Dreams Do Come True

In Sara's Blog http://letstalkpolitics17.blogspot.com/2017/12/today-id-like-to-expand-on-daca-and-why.html she reasons that President Trump abandoning the DACA program is a mistake and can actually cost the United States more money, 200 Billion lost from the economy. I agree with Sara that ending the DACA program is not only immoral, but not well thought out. Children brought unknowingly or without a choice to a new country and then to adopt the culture of America should not be sent to a country they know nothing about. DACA recipients are not criminals but hard working, many first responders or your neighbor. Trump has managed to legally find a way to get away with racial profiling and discrimination; holding onto the absurd notion that they are stealing Americans jobs. If someone was saving your life would you care that they were from a different country, a DACA recipient? Or that they worked hard for their education and you were blessed to have someone willing to save your life. Our diversity is what makes America beautiful, if our own President cannot see it for himself, then the mass majority needs to.

Systematic Failure

In http://madelineusgovernment.blogspot.com/ blog, "US Government Needs Better Voting Systems" I agree that action should be taken in designing a new path for not only how we vote as citizens, but what the Government has not been doing to assist in voter turnout. Citizens should be responsible for educating themselves on candidates and current politics. However, false media and political leaders manipulating public opinion to sway matters in their favor hinders citizens from not only choosing the right decision but to also lose faith in the belief that the Government has the citizens in their best interest. While I also agree new steps should be taken in providing better accessibility, given the current condition of the United States offering unsupervised and electronic access opens the possibility of the voting system being compromised. The Government should first work on "Marketing Voting," to expand voter turnout and take steps to regain the citizens trust to reverse the "What difference will it make," attitude that has been adopted by American society.

Air Head

Imagine no more baby sea turtles scurrying across the beach sand in a race to the water, or a large fluffy polar bear lounging lazily on a bed of ice. If the sea were to rise only 50cm sea turtles would lose their nesting beaches, a detrimental chain reaction to the ecosystem. The adaptation of this fast paced lifestyle often leads Americans distracted, recklessly driving their gas guzzlers in a blind “American Standard” haze and results in a negative impact on Earth’s natural processes. With studies showing a rise in global warming and significant environmental impact it begs to question the direction the President and government is taking with environmental regulations and economic courses that could potentially accelerate the Earth’s environmental decline.

Former President Obama laid out beneficial regulations to assist in the fight against humans’ negative impact on Earth. National Geographic writes of Obamas impactful rewriting of the GHG standards for new vehicles and power plants/ factories emissions, the 2015 Paris Agreement a nation-wide emissions control agreement, fracking and other fossil fuel regulations, and even regulations on food safety. Since Trump has now claimed the seat he has taken initiative to reverse the positive direction the United States was taking to ensure the future of our planet. President Trump has taken strong economic direction for financial benefit overpowering any environmental concerns, adopting an opinion of climate change to be non-existent and excuses it with false media and scientists out for a buck. President is the job title today, but “business man,” came before, and Trump maneuvers the government much like a business deal.  With the Republicans controlling the White house and Congress, the drive for economic growth will result in irreversible damage to the ecosystem and when the sea level engulfs homes, businesses and wildlife the officials responsible will be living comfortably brushing it off for the next person to handle or cast the blame to the media again. The US Department of Interior proposed on October 23, 2017 to auction off oil and gas leases for 77 million acres of federal waters within the Gulf of Mexico. The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management estimates that the Gulf of Mexico’s outer continental shelf contains over 48 billion barrels of oil and 141 trillion cubic feet of gas that are technically recoverable. EPA estimates suggest that if these fossil fuels were burned completely, they would add the equivalent of more than 28 billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere; that is more than five times the United States’ total carbon footprint in 2016. Trump has also taken steps to withdraw the Clean Power Plan which helped combat climate change and the effect of fossil fuels. Trump argues the plan is “unfair” to the coal industry and its workers, but what is unfair is the decision to stop studies into the health risks associated with living near mountain top removal coal mine sites in the Appalachian Mountains.

Significant evidence has proven that climate change and human environmental impact is a current reality and steps need to be taken immediately to reverse our current course. Trump making key environmental decisions in the interest of financial profit such as allowing the Keystone Pipeline to proceed and coal mines to reopen only reverses and hinders the progress of fixing the health risks to not only our planet, but ourselves. Arguing over China and India’s environmental restrictions because they are less severe than Americas is not a solution, but an excuse. If Trump can abandon his direction of selfish business pursuits and immature feelings of who got the “better deal,” and shift perspective to we have a problem what are the solutions, then true progress can be made on our human impact.

