Blogs

__**Art and Culture as a Local Economic Development Strategy**__ //Today on Beat The Press, I read an article about how Grand Rapids, Michigans economy has recently recieved a major boost. They had a modest arts prize auctioned by a private donor. They also say how a government can provide a AFV, also known as an artistic freedom voucher. This would attract such people as muscians and writers to live in a certain city and it would bring econcomic stability to that state.//

Francine,

This is more of a summary than a reaction. What are your thoughts about this policy? Do you think that art & music would be promoted by a voucher system? Do you think that a voucher system would work in healthcare as some Republicans are suggesting for Medicare/Health Insurance? Also, this reaction is shorter than requried (5 to 10 sentences.)

Mr. Brunelli

__$4 Million Doesn't Go As Far as It Used To__
Today I read an article about how the federal welfare program has not expanded significantly during the econonmic crisis, even though the need of the money is highly demanded. As stated in the article "... lawmakers decided not to extend the emergency welfare money, which gave states more than $4 million, in part to subsidize wages to help people go to work." I partially agree with this quote. I believe that in todays society, many people are on welfare and the government should do whatever it takes to help those people. The article also states that some of the money that is giving is to help people with training for jobs. I agree with this. One reason is because many people are losing their jobs or cannot get hired, and I believe that one of the many reasons why people can't find a job is because they might not have enough of the skills that are required to obtain the job that they would like. I think that this article is saying that in todays economy, the prices of many things rose, which is why the four million dollars that the government attains is not much compared to what it used to be. As a Country, I believe that we need to fix this economic crisis in whichever ways we can, so many people can get jobs and healthcare benefits, this way the money that the government has can go towards fixing up our schools.

I believe that the government should have used a less costly mechanism due to the fact that cancer is an extremely large medical issue among many Americans today. While there are many wealthy citizens who can afford the drug, there are many less fortunute people who could not. The government is surely aware of the finanical problems that many American citizens are facing, especially those with cancer and other serious medical problems. It is understood that cancer medicines are very costly to produce in which case after that fact,the government should do its best to keep the cost to the people as low as possible. I believe the government should help cut the cost of these medications as quickly as possible. All americans suffer from cancer should be able to afford any help and medication which is available to them.
 * __Government Intervention Makes Cancer Treatment Expensive__**

Ryan is in line for soon to be Head of the House Budget Committee. He stated that "We should not allow any tax increases, period, because it's going to slow the economy down ...If you want to get this deficit down, you need two things: economic growth and spending cuts." The big issue of this society in America today is that the economy is very fallious. I believe that bases on Ryans quote, he is somewhat unaware of this situation and what the causes are. As a country we need to come together and ameliorate the problem. One way to contribute to this is by not letting go of so many people at jobs, because demand for money is at an all time high.
 * __Doesn't Representative Ryan Know that Firing Workers Slows the Economy?__**

Politicians are mixing the ideas of fiscal policy with the ideas of the monetary policy. Monetary policy is the idea of pushing interest rates down to boost employment while fiscal policy is the idea of the goverment directly spending money or giving tax cuts. The fiscal policy is not about making it cheaper for the private sector to borrow and the editorial believes that the Fed should not have a mandate to pursue unemployment any longer. I believe that that the Fed should continue to boost full employment because I believe that as many American citizens as possible should be given the oppurtunity to work. While the Fed is attracting criticizm for its actions I believe that it is nessecary as long as it is constructive criticizm which the Fed and Chairman Bernanke take into consideration.
 * __Washington Post Accuses People in Washington of Doing Drugs: The Fed and Fiscal Policy__**

According to the NYT, there are still many good jobs available for unskilled workers in the economic profession. Skilled Economists have noted that temporary employment has in fact decreased greatly and is just starrting to recover lost ground. After recent gains in hiring in temporary employment the amount of jobs in this sector is still down by almost 20 percent from the pre-recession level. I believe that this does not show structural employment in even the smallest way. I believe as well that skilled Economists should be served first as jobs in this field are being given.
 * __**Temporary** **Help and Structural Unemployment: The Unskilled Can Always Become Economists**__ ||
 * __**Temporary** **Help and Structural Unemployment: The Unskilled Can Always Become Economists**__ ||

According to the New York Times, the current economy that we are living in, which is not the greatest, is acting as a prevention for the consumers from spending their money. There are millions of baby boomers that will be retiring fairly soon, and with the politicians who are planning to cut the cost of Social Security and even Medicare, the expectations for the saving rate will soon increase. I believe a way to help the recession is to give tax breaks to smaller companys, this way they will higher more people. Large businesses tend to not higher as many people anymore, and are even letting many people go, which are leaving people jobless, with a sacarcity of money in their pockets to spend.
 * __Consumers Are Spending Faster Than Normal__**

