Thursday, April 7, 2011
Current Event 4/7
"Disabled, but Looking for Work" Motoko Rich April 6, 2011 This article follows the story of Christopher Howard, a man who collects social security benefits because of physical disabilities and the loss of his job. He will receive these payments, 574 dollars a month, until he find a job or reaches the age of retirement. Christopher has not been able to find a steady job, because of his disability. He is not alone in the search for a job, and receiving Social Security benefits. Programs that intend to help disabled people obtain jobs have only given a small portion of the beneficiaries jobs. Even while 3.5 million people are looking for jobs, it is becoming even more important for the disabled to get, and keep their jobs. Social Security has been paying far more to the disabled than they are taking in from taxes. At this rate, the disability trust will run out by 2018. The people collecting disability benefits have gone up about 5 million people since 2000, last year they collected around 115 billion dollars combined. One in 21 Americans receive benefits for disability, raising from 1 in 30 in 2000, Christopher Howard lives in Arkansas where the ratio is 1 in 12, one of the highest in the U.S. While people may be recovering, they are scared to leave the benefits and move onto work, they are using them as a type of safety net. However, many beneficiaries cannot work, even when being given the right services and working conditions because of going without work for so long, they are beginning to lose their skills and ambition. What many of the disabled people do not realize when looking for work and "leaving their safety net" of benefits, they are not necessarily going without some support. The Social Security offers incentives to try and encourage people to re-enter the work force. These incentives include collecting the benefits from Social Security for 9 months, making any amount in payment, if their income falls below 1,000 dollars a month they can receive Social Security benefits again immediately for up to three years and they can keep Medicare coverage for up to eight years after returning to work. In 1999 a law was passed by congress permitting the Ticket to Work program, a program that helps beneficiaries in the search for a job. The program has not been very successful, only 13,656 people have returned to work in the past three years, out of 12 and a half million, and less than a third of them made enough money to drop benefits from Social Security. The first time I read through this article I was unsure of the point the author was trying to make. Whether that is because I don't know much about the current state of Social Security or because I was simultaneously trying to read and listen to Jenna rant about math, well, I think I'm pretty sure it was a little of both. However, the second time I read it, and went through with a highlighter, things started to fit together. The author stated several facts, along with the story of Christopher Howard to explain the crisis the state of Social Security is in. I believe, the way disabled and other beneficiaries are collecting social security needs to be changed, obviously. Tax payers are not going to want to pay more taxes in order to pay for the beneficiaries of Social Security. Though, as of now, besides saying "those people just need to get a job", which is known to not be so easy, greater payments from taxpayers is what this is going towards, if that is to be avoided, a new system may be in order. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/business/economy/07disabled.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=social security&st=cse&scp=4&adxnnlx=1302188458-yMD11I9e3txPQA5JBTiU2g
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
DBQ 3/30
Throughout the period of industrialization treatment of workers, the conditions of work and some of the products themselves were dangerous and unethical. In the late and 1880s through the early 1900s Progressive reformers worked towards improving these conditions and through that, American society. Some of their ambitions were improving working conditions, regulating child labor and protecting consumers. Working conditions in the late 1800s through the early 1900s were not usually not regulated. The workers themselves faced dangerous situations at their factories. Document 1 describes some of the horrific working conditions in a meat-packing factory. Workmen would cut themselves, sometimes cutting their own appendages off, sometimes getting infections bringing them to their death. Other workhouses did not have necessary facilities such as fire escapes or proper care for the workers, like giving them breaks or a lunch hour for example. After these conditions and treatments were exposed by progressives such as muckrakers, reforms were taken into action. One of which is represented by document 4. The document is composed of a list of state actions that affected working conditions. For example, recommendations by the New York State Factory Investigating Commission resulting in new laws creating more sanitary and safer working conditions and Massachusetts passing the first minimum wage law. Child labor was also prominent during this era. Children were hired because their small fingers could fit into the mechanical parts of machinery in factories when they were jammed or things such as spools of thread needed to be changed. The children were mistreated as workers as well, besides the fact that children as young as 4 were being employed. The kids sometimes had to walk miles to the factory, they were not given food or substantial wages and sometimes lost fingers and even died. Progressives like Jane Addams, shown in document 3a, pushed for reforms on child-labor. Addams described times when children died in the factories, while the owner of the factory did nothing to improve the