact or not. It is very important that we ensure that our beloved children have the capabilities to adapt to the stresses, working productively both in school and also contribute to the developments in the community. Problems associated with mental illness or health are very common in this
Tuesday, May 12, 2020
While some conservatives oppose gay marriage, others do not. For conservatives who do oppose it, the issue has less to do with homophobia and more to do with protecting the Judeo-Christian view of marriage. Social Conservatives and Wedge Issues While it is true that social conservatives have been on the front lines of wedge issues, not all conservatives are as deeply passionate about them as others. In fact, a large portion of the conservative movementÃ¢â¬âfiscal conservatives and crunchy conservatives, for exampleÃ¢â¬âmay find themselves disagreeing with social conservatives on issues like gay marriage. Nevertheless, simply identifying as a conservative is enough to earn the vitriol and condemnation of the LGBT movement. Opposition to Gay Marriage vs. Homophobia Most gay rights advocates voice opinions of their own. Conservatives are motivated by homophobia [or hate], they say. Conservatives use their religion as a way to oppose gay marriage, others opine. Still, others believe that conservatives dont harbor the same hatred for divorced people, vandals, or other sinners. They have a special hatred for gays and lesbians. Comments like these force even those who have no particular sentiment either way to take up sides and defend their loosely-held convictions (whether they lean to the right or the left on this issue). I dont support gay marriage is not the same as I hate gays, and those on the left are frequently too blinded by their advocacy to recognize it. Those that do simply refuse to acknowledge it. Not everyone who opposes gay marriage is a homophobe, and not everyone who opposes gay marriage hates people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. By branding the religious end of an entire conservative movement as hateful, the people making such remarks come off as hateful of conservatives. It boils the issue down to one or the other, without considering those in between. Marriage As a Sacred Symbol For many people (not just religious conservatives), marriage is a sacred symbol of heterosexual love and commitment. Seeing it changed in such a profound way would be like the National Rifle Association suddenly claiming the rainbow flag as its symbol. Just as this would change the meaning of the flag in a way that is unpleasant to the LGBT community, so too would gay marriage change the meaning of marriage to a large part of the married community. Separation of Church and State? There is a common misconception among those on the left that the Constitution mandates a clear separation of church and state, yet that language is nowhere to be found in the document. The phrase was taken from a letter by Thomas Jefferson and bound into law by an activist Supreme Court in 1878. The Constitution deals with the issue of religion via the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. In the former case, Congress cannot pass laws based on religious principles and in the latter, the government cannot keep people from practicing their religion. National recognition of gay marriage is believed by many conservatives to be an example of government interfering with their right to practice their religion. They see it as akin to the government changing a basic tenet of their religion, not unlike forcing Orthodox Jews to eat pork or forcing Catholics to use something other than water in their baptisms. It reduces the covenant of marriage to a bureaucratic rubber stamp and also bastardizes the holiness of it. Recognition of Civil Unions vs. Marriage As it relates to the federal government, the trouble begins with how marriage is treated. There are very few mainstream or common-sense conservatives who will argue that a gay persons life-partner shouldnt be afforded the same rights as a married persons spouse, especially in instances where one of the parties is ill. The trouble with existing federal law is that it recognizes the institution of marriage, which is a holy, religious practice. While atheists will argue marriage is a legal covenant, most conservatives (and even many liberals) will concede that it is an act of religion. Most mainstream conservatives believe that civil unions would be a better way for the federal government to bestow benefits on couples. State vs. Federal While there are many conservatives who believe the institution of marriage should be defended as a covenant between a man and a woman, many more believe that the federal government shouldnt be dealing with the subject at all. Its a matter of jurisdiction. A large majority of conservatives believe the gay marriage issue is a states rights issue since there is no explicit language regarding the subject in the Constitution. According to the Tenth Amendment (Article X of the Bill of Rights), The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. If it were a matter of the states, there undoubtedly would be states in the U.S. that would permit gay marriage and others that wouldnt. For the majority of conservatives, this is fine as long as the voters of these states are the ones making the decisions (not the lawmakers). The Bottom Line For most mainstream conservatives, gay marriage isnt the issue it is for social conservatives. While there is a crossover for many on the right, political conservatism is less about wedge issues and more about limiting the size and scope of government, building a strong national defense and enabling the freedom of enterprise. Many conservatives who took a states right stance have put the issue on the back-burner since the Supreme Court decisions legalizing gay marriage and prohibiting state restrictions and bans.
