grass roots

Lo siento que no estás pasando un rato mejor, pero estoy también alegre que no estás pasando el mejor rato de su vida, porque quiero tus rato mejores ser conmigo.  Deseo que estabas aquí conmigo.  Te echo de menos mucho aquí.  No sé porque, pero te echo de menos más aquí como cuando estoy en hogar y te todavía vas.  Pienso que la razón principal que estoy infeliz es porque te quiero tanta.  me hace muy feliz saber cuánto me echas de menos. No lo decía tanto como tu, sino que te falto, mucho.  Pienso en tu todo los días, en todas partes yo voy.  Dijiste que pensabas que pasarías quizá un rato mejor si no amabas el hogar tanto, que es interesante puesto que estabas infeliz mucho en hogar también.  Dijiste que era mi culpa que estás triste todo el tiempo porque me quiero tanto, es mejor ser triste ahora para tener alguien a querer que mucho acera de más adelante.  Siento igual. Te quiero mucho y estoy feliz quererte tanto.  Estoy alegre de que no estés pasando el mejor rato de su vida ahora.  Quiero tus ratos mejores ser conmigo. 

The Federal Government employs doctors, lawyers, scientists, economists, and many other professionals.  How important is it for the government to be able to recruit and retain top graduates in these fields?  Explain.

For thousands of years, countries have been interacting intercontinentally; however, in the past half-century rapid technological advances and reduced trade restrictions have revolutionized our view of the modern global society.  The economies, societies, technologies, cultures, politics, religions, and ecologies of nearly 200 countries have become intertwined and integrated into a global community and economy.  This ever evolving process has not and will not always proceed smoothly; however, there is much the United States can do to ensure that not only its citizens, but that all people of the world benefit from these changes.

In today’s global community, unlike the global community of a hundred years ago, individuals and businesses, especially those in developed countries like the United States, routinely interact with and contribute directly to the global community in ways that would not been possible in the relatively recent past.  Because of the advance communication technologies, millions may instantly be contacted.  Indeed when a large corporation takes root in a developing country, some may wonder whether the corporate entity of the government exerts more power and influence.

Technology, international trade, international investments, and multi-national corporations are constantly making nations, communities, and countries more interconnected and interdependent.  As geographic and political distances and barriers are reduced, the political, economies, and cultural values of countries, peoples, businesses, and governments mingle, interact, and sometimes clash.  In today’s global community the United States has much to lose and much to gain by participating and competing in the world marketplace and global community.  We must ensure that United States along with the nearly other 200 countries prosper.

To maintain and increase its position as a world leader, and to maintain and improve the standard of living of its human citizens, the United States government must work to produce and attract the most qualified doctors, engineers, lawyers, economists, philosophers, technicians, and other professionals.  When the United States was a young country, it was rich in untapped and underutilized natural resources.  In an agrarian or industrial society, the United States guaranteed growth, prosperity, and preeminence by utilizing its natural resources.  The United States has not exhausted its natural resources; however, in today’s technological/information based global economy the United State’s most valuable resource of all is its people.  For the United States to maintain its position as a world leader it must generate, attract, employ, and utilize professional leaders.

By training, recruiting, and retaining top professionals (doctors, lawyers, scientists, teachers, economists, etc.), the United States will be able to react more flexibly to changes in the volatile global community, improve the standards of living of its own citizenry, improve the standards of living of the world citizenry, and enhance the stability of the world economic and political systems. 

“Verse y amarse locamente fue una sola cosa.  Ella tenía los colmillos largos y afilados.  Él tenía la piel blanda y suave: estaban hechos el uno para el otro,” (Poli Délano, A primera vista) o más bien ella estaba hecho para él.  Ya ella, disfrazada y trepa cuidadosamente, lo había esperando muchos días.  Ella, con sus colmillos largos y afilados ordenados encubrir su potencial engañoso de causar tanto dolor, acechaba pacientemente hasta que él vino.  Ella nunca se agitaba nerviosamente con anticipación o suspiraba con aburrimiento.  No, ella esperaba solamente por él, y por casualidad él, lleno de energía y de vida, vino.   Él, con su pelo gruesa y su piel blanda y suave, acercó a las quijadas de acero, ignorado de su hado helado.  Con un paso desgraciado ella penetró su piel blanda y suave, hundiendo fácilmente profundo por músculo golpeando hueso.  Su hado previamente incierto llegó a ser cierto en un instante.  Sus horas llegaron a ser limitadas y su sitio grave fue elegido.  Ella, con sus colmillos largos y afilados estaba hecho para él o más bien ella estaba hecho para la destrucción de él.  ¿Para qué  él estaba hecho?