cause, and children sitting on stools in sweatshops pulling "thread after thread" out of the machinery. Jane Addams' actions were not in vain, document 3b shows an excerpt from the First Factory Law of Illinois that prohibited children under 14 to be employed and continually prohibited unless allowed in a legal document by the parent or guardian. Document 5 also shows how Jane Addams and other progressives work was successful by a graph showing the drastic decline of child labor from 1900 to 1920. In the late 1800s and early 1900s there were not laws that indicated what was safe for consumers. Food packaging and labeling was not regulated. In the meat-packing industry rats would climb over dead carcasses stored on the floor breeding and leaving feces on the dead cows and pigs for days until the meat was scraped up to be packaged and sold. The meat was also injected with dyes and rubbed with seasoning so it would not look, or smell rotted. Muckraker, Upton Sinclair worked in the meat-packing industry for a time, and wrote a book called The Jungle, that exposed the dangerous and unsanitary conditions in the industry. Sinclair's book lead him to meet with President Theodore Roosevelt, explained in document 2, and forced him to make a promise to reform the industry. President Roosevelt kept his promise to Sinclair by crating a bill which would later become the Meat Inspection Act. Later, the Pure Food and Drug act came about making the mislabeling of food and drugs illegal. The work of Progressives in the late 1800s and into the early 1900s made life in the workforce ethical and safe for the workers, along with the safety of consumers and eventually also expanding democracy. Without the reforms started by the progressives, protests by suffragists and information found by muckrakers industry today would not be as regulated and secure as it is today, maybe not even at all. The effects of the Progressives' work created factories and industries to be what they are today, giving people jobs and producing much needed goods for consumers.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Thematic Essay: Due 3/17
In the 19th century the United States went though a period of immense industrial expansion. The new industries affected the lives of many Americans who were involved with them. Some of these effects lead to one another, such as increased urbanization, immigration and reform movements.
Urbanization was incresed because of the growth of factories as well. Factories were located in areas that had a substantial population, then workers would move closer to the factories in search for employment, creating a city. The new people moving into the urban areas often were able to find jobs because of the need for unskilled workers that could be paid less. Farmers would go to the cities to find work, as they were loosing money from new technology that was replacing workers. Examples of cities that became major industrial cities are Chicago, New York City, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, St. Louis and Detroit. The influx of many people into one area lead to diversity in cities through the factories and housing. With the large amounts of people moving into the area, tenement housing became popular.The amount of people in a condensed area caused severe problems. The sanitation had major flaws, people would store their garbage in the air shafts of the tenements, bathrooms were close together and near living quarters and multiple of large families would live together in small, one room apartments. These conditions caused widespread diseases and deaths. Pollution was also a problem. Sewage ran down the drain systems on streets and water was infused withgarbage and waste. Pollution also caused diseases and death. Along with sanitation and pollution, crime also became an issue. Without a standard police force murders, thievery and pickpocketing were common because of political and financial disagreements. Political bribes also grew from bribery, drafts, voter fraud and kickbacks.
The industrial growth brought needs for cheap labor and unskilled workers. This led to great amounts of immigration. The word of pay rates and jobs reached over to other countries, giving them ideas of hope. Besides the jobs, immigrants left for religious freedom, to flee from civil wars and other things making them believe the streets of America were “paved withgold”. Though, immigration was not a complete benefit, the immigrants themselves were treated poorly by those who supported ideas such as nativism, if they were even let into the country at all. Most immigrants, those without a working pass or sponsor, had to go through extensive processing before they were let into the country. The amount of immigrants turned away at Angel Island in San Francisco far surpassed the amount going in. They also took jobs that were desired by the native whites, causing them to be a target of political corruption. Because of the ethnic bias, racism and discrimination they were sometimes forced to live in ethnic ghettos, slums and tenement housing which were often unsanitary. Because of the discrimination and unhealthy conditions, reform movements became popular to invoke fair treatment and pay for the immigrants and other mistreated groups such as African Americans, women and children.
These were just a few effects from the industrial growth during the 19th century. Though, these effects were a large part of the industrial growth itself. Without immigrants and the building up of cities themselves, the industry may not have grown at all. With the industry grew other events that shaped the way industry is today, such as reform movements involving fair pay and treatment of workers, African Americans, women, and children. Without the effects like immigration and urbanization from industrial growth in the 19th century the industry would not be what it is today.
