Comment blog 6

I agree with Vanessa; families should not be torn apart by deportation, after all, this would only harm our country's economy. An article in the U.S News called “undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes,” by Soergel Andrews, backed up her point after it affirmed that, “A study from The Institute of Taxation and Policies...found that illegal immigrants contribute with [the counties economy by] nearly 12 billion each year in incomes, property, sales and taxes.” This means that even with Trumps new plan of deporting only 3 million immigrants, we would still see dramatic changes in our country’s economy. It would be better if instead of deporting immigrants they where given a permanent residence or citizenship to the United States. She mentioned a comment made by Raul Hinojosa, professor of UCLA stating that “undocumented  population typically gets about 20% less wage”(Vanessa). She also pointed out the benefits the companies had, but not the reasons why the immigrants get less wage. I personally think it might because most immigrants work in jobs where the salary is illegally below the minimal wage. They have jobs that most Americans consider a waste of time,money, and effort. Immigrants have long shifts, yet they have no insurance or benefits. This is better for the companies but not the for people. However, if the undocumented people were given a residency or a citizenship, they would be treated fairly, they would not fear being deported if they claimed their rights. They would be paid more, and they would have to pay their taxes if they never have. Tearing families apart and building a wall is not the solution for immigration problems, but giving more opportunities to people from other countries with visas and punishing only criminal is. After all, the great America is built upon immigrants.

comment on Hani's "Raising Minimum Wages" blog

In reference to Hani's "Raising the Minimum Wage" blog, with all due respect of course, the question I ask myself regarding our greedy corporations is will paying employees better wages increase the economy and boost productivity? 

Who will be actually be courageous enough to start the ball rolling? The most obvious choice is our government. But the current Congress has been paralyzed.

Business leaders know what to do. But do they have the will to do it? Are they willing to control the excessive greed so prevalent in our culture today and divert resources to better education and the creation of more opportunity?

Business has the most to gain from a healthy America, and the most to lose by social unrest or punitive taxation. In my opinion, business can start the process in two steps. First, invest in the actual value creators which are the employees. Start compensating fairly, by which I mean a wage that enables employees to share amply in productivity, increases and creates innovations.

The fact that real wages have been flat for about four decades, while productivity has increased by 80 percent, shows that obviously has not been happening. Before the early 1970s, wages and productivity were both rising. Now most gains from productivity go to shareholders, not employees.

Second, businesses must invest aggressively in their own operations, directing profit into productivity and innovation to boost real business performance. According to The NY Times, today, too many corporations reduce investment in research and development and brand building. As a result, we see a general decline in the value of their brands and other assets. To make up for those declines and for anemic revenues, businesses buy back their stock (now at record levels) and thus artificially boost earnings per share.

Someone must break the ice; someone must lead. Companies including Home Depot, Costco Wholesale, Whole Foods, Publix, Qualcomm, Starbucks and Gravity Payments are taking small steps, and compensating employees more. These are the green shoots we need. Similar changes must be made by many more businesses in order to see an impact on the economy.

So while we celebrate those who do the right thing but how can we move more businesses and chief executives to act now? We really don’t want civil unrest or an 80 percent tax rate to jar us into action.

I believe there is a way to start. Government can provide tax incentives to business to pay more to employees making $80,000 or less. The program would exist for three to five years and then be evaluated for effectiveness.

The benefits would be huge. People would have more money to spend, and many would no longer need government help. That would mean a reduction in entitlements.

Finally, that other America, the one that hasn’t been able to climb out of debt, will know that help is coming — not as an increase in government support, but as a fairer way to share in the hard work and incremental value a business generates. As has been proved again and again, shareholders also win, because satisfied employees produce better results.

Senator Mark R. Warner, Democrat of Virginia, is working on a somewhat similar bipartisan plan to introduce in Congress. I don’t know yet what it would cost. But not acting would be far more costly. The urgency is clear. A fair and responsible free enterprise system is still the best engine ever invented to create opportunity and a higher standard of living.