Wednesday, May 6, 2020
The Story Behind Financial Deregulation a. Wild Optimism the Deregulation Movement b. The Political Influence of the Financial Sector (and the Wealthy in General) PART II: THE SOLUTION Section 3: The Solution is Government Stimulus (and a Few Other Reforms) 7. We will write a custom essay sample on Krugman Analysis or any similar topic only for you Order Now The Solution is Government Stimulus 8. Objection #1 : Government Stimulus DoesnÃ¢â¬â¢t Spur the Economy (and Response) ; a. Exhibit A: The Great Depression b. The Initial Stimulus Effort Was Too Small 9. Solution Specifics a. Stimulus Specifics b. Additional Federal Reserve Actions c. Housing Relief (et. L. ) 10. Objection #2: The Danger of Government Debt (and Response) ; . The Problem of Investor Confidence b. The Problem of Paying off the Debt in the Future 1 1 . Objection #3: The Danger of Inflation (and Response) Section 4: The Chances of Government Stimulus Being Implemented (and How to Improve Them) 12. Pragmatic Politics and the Coming Election a. An Obama Sweep b. An Obama Win, and a Divided Parliament c. A Rooney Victory 13. Conclusion Since the housing and financial crash of 2008, AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s economy has been stuck deep in the doldrums. Indeed, GAP has remained well beneath pre-2008 levels, and employment levels have failed to recover. In an effort to resuscitate the economy, the American government tried first to Jump-start it through stimulus spending, and has now replaced this approach with greater austerity. Nothing seems to be working. For Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Grumman, though, the answer is clear: the problem is that the original stimulus effort was too small, and, since that time, the government is moving squarely in the wrong direction. Indeed, Grumman argues that AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s current situation bares a striking resemblance to the stagnation of the Great Depression, and that history has taught us what to do in such situations: the overspent must take an aggressive approach to stimulate the economy into recovery. This is the argument that Grumman makes in his new book Ã¢â¬ËEnd This Depression Now! Ã¢â¬Ë Now, Grumman is not a proponent of big government spending under normal conditions. Indeed, even in a recession, GermanÃ¢â¬â¢s preferred approach is to drop interest rates in order to spur consumer spending. The problem now is that interest rates are already at zero, and this has not been enough to get consumer spending off the ground, thus leaving the economy in what is called a Ã¢â¬Ëliquidity trapÃ¢â¬â¢. For Grumman, the liquidity trap is actually quite common in economic downturns that allow financial crashes (as is the case with the current one, and as was the case with the Great Depression), and is why such slumps tend to be deep and prolonged. According to Grumman, the best and surest way to save the economy from a liquidity trap is for the government to step in and undertake the spending that consumers wonÃ¢â¬â¢t. That is, the government must stimulate the economy back into action, until consumers can get back on their feet enough to take over for themselves. For Grumman, this is precisely what happened in America during WI, when the governmentÃ¢â¬â¢s military spending served to stimulate the economy and save it from the rips of the Great Depression. Now, GermanÃ¢â¬â¢s opponents will point out that the American government has already tried the stimulus approach during this downturn, and that this strategy did not work, thus showing that it cannot be relied upon. WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s more, these same opponents argue that the governmentÃ¢â¬â¢s debt is already enormous, and indeed dangerously high, and that further government spending at this point may well render the debt completely unmanageable, if not force the government into insolvency (which is indeed a threat that is currently being faced by several countries in the European Union). Finally, GermanÃ¢â¬â¢s detractors maintain that pumping more money into the economy at this time only threatens to drive up inflation to dangerous levels, perhaps even triggering a hyperinflation spiral. Grumman, though, claims that he has answers to all of these objections. In the first place, as noted above, the author maintains that the failure of the governmentÃ¢â¬â¢s first stimulus effort did not prove that this approach is ineffective, but that it simply wasnÃ¢â¬â¢t large enough to do the trick. Second, Grumman argues that though government debt does pose a concern, AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s debt is actually not that dangerous by historical tankards. WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s more, since America has its own currency (unlike the countries of the European Union), it is able to print money to turn over its debt, thus preventing the possibility of bankruptcy. Finally, with regards to inflation, Grumman contends that inflation simply cannot get off the ground in a depressed economy (as the current situation would attest to), and that when it is triggered in an upturn the government can always reverse its policy, thus keeping it firmly in check. Here is Paul Grumman speaking about his new book (Part II of the interview is available on Youth): http://www. Tube. Com/watch? What follows is a full executive summary of End