Moral Funding

With Congress spending 70 times the amount of money for the military as it does for the FEMA disaster relief it is astounding we are supplied with any aid at all. Chris Ernesto's Funding for War vs. Natural Disasters https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/18/funding-for-war-vs-natural-disasters/ manages to touch on a relevant controversial issue concerning the over funding of the military in comparison to the natural disaster fund. The descriptive dramatization of the damage caused by the natural disasters and the introductory image created of paradise is in stark contrast to the disastrous picture painted, and aids readers view towards a cynical and questionable opinion of Government spending. While analyzing the large differences and room for adjustment  in the budgets, I came to agree that it is concerning the government spends so much money on war  which only creates disaster, and yet we cannot help our own citizens with the disasters that plague us at home right in America. Chris focuses on highlighting the cost differences of the recent disasters such as hurricane Maria which hit Puerto Rico, and the wildfires destroying California. By stressing the difference of the 220 Billion recent disaster cost to the 700 Billion military budgets the author makes a valid comparison stressing the option that there is enough in the budget to distribute to a relief cause.  He goes on to argue the spending of 1.25 Trillion dollars to modernize the US nuclear arsenal; he portrays the audacity of the government’s spending decisions when 1.25 trillion is more than enough money to not only rebuild Southeast Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and California, but to also modernize the US infrastructure. By filtering the money into the disaster relief budget it allows the building of more disaster relief centers and hiring more firefighters and first responders, he also states that more funding would allow firefighters to earn more than minimum wage especially when battling fire for 70 straight hours. The overall article contemplates and argues a huge moral crisis within the government. With large budget differences, foreign wars draining valuable resources, first responders receiving low pay and long hours, and millions of citizens being personally affected; Chris accurately analyzes a morally corrupt government and portrays their actions in a realistic and relatable viewpoint. 

Education Vs. Inequality

The Dallas Morning News recently published an article called, “Rich kids are in Pre-K while poor ones are with grandma,” in which it highlights on the book of Ajay Chaudry, Taryn Morrissey, Christina Weiland and Hirokazu Yoshikawa called, “Cradle to Kindergarten: A New Plan to Combat Inequality.” The editorial focuses on the inequality of 3-4 year olds raised in opposite households; a rich family that is able to provide an early education such as Preschool, where as a poverty stricken family may not be able to provide the same service to their children.

Poor parents who cannot afford structured preschool or whose schedules do not coexist with school will often leave their kids with a relative or child care provider which can result in the child not receiving the necessary focused development. Only 55 percent of America’s 3-4 year olds attend preschool which is unacceptable compared to China who has 75 percent or Germany and Britain who have 90 percent of young children attending preschool. Research formed since the 1940’s has shown that children who don’t attend formal school until kindergarten start off a year behind in math and verbal skills. Lack of early development increases the probability of falling behind which can lead to dropping out of school and working low paying jobs.

“The earliest years are the most promising for brain and skill development, yet it is when the U.S. invests the least,” Yoshikawa, an education professor at NY University, told The Washington Post. The United States should take more interest in the early development of its citizens. They are after all, eventually going to be functioning within it and can either contribute or take away from the progress. The government should contribute millions more for early education programs making sure kids are enrolled by 3, providing more assistance for affordable child care, and assisting poor families as soon as a child is born, to promote a better future; not only for the child, but for the United States. A well-educated child promotes a successful economy and society. Providing an equal “quality” education and opportunity at a young age supplies the United States with a level playing field over the many countries already providing early child development to the vast majority.

Ease of Foreign Gun Regulations

Currently in 2017 the United States has had 11,211 deaths, not including the 22,000 suicide deaths, and the disheartening sum of 45,023 gun regulated incidents. While the United States has a poorly regulated gun crisis that is in serious need of managing; it is still not the top ranked nation in gun violence. President Trump is planning to make it easier for American gun makers to sell to foreign buyers, and while America has its own gun violence problems as a country; we should not be responsible for putting guns into the hands of foreigners who might in turn point the barrel right back.

Guns play a major role in America from protecting national security and local communities to hunting and sport. They play an even bigger role in the loss of lives. If President Trump was to allow the ease of trading guns to foreign countries not only would the US face the possibility of the guns being used on American citizens, but on the innocent citizens of foreign countries. During Trumps campaign election the National Rifle Association spent more than 30 million dollars in support of his candidacy.  “I am going to come through for you,” Trump expressed at the NRA Convention in April. In 1996 The NRA goaded Congress to stop its 2.6 million federal funding to gun violence research. Were it Cancer research that had stopped everyone would take notice, but it’s been 20 years of no gun violence research and nothing has changed. Without any substantial evidence on gun violence the steps needed to prevent its acceleration is at a standstill. Trump preaches that immigrants living in America pose a threat to security, but selling guns to them across seas is not a better solution and a hypocritical one at that.

While removing guns completely is unrealistic; regulating them so as to not infiltrate the black market is not. They result in massacres, homicide, suicide, robbery, civil unrest, and foreign cartels enforcing their will. No good can come from the ease of trading guns except the profit of money and power, corruption at its finest.

www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-weapons-exclusive/exclusive-trump-administration-prepares-to-ease-export-rules-for-u-s-guns-idUSKCN1BU2N8

Greetings

Hello!