Urbanization was incresed because of the growth of factories as well. Factories were located in areas that had a substantial population, then workers would move closer to the factories in search for employment, creating a city. The new people moving into the urban areas often were able to find jobs because of the need for unskilled workers that could be paid less. Farmers would go to the cities to find work, as they were loosing money from new technology that was replacing workers. Examples of cities that became major industrial cities are Chicago, New York City, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, St. Louis and Detroit. The influx of many people into one area lead to diversity in cities through the factories and housing. With the large amounts of people moving into the area, tenement housing became popular.The amount of people in a condensed area caused severe problems. The sanitation had major flaws, people would store their garbage in the air shafts of the tenements, bathrooms were close together and near living quarters and multiple of large families would live together in small, one room apartments. These conditions caused widespread diseases and deaths. Pollution was also a problem. Sewage ran down the drain systems on streets and water was infused withgarbage and waste. Pollution also caused diseases and death. Along with sanitation and pollution, crime also became an issue. Without a standard police force murders, thievery and pickpocketing were common because of political and financial disagreements. Political bribes also grew from bribery, drafts, voter fraud and kickbacks.
The industrial growth brought needs for cheap labor and unskilled workers. This led to great amounts of immigration. The word of pay rates and jobs reached over to other countries, giving them ideas of hope. Besides the jobs, immigrants left for religious freedom, to flee from civil wars and other things making them believe the streets of America were “paved withgold”. Though, immigration was not a complete benefit, the immigrants themselves were treated poorly by those who supported ideas such as nativism, if they were even let into the country at all. Most immigrants, those without a working pass or sponsor, had to go through extensive processing before they were let into the country. The amount of immigrants turned away at Angel Island in San Francisco far surpassed the amount going in. They also took jobs that were desired by the native whites, causing them to be a target of political corruption. Because of the ethnic bias, racism and discrimination they were sometimes forced to live in ethnic ghettos, slums and tenement housing which were often unsanitary. Because of the discrimination and unhealthy conditions, reform movements became popular to invoke fair treatment and pay for the immigrants and other mistreated groups such as African Americans, women and children.
These were just a few effects from the industrial growth during the 19th century. Though, these effects were a large part of the industrial growth itself. Without immigrants and the building up of cities themselves, the industry may not have grown at all. With the industry grew other events that shaped the way industry is today, such as reform movements involving fair pay and treatment of workers, African Americans, women, and children. Without the effects like immigration and urbanization from industrial growth in the 19th century the industry would not be what it is today.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Poom #1
I feel so restricted.
This sickness makes me
everything I detest.
I am shunned from the
outside world.
Peering from the
windowsill
I look out
on all of the things
I wish I was
and am afraid
I will never be.
This sickness makes me
everything I detest.
I am shunned from the
outside world.
Peering from the
windowsill
I look out
on all of the things
I wish I was
and am afraid
I will never be.
Current Event : Week of 3/10
“The EPA Trims Costs to Control Toxic Air Pollution”
Dina Cappiello
The Associated Press; February 23, 2011
On February 23, the EPA stated that it will make regulations cheaper for companies to reduce air pollution. They have found ways to keep the pollution under control and do so with a 50% cost savings to the companies that are running the boilers, heaters and incinerators that have to install them. The companies that burn renewable fuels will not be required to to install the new technologies and only maintenence and “tune ups” every two years would be required. This new regulation proposal will cost 1.8 billion dollars less each year, and still stop the health problems caused by the pollution. A job analysis stated that with the new regulations 2200 jobs will be created, not including jobs coming from the purchases of the pollution-control equipment. Even with these changes, many representatives for boiler owners and manufacturers were not happy with the new regulations. The president of the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, Bob Bessette, said the changes made sense and will reduce costs, but the regulations can still be improved. Bessette also sated that he “hopes the EPA will consider other portions of the rule that would protect the environment while giving relief to manufacturers, universities and industrial energy providers” meaning, that the company is worried about how the cost will affect their industry. The real shock of this article was the fact that Obama administration originally asked the court for a 15-month extension to review the 4800 public comments that had come in, but the court gave them 30 days to review them and make the regulation instead. Working with their short deadline, the EPA created a new regulation that will require factories to install technologies that will reduce pollution and health risks in three years.
I did not care for this article that much. The writing did not grab my attention, or get it at all for that matter. It was repetitive, but the article did produce information on the recent activities of the EPA relating to the new regulations. I think, that the author may have been able to collect more information about what the regulations actually meant for the companies and for the EPA itself. Along with that, they also could have sorted their information in a more coherent manner. With those two things included in the article, I believe it may have left a better impression on me, as a reader.
Original article is not longer available online.