This Depression NOW! By Paul Grumman. PART l: THE PROBLEM Grumman begins by way of establishing the gravity of the problems that AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s economy is currently facing. This can be seen in the numbers. To begin with, consider AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s Gross Domestic Product (GAP). As Grumman notes, GAP indicates Ã¢â¬Å"the total value of goods and services that are produced in an economy, adjusted for inflationÃ¢â¬ ¦ In a given period of timeÃ¢â¬ (loc. 274). As such, GAP provides a general picture of how much an economy is producing, and how quickly it is growing. Between the Great Depression and the beginning of the current recession, AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s GAP grew at an average rate of between 2% to 2. 5% per year (loc. 277). The biggest downturn during this time occurred between 1979 and 1982, when AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s economy experienced a Ã¢â¬Ëdouble dipÃ¢â¬â¢ recession-?which Grumman characterizes as essentially Ã¢â¬Å"two recessions in close succession that are best viewed as basically a single slump with a stutter in the middleÃ¢â¬ (loc. 283). At the low point of this recession, in 1982, AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s Ã¢â¬Å"real GAP was 2 percent below its previous peakÃ¢â¬ (loc. 83), meaning it basically went flat. However, the author continues, the economy rebounded very quickly in the immediate aftermath, Ã¢â¬Å"growing at a 7 percent rate for the next two years-?morning in AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢-?and then returned to its normal growth trackÃ¢â¬ (loc. 283). When we look at the latest recession, we find that the low point occurred between 2007 and 2 009. When compared with the recession of the late sassÃ¢â¬â¢s and early sassÃ¢â¬â¢s, we find that the latest Ã¢â¬Å"plungeÃ¢â¬ ¦ As steeper and sharper, with real GAP falling 5 percent over the course of eighteen monthsÃ¢â¬ (loc. 287). WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s more, the American economy has not seen a strong recovery this time around, as Ã¢â¬Å"growth since the official end of the recession has actually been lower than normalÃ¢â¬ (loc. 287). All in all, the author claims, Ã¢â¬Å"the U. S. Economy is [currently] operating about 7 percent below its potentialÃ¢â¬ (loc. 295), and has lost $3 trillion in value since the slump began (loc. 299). Most significant of all, though, is that the economy shows no signs of a major come back any time soon; thus leading Grumman to conclude that Ã¢â¬Å"at this point weÃ¢â¬â¢ll be very lucky if we get away with a cumulative output loss of Ã¢â¬Ëonly $5 trillionÃ¢â¬ (loc. 299). . Unemployment Is Way Up While the GAP numbers are certainly telling, the more significant numbers, according to Grumman, are those concerning unemployment. As the author reminds us, unemployment statistics cover only those who are looking for work but who canÃ¢â¬â¢t find it, and Ã¢â¬Å"in December 2011 that amounted to more than 13 million Americans, up from 6. 8 million in 2007Ã¢â¬ (loc. 94). This is already a staggering number, but when you take into account all of those people who have stopped looking for work out of frustration, or who have taken part-time work out of desperation, this number balloons even Geiger: Ã¢â¬Å"by this broader measure there are about 24 million unemployed Americans -?abou t 15 percent of the workforce-?roughly double the number before the crisisÃ¢â¬ (loc. 202). And since the current slump has dragged on so long, the number of people who have been out of work long-term (meaning 6 months to 1 year, or longer [loc. 224]) has risen to levels not seen since the Great Depression. Indeed, Grumman writes that Ã¢â¬Å"not since the sassÃ¢â¬â¢s have so many Americans found themselves trapped in a permanent stats of JoblessnessÃ¢â¬ (loc. 228). The unemployment numbers are particularly important, the author argues, since hey bring home the human element of the story. Indeed, while GAP statistics represent the abstract loss of an entire economy, unemployment numbers reflect the loss of income of real people. WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s more, unemployment not only affects income, but self-esteem as well: Ã¢â¬Å"people who want to work but canÃ¢â¬â¢t find work suffer greatly, not Just from the loss of income but from a diminished sense of self-worth. And thatÃ¢â¬â¢s a major reason why mass unemployment-?which has now been going on for years-?is such a tragedyÃ¢â¬â¢ (loc. 173). Adding to the tragedy here is the fact that those who are shut out of the Job market or long stretches end up being stigmatize, which can hurt their prospects of landing work in the future: Ã¢â¬Å"Does being unemployed for a long time really erode work skills, and make you a poor hire? Does the fact that you were one of the long-term unemployed indicate that you were a loser in the first place? Maybe not, but many employers think it does, and for the worker that may be all that matters. Lose a Job in this economy, and itÃ¢â¬â¢s very hard to find another; stay unemployed long enough, and you will be considered unemployableÃ¢â¬ (loc. 241). While all of these factors have very such affected people who were already in the Job market, it has been even worse for young people who had not yet established themselves before the recession hit. Indeed, unemployment levels among the young tend to be higher than the general population in the best of times, but in the worst of times they tend to get hit even harder. As Grumman notes, Ã¢â¬Å"truly , this is a terrible time to be youngÃ¢â¬ ¦ Roughly one in four recent graduates is either unemployed or working only part-time. There has also been a notable drop in wages for those who do have full-time Jobs that donÃ¢â¬â¢t make use of their educationÃ¢â¬ (loc. 249-58). 