Increase minimum wages

    I totally agree with the M. Kristina's point over increasing USA minimum wage in the blog Increase USA Minimum Wage. As the federal minimum wage was introduced in 1938 during the Great Depression under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It was initially set as $0.25 per hour and has been increased by Congress 22 times, recently in 2009 when it went from $6.55 to $7.25 an hour. Proponents of a higher minimum wage state that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour is too low for anyone to live on; that a higher minimum wage will help create jobs and grow the economy; that the declining value of the minimum wage is one of the primary causes of wage inequality between low and middle-income workers; and that a majority of Americans, include a slim of majority of self-described conservatives, support increasing the minimum wage. I agree with the Kristina saying in the blog that every human's philosophical dream of having happy and successful life in U.S. can be achieved by changing our minimum wage.
     By increasing the minimum wage, there will be many benefits to the country and the people living in it. The first would be that millions of Americans would see a pay raise that could go toward meeting their basic needs and living expenses. A recent analysis by CNN was even more aggressive, implying that 5 million Americans would be lifted out of poverty at $10.10 per hour. More workers being able to pay for their basic expenses is a good thing, as it may lead to less reliance on government and state-sponsored financial aid programs. The other benefit would be extra pay in the pockets of some 16.5 million workers could trickle down to retailers and provide a boost to the economy. Since the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 raised the federal minimum wage to $7.25 an hour starting in 2009, there have been numerous unsuccessful attempts by Congress to raise the wage further. The two main efforts are the Harkin-Miller proposal to raise the wage to $10.10 nd the Living Wage Movement to raise the wage to $15. Even though some of the movement failed but, the fact is increasing U.S. minimum wage concept is thought by everyone.
            Thus, increasing the minimum wage of U.S. would help all citizens to achieve the "America Dream" and actually I agree with Kristina's commentary on Increase Minimum Wage Blog.

The Future

In 2014, Dakota Access, LLC, announced plans to build a $3.7 billion pipeline that would stretch from North Dakota to Illinois, about 1,170 miles across four states. The pipeline while being built is to create 8,000 to 12,000 jobs and once completed, predicted to haul approximately 470,000 barrels of crude oil per day. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration advocate pipelines to be the safest option for transporting oil and natural gases because unlike rail cars and trucks, there is not a possibility of wreckage, therefore no chance of large spread fires. 

However this has brought light to another frequent issue, that of leakage and ruptures. For example, in 2013, an Enbridge Energy pipeline broke open and spilled 843,000 gallons of oil into the Kalamazoo river in Michigan, which resulted in a cleanup that cost millions and took years.

Over the past several months, the DAPL has received national attention and attracted thousands of protesters. Worried of the potential health hazards the pipeline could bring to the surrounding inhabitants, environmentalists and tribe members (primarily from Standing Rock Sioux Tribe) from all around have begun peaceful protests. The Sioux object because part of the pipeline is to be built on sacred burial lands, but the overwhelming majority of the pipeline is built on private property. Only a small portion of the pipeline is slated to be built on federal land. Therefore the Federal Government has very limited options on what it can do to help the Sioux Nation oppose the construction of the DAPL. 

I believe fossil fuel is the fuel of the past and the United States government should not support a private industry major investment in the infrastructure of the fossil fuel economy. Furthermore, as a government and a nation, we should not jeopardize the environment or waste money and effort to maintain a diminishing and inefficient fuel source. I believe the U.S. government should respect the wishes of the Sioux Nation and support them in their opposition to the construction of the DAPL. I would rather see private industry, with government support, use the $3.7 billion to build an energy infrastructure that furthered the production, delivery, and use of alternative and sustainable energy sources. The way of the future.

Donald Trump Announces 5-Point plan about Illegal Immigration

 Illegal Immigration from Mexico has been a destabilizing force in the United States of America for a multitude of years, garnishing a National Security issue on a critical scale. A great number of the Mexican populations have sought out to travel to the United States to seek a greater quality of life for themselves and/or their families. However, not every immigrant who enters the U.S. legally are fortunate to acquire the opportunity of American independence. Many illegal immigrants are impoverished, uneducated, and unable to obtain proper healthcare. The increasing number of illegal immigrants in the U.S has become an economic burden impacting the American public education system, the healthcare system, and the tax revenues of the American government. The U.S. has battled illegal immigration for a boundless number of years, while it almost seems hypocritical given that the evolution of this country has been sculptured by a land of laboring immigrants; governing laws have also evolved to regulate emerging issues America’s Border Security regularly challenges every day.