Dina Cappiello
The Associated Press; February 23, 2011
On February 23, the EPA stated that it will make regulations cheaper for companies to reduce air pollution. They have found ways to keep the pollution under control and do so with a 50% cost savings to the companies that are running the boilers, heaters and incinerators that have to install them. The companies that burn renewable fuels will not be required to to install the new technologies and only maintenence and “tune ups” every two years would be required. This new regulation proposal will cost 1.8 billion dollars less each year, and still stop the health problems caused by the pollution. A job analysis stated that with the new regulations 2200 jobs will be created, not including jobs coming from the purchases of the pollution-control equipment. Even with these changes, many representatives for boiler owners and manufacturers were not happy with the new regulations. The president of the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, Bob Bessette, said the changes made sense and will reduce costs, but the regulations can still be improved. Bessette also sated that he “hopes the EPA will consider other portions of the rule that would protect the environment while giving relief to manufacturers, universities and industrial energy providers” meaning, that the company is worried about how the cost will affect their industry. The real shock of this article was the fact that Obama administration originally asked the court for a 15-month extension to review the 4800 public comments that had come in, but the court gave them 30 days to review them and make the regulation instead. Working with their short deadline, the EPA created a new regulation that will require factories to install technologies that will reduce pollution and health risks in three years.
I did not care for this article that much. The writing did not grab my attention, or get it at all for that matter. It was repetitive, but the article did produce information on the recent activities of the EPA relating to the new regulations. I think, that the author may have been able to collect more information about what the regulations actually meant for the companies and for the EPA itself. Along with that, they also could have sorted their information in a more coherent manner. With those two things included in the article, I believe it may have left a better impression on me, as a reader.
Original article is not longer available online.
Current Event: Week of 2/25
“Congress, Obama Brace for Showdown as Government Shutdown Looms”
Paul Kane
February 20, 2011
Last Saturday, the House attempted to pass a budget measure that would cut $61 billion from government funded programs. This idea was quickly shut down by the President and Senate Democrats. The measure was passed later that day and now moved onto the Senate. The Senate has previously stated that the “House Plan’s cuts are too drastic. The cuts decrease budgets up to 40%, hundreds of millions cut from border security and funding for the District of Columbia and funding for companies like AmeriCorps and PBS would stop all together. However, the Senate only has a few days to talk about the bill; they only have until March 4th. With this short amount of time, it is rare that the two government branches will agree. Because of the short amount of time and the likely disagreement; it is expected for the government to shut down, or will have to come up with and agree on a new, temporary plan for the budget. If a temporary plan could still be hard for the government to agree on, because that would still have to make substantial cuts.
I thought this article was informative, and interesting. The author gives the impression of the Republicans pushing heavier cuts, and uses quotes from both Republicans and Democrats telling their side of the debates. The quotes help readers to understand what is going through the mind of the government officials while deliberating over the cuts, and trying to find ways to keep minimal cuts to programs such as Planned Parenthood and PBS. I am not sure what my standpoint on the subject of the budget cuts is. On one hand, I would be regretful if things like PBS were cut from the nation; because I feel they are a large part of positive social media. On the other hand, budget cuts are one of the few ways our country will begin to crawl out of the debt we have dug into over the years.
Original Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/19/AR2011021903916_pf.html
Paul Kane
February 20, 2011
Last Saturday, the House attempted to pass a budget measure that would cut $61 billion from government funded programs. This idea was quickly shut down by the President and Senate Democrats. The measure was passed later that day and now moved onto the Senate. The Senate has previously stated that the “House Plan’s cuts are too drastic. The cuts decrease budgets up to 40%, hundreds of millions cut from border security and funding for the District of Columbia and funding for companies like AmeriCorps and PBS would stop all together. However, the Senate only has a few days to talk about the bill; they only have until March 4th. With this short amount of time, it is rare that the two government branches will agree. Because of the short amount of time and the likely disagreement; it is expected for the government to shut down, or will have to come up with and agree on a new, temporary plan for the budget. If a temporary plan could still be hard for the government to agree on, because that would still have to make substantial cuts.
I thought this article was informative, and interesting. The author gives the impression of the Republicans pushing heavier cuts, and uses quotes from both Republicans and Democrats telling their side of the debates. The quotes help readers to understand what is going through the mind of the government officials while deliberating over the cuts, and trying to find ways to keep minimal cuts to programs such as Planned Parenthood and PBS. I am not sure what my standpoint on the subject of the budget cuts is. On one hand, I would be regretful if things like PBS were cut from the nation; because I feel they are a large part of positive social media. On the other hand, budget cuts are one of the few ways our country will begin to crawl out of the debt we have dug into over the years.
Original Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/19/AR2011021903916_pf.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)