3. The Potential Long-Term Consequences When it comes to the plight of young people, as well as those who have found themselves shut out of the Job market for an extended period, these phenomena not only affect those directly involved, but also threaten to damage the economy in the long term. This proves to be the case because, as mentioned, present unemployment, or underemployment, can threaten future opportunities. As Grumman explains, Ã¢â¬Å"if workers who have been Jobless for extended periods come to be seen as unemployable, thatÃ¢â¬â¢s a long-term reduction in the economyÃ¢â¬â¢s effective workforce, and hence in its productive capacity. The plight of college graduates forced to take Jobs that donÃ¢â¬â¢t use their skills is somewhat similar: as time goes by, they may find themselves demoted, at least in the eyes of potential employers, to the status of low- skilled workers, which will mean that their education goes to wasteÃ¢â¬ (loc. 324). And lost employment opportunities is not the only way that a prolonged slump can adversely affect future economic performance. As Grumman argues, an extended downturn tends to deter businesses from investing in and expanding their operations, which can leave them in a position where they are unable to meet emend when the economy finally does turn around and demand picks up: Ã¢â¬Å"the problem is that if and when the economy finally does recover, it will bump up against capacity limits and production bottlenecks much sooner than it would have if the persistent slump hadnÃ¢â¬â¢t given businesses every reason to stop investing in the futureÃ¢â¬ (loc. 328). GermanÃ¢â¬â¢s claim that an extended economic downturn does in fact have significant long time repercussions is bolstered by an MIFF study that looked at previous recessions. As the author explains, Ã¢â¬Å"the International Monetary Fund has tidied the aftermath of past financial crises in a number of countries, and its findings are deeply disturbing: not only do such crises inflict severe short-run damage; they seem to take a huge long-term toll as well, with growth and employment shifted more or less permanently onto a lower trackÃ¢â¬ (loc. 41). Even more important, for Grumman, is that there is also evidence that a concerted effort to pull an economy up out of a slump can mitigate the future damage (loc. 341). For the author, then, the message is clear: America is in the midst of a very serious and damaging slump; the longer the country remains in the slump, the worse things ill be in the long run. As such, we must take swift and direct action to extricate the nation from the current situation. Before we take a look at what form Grumman thinks this action should take, it well help to hear the authorÃ¢â¬â¢s assessment of the current situation, and what he thinks landed the country here to begin with. According to Grumman, while AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s current situation is really quite dire, the reason why the country finds itself in this situation is really rather simple. It all has to do with demand: Ã¢â¬Å"why is unemployment so high, and economic output so low? Because we-?where by WeÃ¢â¬â¢ I mean consumers, businesses, and governments combined-?arenÃ¢â¬â¢t spending enoughÃ¢â¬ ¦ E are suffering from a severe overall lack of demandÃ¢â¬ (loc. 453-62). Actually, this whole scenario is unfolding as somewhat of a domino effect, as is the case with all downturns. To be specific, consumers have stopped spending, which means that businesses do not feel the need to hire more employees and/or ramp up production; and since production is down, governments are earning less revenue through taxes, and are themselves more reluctant to spend (loc. 459). So, how does a country get itself out of this kind of slump? Under normal circumstances AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s Central Bank (the Federal Reserve), would pump more money into the economy, thereby lowering the interest rate (by the law of supply and demand) (loc. 554-59, 590). This has the effect of making credit cheaper, which spurs individuals to lower their savings and consumer more, thus pulling the economy out of the slump. As Grumman reports, this strategy has proven to be very effective over the years: Ã¢â¬Å"it worked spectacularly after the severe recession of 1981-82, which the Fed was able to turn within a few months into a rapid economic recovery -?morning in America. It worked, albeit more slowly and more hesitantly, after the 1990-91 and 2001 recessionsÃ¢â¬ (loc. 559). The problem this time around is that when the recession hit in 2008 interest rates were already at the rock bottom rate of zero percent, meaning the Fed could not lower them any further (loc. 594). Since that time the interest rate has remained at zero, but, through it all, even this has not been enough to spur consumer spending to the point where it has been able to rescue the economy from its slump. When interest rates are at zero, and people still arenÃ¢â¬â¢t