According to the New York Times, the QE2 would like to "printing money, financing the federal deficit and devaluing the dollar." They believe that a strong effect of this would be that within some time, it would boost the economy by lowering the value of the dollar. They say that it would make the United States products more competitive throughout the nation. After reading this article, it convinced me that they should lower the value of the U.S dollar for a number of reasons. As a country, we need to do as much as possible to try and get us out of this recession that we got ourselves into.
 * __QE2 Will Lower the Value of the Dollar__**

In a recent article by the New York Times, " Is Law School A Losing Game?" , written by David Segal, states that law school graduates come out with a large finanical debt, and only 84 percent of adults have a steady, high paying job. Most of the new jobs are being created at the top and the bottom of the skills level. I think that this is one of the reasons why law school and even medical school is so hard to get into these days, because you need to obtain a very high gpa because it will only help for your future. Jobs these days are looking to higher the best of the best.
 * __The NYT Disagrees with Economists: Claims There are Too__ __Many Lawyers__**

[|**China's Purchase of U.S. Companies Does not Create Jobs in the United States**]

Recently, Chinese firms have been investing in the united states in order to try and create new jobs. The majority of investmesnts have involved buying up existing firms as opposed to creating new ones. Surprisingly, this will not create any new jobs. The amount of new investment has not even reached 1 billion dollars a year. In my own opinion. I do not think the chinese should not invest in the united states. I believe this is a problem which the U.S goverment should fix on its own. The chinese should not invest in any U.S business as well as any other foriegn countries, and in my opinion they should mind their "business".

Many economists these days seem to believe that pensions should only assume that stock will only bring the same rate of return as Treasury bonds do. While the expected return on stocks might be about 10 percent, some economists still argue that because there is a risk associated with stock returns, public pension funds should only assume the rate of return on risk free Treasury bonds will be roughly 41/2 percent.Those who argue against this say that state pension funds, essentially, are indifferent to the risk of market timing. In the case that the market is depressed for a couple of years, the pension fund would still have assets to pay the benefits. My opinion on this is that public pensions should make for the assets they hold in stock. I believe that if this was not the case, the economy may be hurt greatly if the market was depressed for a significant amount of time.
 * __Economists on Stock Returns: It Depends on the Weather or Maybe Politics__**

Many politics and writers in Washington have been making incorrect statements about Social Security on the regular, lately. All the major media outlets are taking part, to produce any misinformation that makes the program look bad and down. The hottest sport these days in Washington is seeing how many incorrect or misleading statements about Social Security you can get in one column. All the major media outlets are fully on board, anxious to convey any misinformation that reflects badly on the program. Republican Mckinnon does his part by informing us that the U.S might just end up like Greece or Portugal, meaning we’ll be abandoned by the credit markets and have to go to international organizations to buy our debt. This isn’t true of course and the united states has its own currency, which means we could never be like neither of those countries. I believe those who don’t fully understand the program of social security shouldn’t be making false statements about it. Stating your opinion about the program is one thing, but trying to scare people with false information, I believe that’s unessecary

=QUATER 4=

**__ People Don’t Look to Buy Counterfeits, They Buy Unauthorized Copies __** ==== ** In New York City, there is an effort to initiate giving people fines for purchasing unauthorized copies of designer products, whether it is handbags or clothing. If someone is caught in the act of consuming these types of merchandise, they could spend up to a year in jail or be pressed with a one thousand dollar fine. I believe this is taking it too far. The main reason why people tend to buy knockoffs is the simple fact that the real thing is just quite expensive. But then again, I feel that it is in some way wrong because the designers lose money from this. The most popular area that supports selling crackdown merchandise is Canal Street, also known as “Counterfeit Triangle”. There is a great argument though, which is, these products should not be considered counterfeit because people know that when they are buying these items, they know that it is in fact a replica of the real deal. But some argue that to other people, it can be seen as the designer product. In my opinion, I feel like I’m leaning more to the side of that this law is bogus and a thousand dollar fine is quite unnecessary. ** ====

**__Cheaper Drug to Treat Eye Disease Is Effective __**  In an article for the New York Times, there has been a stunning new research which shows that a drug called Avastin that sells for $50 a dose is just as valuable in the treatment of the same eye disease along with a different drug called Lucentis which sells for nearly $2,000 a single dose. Both these products are intended to prevent blood vessel formation and leaks in the human eye. Studies show that in 2008, Medicare paid twenty million for Avastin compared to the $537 million for the Lucentis injections. To my understanding, I believe that it is unnecessary that Medicare and any other type of private insurers out there pay 4000 percent more. The reason that Lucentis is able to sell for so much more is because Genetech, the drug company, has a patent which allows it to charge much greater prices than its cost of production. Economist believes this to be a pure waste, and I agree with them one hundred percent. We would save close to $10,000 annually.