Donald Trump's plan against illegal immigration to build a wall dividing U.S. borders against Mexico, in my opinion, do not merit the perceivable benefits of his plan. It will only fuse more pressure for foreigners to broaden their attempt. His focus is the 14th Amendment which falsely grants citizenship to babies born in America of illegal Aliens. He wants to change that with his 5 ideas on how to secure the U.S. border.  

1) His idea is to build a fence/wall, deploy 25,000 additional border agents and utilize predator drones.

2) Enforce immigration laws

3) No more cozy detention centers: as the detention centers are basically vacation resorts for illegal aliens as trump quotes, " They should be deported now!"

4) Oppose the"DREAM Act": he opposes in-state tuition at public colleges and universities where illegals may pay less than out-of- state U.S. citizens. allowing deported illegal aliens to come back through an expedited process of some sort.

5) No future tuition benefits: he feels that far too many American students pay more than illegal aliens, who receive generous tax payer subsidies and lowered in-state tuition rates. Trump plans to stop this immediately.

While his plans to change the methods in terms of immigration in America might be very aggressive, I do not believe building a wall of any sort will decrease numbers of immigrants into the U.S., in fact, the illegal immigrants that are already here should be more of a focus in reference to determining whether they will remain in the U.S. as future citizens or evaluate them for eligibility of deportation.

Trump Ducks Releasing His Tax Returns

Just last month, there had been a huge protest in Washington D.C. of people opposed to Donald Trump's decision not to release his tax returns. Although, standing publicly opaque in his own defense, he knew that it is not against the law to refuse exposure of his tax returns. The disclosure of Donald Trump’s 1995 tax maneuver led America to a rare time in which the government’s tax policy turned into a huge national political issue. According to documents by The New York Times, Mr. Trump claimed almost a billion dollars in operating losses that could be used to avoid future federal income taxation. The mind-blowing figure would amount to almost 2% of all of his net operating losses claimed by all American taxpayers that year.

In addition, The New York Times report, “The rule (loophole) that allowed Trump to shelter almost $1 billion in income from taxation dates far back to the year 1918. It was enacted to prevent businesses from being penalized by the administrative convenience of calendar-year taxation: If a company loses $100,000 one year, and makes $100,000 the following year, the law allows the company to pay nothing in taxes, as it has only broken even.”

   

Understandably, his deceitful maneuver could have concealed him for up to eight-teen years’ worth of income taxes, easing his smooth path to his new career, leveraging his name and expertise for publicity while minimizing all the potential risks to his fortunes. Trump-branded apartment buildings, golf courses, hotels, men’s wear and steaks were followed by his lucrative hit reality television series. 

Personally, as a millennial, my personal beliefs sway more as a liberal. I do agree with the facts of the author considering how Mr. Trump has revealed nothing less than a conniving approach within margins in eligibility for presidency. Now that this issue has become much more publicized, I openly advocate that our government should pass a law stipulating any future approach similar to the government's evaluation of Trump’s qualifications in making office which includes but not limited to anyone with no military/ congressional experience, served as senate, provide a transparent approach requiring tax returns of income, assets, and ownership, among many more, etc. If it is required by law that American tax paying citizens provide tax documentation for the approval of various issues, it should be enforced upon our superiors as a validation of proof and transparency.

Donald Trump's Gun Law Policy

Quite obviously, Donald Trump never ceases to amaze the public with his outlandish perspectives. He has managed to attract record holding viewers with his ridiculous viewpoints on how America will improve if he scores success in achieving national presidency. Embarrassingly enough, he announced his gun safety policy to outlaw gun laws to the general public which kept the National Rifle Association pretty quiet as Trump refuted. "If they see a person possibly with a gun or they think may have a gun, they will see the person and they will look and they will take the gun away!" according to salon.com, he continues, "They will stop, they will frisk, and they will take the gun away and they wont have anything to shoot with!" I believe that this would ultimately put more lives at risk advocating Donald Trump's risky procedures. not only will these tactics put officers lives at risk but my standard procedure, this would exacerbate situations to become much more hazardous for innocent bystanders.

Conclusively, i advocate the right to self defense and abide by american laws regarding our gun laws. But there are certain precautions officers take that not only protect themselves, but also protect the general public. Donald Trump's Gun policy is absurd and it only proves that there is no regard to properly protect the people of our country!