spending, you have what is called a Ã¢â¬Ëliquidity trapÃ¢â¬â¢. As Grumman explains, Ã¢â¬Å"itÃ¢â¬â¢s what happens when zero isnÃ¢â¬â¢t low enough, when the Fed has saturated the economy with liquidity to such an extent that thereÃ¢â¬â¢s no cost to holding more cash, yet overall demand remains IoWÃ¢â¬â¢ (loc. 596). And for the author, this is the crux of the issue. According to Grumman, a major part of the problem this time around is that when the latest recession hit, a large number of Americans were already deep in debt due to the housing crash, as well as other personal debt. What this meant is that even at zero percent interest a vast number of Americans could not afford to resume pending, for they had to get out of their debilitating debt first (loc. 755, 774, 2240). Nor is that the worst of it. Indeed, one of the most straightforward ways to get out of debt is to sell off your assets. But when a large number of people try to sell off their assets (including their houses) all at once, this drives down the price of the assets, thus reducing the amount of money that people can raise in order to pay off their debt, thus exacerbating the problem (loc. 63). But thereÃ¢â¬â¢s more! As the prices of assets fall, the purchasing power of money correspondingly increases (called fellatio), and this increases the relative burden of debt (for the money that you are paying back your debt with is ever increasing in value), thus complicating the matter even further (loc. 767). 5. The Root of the Problem: The Deregulation of the Financial Sector Now, a lot has been mad e of the issue of how Americans came to be so indebted in the first place, for this was a major part of why the current problem is so bad. Commentators on the right tend to blame borrowers who took out loans that they were not in a position to pay back, as well as government supported agencies who provided cheap loans to under-funded home-owners (loc. 059). Commentators on the left, on the other hand, tend to put the blame on deregulation in the financial industry, which allowed banking and investment companies to take on undue risk, as well as the banking and investment companies themselves who took advantage of the situation by way of providing loans to overly-risky borrowers. Grumman himself is primarily in the latter camp. To begin with, Grumman claims that the vast majority of bad mortgage loans were made by private firms, not the much maligned government-sponsored Fannies Mae and Freddie Mac (loc. 1072); who, the author contends, got into the bad mortgage name only very late (loc. 1072), and not nearly to the extent that private companies did (loc. 1072). But the root of the problem, according to Grumman, is the steady deregulation of the financial industry that began under Reagan in the sassÃ¢â¬â¢s, and that culminated with the Grammar-Leach-Bailey Act of 1999, which repealed a provision of the Glass-Steal Act. Glass-Steal was a bill passed in 1933 to deal with the ongoing Great Depression (loc. 977). The major provision in the bill was that commercial banking deposits would be insured up to a certain point by the federal government (loc. 977). This was meant o restore confidence in banks, many of whom had fallen to bank runs in the previous years (loc. 977). The issue with insuring bank deposits, though, is that this creates a moral hazard for the banks. For the banks know that they will ultimately be bailed out by the government (meaning taxpayers) if they fall into insolvency (loc. 86); and, as such, they are tempted to make overly-risky investments. As Grumman explains, Ã¢â¬Å"it could have created a situation in which bankers could raise lots of money, no questions asked-?hey, itÃ¢â¬â¢s all government insured-?then put that money into high-risk, high stakes investments, curing that it was heads they win, tails taxpayers loseÃ¢â¬ (loc. 986). In order to protect against this moral h azard, the legislators behind Glass-Steal also included a provision that stipulated that commercial banks could not act as investment banks. This was meant to keep commercial bank deposits safe from overly-risky investments. As Grumman notes, Ã¢â¬Å"any bank accepting deposits was restricted to the business of making loans; you couldnÃ¢â¬â¢t use depositorsÃ¢â¬â¢ funds to speculate in stock markets or commodities, and in fact you couldnÃ¢â¬â¢t house such speculative activities under the same institutional roofÃ¢â¬ (loc. 990). In 1999, though, this provision of the Glass-Steal Act was repealed by the Grammar-Leach-Bailey Act (loc. 1017). According to Grumman, this move was the height of irresponsibility, and was a major contributor to the extreme risk-taking environment that led directly to the financial crash of 2008 (loc. 007-1017). For the author, though, the repealing of Glass-Steal was not the only article of deregulation that prompted the crash. Indeed, he identifies several pieces of anti-regulatory legislation that also had a hand to play in triggering the whole mess, from President CarterÃ¢â¬â¢s Monetary Control Act of 1980 (Ã¢â¬Å"which ended isolations that had prevented banks from pa ying interest on many kinds of depositsÃ¢â¬ [loc. 1003]); to President ReggaeÃ¢â¬â¢s Garn-SST. German Act of 1982 (Ã¢â¬Å"which relaxed restrictions on the kinds of loans banks could makeÃ¢â¬ [loc. 003]); to the failure of legislators to keep up with new innovations in the financial industry, such as shadow banks (loc. 1029-42). Now, unlike some left-wing commentators, Grumman is not prepared to let consumers off the hook entirely for the debt problems that complicated the crash. Indeed, the author (following the economic thinker Hyman Minsk) argues that a big actor behind the growth of consumer debt in the recent past was a general natural tendency for people to forget about the dangers of debt during good times (loc. 733, 798-815). As Grumman explains, Ã¢â¬Å"an economy with low debt tends to be an economy in which debt looks safe, an economy in which the memory of the bad things debt can do fades into the mists of history. Over time, the perception that debt is safe leads to more relaxed lending standards; businesses and families alike develop the habit of borrowing; and the overall level of leverage in the economy risesÃ¢â¬ (loc. 810). As the quote makes clear, the optimism in question touched all Americans, not Just the lenders, and so all involved deserve some share of the responsibility (loc. 33, 806). 6. The Story Behind Financial Deregulation According to Grumman, though, it was ultimately the lack of regulations that allowed this selective memory and wild optimism to become dangerous, for the regulations were essentially keeping these sentiments in check (loc. 838). Now, it may rightly be said that the same emotions that led to growing debt also influenced the legislation that allowed it to become da ngerous in the end (loc. 40). But for Grumman, there were other reasons behind financial deregulation that are also important to consider. For one, even before regulations were removed from the financial sector, the government had already begun to deregulate other industries (such as air travel, trucking, and oil and gas) (loc. 999-1003). These reforms had led to significant gains in efficiency in these industries (loc. 999), and thus many were optimistic that the same approach would work in the financial sector. The problem, as Grumman points out, is that Ã¢â¬Å"banking is not like trucking, and the effect of deregulation was not so such to encourage efficiency as to encourage risk takingÃ¢â¬ (loc. 007). B. The Political Influence of the Financial Sector (and the Wealthy in General) Over and above the factors mentioned above, though, Grumman argues that there is a still more sinister explanation behind the deregulation of the financial sector. And this has to do with the political influence of those who benefited most from it: the bankers themselves. Take the Grammar-Leach-Bailey Act of 1999, for instance (which, yo u will recall, revoked a crucial regulatory provision of the Glass-Steal Act). As Grumman points out, the gassing of the Act was largely influenced by the lobbying of Citron and Travelers Group, who in 1998 had wanted to amalgamate to become Citreous, but who had encountered obstacles due to Glass- Steal (loc. 1043, 1357-65). And even before this, the political elite stood in defense of increasing deregulation, despite initial indications that the measures were problematic (loc. 1414, 1130). Indeed, as Grumman is wont to stress, the problems posed by deregulation did not begin with the financial crash of 2008. Instead, they began to surface even in the sassÃ¢â¬â¢s when the banking sector was first deregulated. For instance, in 1989 the Federal government was forced to shut down the thrift banking industry due to a collapse induced by bad debt (loc. 1099-1120). A desperate move that put taxpayers on the hook for $130 billion (loc. 1120). Then, in the sassÃ¢â¬â¢s, further difficulties arose when several large commercial banks over-extended themselves Ã¢â¬Å"in lending to commercial real-estate developersÃ¢â¬ (loc. 1119). Finally, Ã¢â¬Å"in 1998, with much of the emerging world in financial crisis, the failure of a single hedge fund, Long Term Capital Management, froze financial markets in much the same way that the failure f Lehman Brothers would freeze markets a decade laterÃ¢â¬ (loc. 1123). For Grumman, all of these events should have acted as clear warning signs that there was something seriously wrong with financial deregulation (loc. 1 125-30). So why did the political elite fail to heed the warning signs? For Grumman, this become a good deal more understandable when we appreciate how profitable deregulation was for the financial sector (loc. 142), and how much influence this sector has on government. Indeed, as the author points out, while deregulation did virtually nothing to increase the incomes of middle class families (loc. 137, 1190), the move was a great boon to the wealthy (loc. 1142, 1201), and especially the bankers themselves (loc. 1300, 1418). In addition, itÃ¢â¬â¢s no secret th at the wealthy, and the financial sector in particular, has a major influence on government (loc. 1351). This influence exists not only in the form of significant monetary contributions (loc. 346), but in the two-way cross-over between the financial sector and political office (loc. 1380, 1392). WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s more, the influence of the wealthy has been increasing as the rich have gotten richer since the time when deregulation first took off (loc. 1388). Section 3: The Solution is Government Stimulus (and a Few Other Reforms) 7. The Solution is Government Stimulus Grumman certainly maintains that reforms in financial sector regulations are needed if the country is to avoid falling into future debacles such as it finds itself in presently. For him, though, the more important question has to do with how to get the country out of its current situation. As you will recall, Grumman contends that AmericaÃ¢â¬â¢s problem now is that it is in the midst of a liquidity trap. That is, interest rates are already at zero, and yet this still isnÃ¢â¬â¢t enough to reignite consumer pending. WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s more, since consumers arenÃ¢â¬â¢t spending, businesses have no reason to hire workers and/or expand their operations, and so they arenÃ¢â¬â¢t spending either (loc. 461). Any yet, for Grumman, this lack of spending is very much the heart of the problem. So what can be done? According to Grumman, the answer is simple: the government must step in and take over the role of spending (loc. 879). As the author puts it, Ã¢â¬Å"the essential point is that what we need to get out of this current depression is another burst of government spending. Is it really that simple? Would it really be that easy? Basically, yesÃ¢â¬ (loc. 688). GermanÃ¢â¬â¢s argument is that government spending will put money into the hands of the people, who will then be able to recover enough to resume spending themselves. As consumer spending increases, businesses will increase production and hire more workers, thus fully pulling the economy out of its current slump (loc. 679). 8. Objection #1 : Government Stimulus DoesnÃ¢â¬â¢t Spur the Economy (and Response) Now, some argue that government spending doesnÃ¢â¬â¢t actually increase demand and spur the economy at all, since, they claim, all it really does is take resources from one sector of the economy and transfer them to another. The argument is well-rendered by Brian Riddle of the right wing thing tank the Heritage Foundation, who Grumman quotes in his book: Ã¢â¬Å"the grand Keynesian myth is that you can spend money and thereby increase demand. And itÃ¢â¬â¢s a myth because Congress does not have a vault of money to distribute in the economy. Every dollar Congress injects into the economy must first be taxed or borrowed out of the economy. YouÃ¢â¬â¢re not creating new demand youÃ¢â¬â¢re Just transferring it from one group of people to anotherÃ¢â¬ (loc. 474). Now, for Grumman, this argument may hold true under normal circumstances, when banks are lending and companies are competing for resources (loc. 2369). But in a depressed economy this is not the case. Rather, in such a situation banks are not lending because safe investments net very little profit, and risky investments are, well, too risky (loc. 2369). So in a depressed economy, resources go unused by the private sector (loc. 2079). This being the case, government spending does not displace private spending; rather, it does nothing but increase demand How to cite Krugman Analysis, Papers
Friday, May 1, 2020
I was sobbing. My entire body heaved with the weight of a thousand pound bulldozer. My miniscule shoulders shook. My life was ending. To my seven year old self, there was no more acute pain than the shrill screech of my motherÃ¢â¬â¢s voice colliding violently with the threatening hollers of my father. I heard dinner plates breaking. I heard silverware clatter. I could almost feel my soul rip apart. No matter how irrational this thought was, no matter which way I thought about it, I could not make myself feel better. A very untalented conductor was directing and orchestra of angry zoo animals in my kitchen and there was nothing I could do. My seven year old self was dying. For the most part, my childhood was blissful and serene, but like many families, mine was mildly dysfunctional. My parents were by no means soul mates. Drawn together by practicality rather than love, anger and discontent were bound to spew out of the chasms of their relationship periodically. We will write a custom essay sample on A Childhood Apocalypse or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page IÃ¢â¬â¢ve since learned to deal with it like the inhabitants of earth have learned to deal with earthquakes. We ride out the storm, with the knowledge that it will pass. We resolve to clean up afterwards, make stronger structures, and move along with life. On this one particular occasion however, before I learned to productively channel my anguish, I was helpless. I was young and incoherent. My cousin, who had spent the night over at my house, came into my room. He was a year younger than me, a gangly, shy Asian kid. I was not so fond of him at the time and I barely noticed his entrance. I could feel him staring at the hot tears streaked across my face. I was embarrassed. I met his eyes as he told me, Ã¢â¬Å"ItÃ¢â¬â¢s okay. It canÃ¢â¬â¢t go on forever. My parents do this too.Ã¢â¬ It canÃ¢â¬â¢t go on forever: that phrase, that small bit of sanity that I desperately needed. We sat in silence until my parents stopped yelling and came to get us. I wouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t know it un til later, but I would be eternally grateful for that one moment. That one moment is the basis for my entire outlook on life. Every moment that IÃ¢â¬â¢m in pain, I think of his unintentional moment of insight. A six year old child saved my life in the midst of an apocalypse. In those five words, he taught me perspective. Realizing now, how silly I was to cry over an argument, is also realizing how silly it is to cry over anything. It canÃ¢â¬â¢t last forever. Nothing that can hurt me can last forever. I can do anything.
Sunday, March 22, 2020
The puritan periods and age of classicism Essay Former presidents and officers of the ABACAS, (mention their names), my fellow alumni from different batches , guests, ladies and gentlemen, a pleasant evening .. Were gathered here tonight as usual to annually celebrate this reunion of great significance, our BACH grand alumni global reunion. Binnacle Catholic High School, BACH, rings a bell in our hearts, it brings us back to wonderful memories as cost say that high school days are the best, perfect, exciting days of our lives. BACH was our very foundation where we got educated and trained, Many years have gone by since we all graduated from BACH, we lost touch, we became distant, there has been transition in our lives since then. We had varied lives: we faced challenges , experienced heartbreaks ,reaped rewards. _our Journey may not be easy But we all made it here tonight , thankful for the role BACH has played in our development. Our alma mater gave us a special sense of belonging. Our directors, school heads and teachers, whether still living or not, touched our lives and gave us gifts which we carry to the end of our lives. Let us be thankful again for this gathering , rekindle high school memories, renew our friendships, and continue to support our alma mater in our own way, for this Is the legacy that the founders of our school and the great director , the late FRR. Leo Benzene left us to fulfill. We will write a custom essay sample on The puritan periods and age of classicism specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The puritan periods and age of classicism specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The puritan periods and age of classicism specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer I wont keep you long with a lengthy speech because we need to spend more time to enjoy this occasion. Let us get reacquainted and share our stories Let us stay forever young so that our horizon still looms ahead, beckoning tomorrows of fulfillment and greater Joy and most of all , we shall meet again next year, and In the ensuing years to come.
Thursday, March 5, 2020
Ambulatory Care essays Ambulatory emergency care or same-day emergency care is achieved by creating a whole system approach across primary and secondary care. This ensures that, where appropriate, patients are diagnosed and treated on the same day and then sent home with ongoing clinical supervision as needed. If implemented successfully, this approach has the potential to both improve patient experience and reduce costs. The Directory was published in 2007 by the NHS Institute, identifying 49 emergency conditions and clinical scenarios. (e.g. cellulitis) that have the potential to be managed on an ambulatory basis. The underlying principle is that admission to a hospital bed should only take place in the context of an acute illness that requires inpatient care. What Are the Prevention Quality Indicators? The PQIs are a set of measures that can be used with hospital inpatient discharge data to identify "ambulatory care sensitive conditions" The PQIs consist of the following 16 ambulatory care sensitive conditions, which are measured as rates of admission to the hospital: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Diabetes short-term complication Diabetes long-term complication Angina without procedure Congestive heart failure (CHF) Lower-extremity amputation among patients with diabetes A ...
Tuesday, February 18, 2020
The impact of Directive on UK Law - Essay Example Van Duyn made it clear that this was also true of Directives. If Directives are binding then it is possible that they will be relied upon in national courts, but clearly each case will turn on its own facts. Therefore since Z works for a Council this can be construed as an emanation of the State (specifically Case 103/99 Costanzo  ECR 1839) and it is submitted that prima facie he is able to rely on the governmentÃ¢â¬â¢s non implementation directly in a UK court or tribunal provided the Directive is unconditional and sufficiently precise. However this is not true for D. His employer is a private company and as seen in the following case, the Court of Justice does not allow the direct horizontal enforcement of Directives. In Case 152/84 Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching)  ECR 723  1 CMLR 688 Helen Marshall sought to sue a health authority for retirement age discrimination under the Equal Treatment Directive 1976. Her employer dismissed her at 60 in line with her contract. National law exempted retirement matters from its scope -- it did not impose retirement age at 60 - - only that women became eligible for pension at 60. The Court of Justice held that there was no Ã¢â¬Ëhorizontal effectÃ¢â¬â¢ to a Directive where a government had failed to implement a Directive. Helen Marshall could not sue the Health Authority in these circumstances. If the employer is not the State or an emanation of the State then the Court of Justice allows the national court to look at indirect effect.