1. Who makes the most profit on coffee shops around the London subway? Please explain why that is the case

The landlord who owns the rental space for the coffee shops around the London subway profits most from the coffee shops being there.  Because no coffee shop wants to operate on the same street and several other coffee shops the landlord will profit most from his property by only renting property to one of several coffee shops.  Because several coffee shops are competing against each other for just one property they drive up the rent of that property. They are willing to pay a very high rent for the property because they expect to earn a very high revenue because of the specific advantages of operating at that specific location.  As a result, a large portion of their revenue is absorbed by their high rent costs. “If there is a profitable deal to be done between somebody who has something unique and somebody who has something that can be replaced, then the profits will go to the owner of the unique resource.”  In the case of coffee shops around the London subway, coffee shops are common and coffee shop property is uniquely scarce.

2. What two factors make coffee shops profitable?

Coffee shops, especially those around the London subway, are profitable largely because of good location and relatively inelastic demand.  A good location means a large pool of potential clients.  Demand is high despite the coffee being relatively inexpensive considering its costs because there is a large number of consumers who can easily afford if.  These consumers are moderately price insensitive causing coffee to be rather inelastic.

3. How much profit does “the marginal firm” earn? Why? Your answer should explain clearly what a marginal firm is.

The “marginal firm,” is the firm which is just barely productive enough to stay in business.  Because it is always on the verge of going out of business, if say its competition became more productive, it just barely breaks even.

4. Why are British teachers paid so little?

Although there is a shortage of British teachers British teachers are paid relatively little.  This is because “the government, the single employer (of British teachers), has massive bargaining power.”  Because the government acts as a “monopoly employer” the scarcity of British teachers is much diminished effect on their wages.

5. Why are British nurses paid so little?

British nurses are paid relatively little despite their extensive training because of the large influx of foreign nurse immigrants.  The increased supply of nurses decreases the wages they are paid.

when we first started blogging, i pretty much hated and avoided it as much as i could.  it was something that i had never really done before or heard all that much about and just wasn’t really interested in going.  as we got a little further into the class though and other people, and classes started blogging i kinda looked around to see what everyone else was doing and saw what they were starting to write.  most people really hadn’t written all that much, but some, anyway, had written something, and i started to see the potential for blogging.

even though i realized and accepted that the idea behind blogging as a way of expression was good and could actually work, i still didn’t really want to blog myself.  some of the blogs i had seen by just looking about had looked pretty good, and i figured that for mine to look good i would have to spend a lot of time on it.

when i first made my blog i didn’t do much of anything with it for a while.  then finally i wrote a post because greenlaw kept telling us that we needed to and i thought that if i didn’t then the end of the semester would come around and i either wouldn’t have anything, or i’d have a lot from the last week.  after writing it i felt pretty good about it, but it had taken a while to write and i was kinda lazy about going back and writing any more.

a few weeks latter after a lot more encouraging i wrote an other blog and felt pretty much the same as i had the first time around, except a little more inspired since more space was used up.  i think that’s about the time that i chose a new layout and renamed.  the more i added or changed to my blog, the easier it became to add and change others things also, and that’s went i really, really started to blog.

i like my earlier posts, but i was a bit distant from them, but still think they were really important to include with the rest since they were the somewhat sporadic beginnings of ‘everything else’.  there is still a lot that makes up ‘everything else:’ papers (for globalization and one also for political science), assignments (usually assigned at the beginning of the year, i.e. photo and youtube blogs), and also unprompted opinion pieces.

i think its good that my blog has these different kinds of writing in it because it shows some of what i can do and gives some insight into what i might do in the future.  they show the progression of my knowledge and interest through what i have chosen to write about and how i have approached each topic.

my first post was an assignment where i was supposed to explain my prior experience with globalization, which wasn’t very much.  later on though i revised my definition of globalization and having written several posts on different aspects of globalization.  my posts reflect, especially towards the most recent end, what all i have been learning.  i could not have written the final globalization or political science papers that i wrote just a few weeks ago at the end of august, or even in september, october, or november.  those papers would have been shorter (i just wouldn’t have had enough to say) and poorly organized.

my development could have also been tracked by the way i participated in class.  most of the time i was interested in whatever we were doing.  its just the way i am that i usually have a harder time not paying attention to things.  even though i was interested though, my understanding was splotchy so i had lots of questions, which i almost always asked.  i would have still learned even if i had listened and not asked any questions, but know that i learned so much more because of the questions i did ask.

http://flickr.com/delicious_thumb.gne?id=91164735

the hope i have for globalization is that it will not lead to a complete cultural homogenization, but rather a beautiful incorporation of cultures that results is a new art.

this image of two sodas, one an ‘american’ soda and the other a ‘non-american’ soda do not look odd sitting next to each other.  the ‘american’ soda still looks clearly American, appearing foreign at the same time.  so what is the result: an american soda, an ‘american soda, a ‘non-american’ soda, or a non-american soda?  who is or isn’t to decide?  who is right? does it matter?

I have really enjoyed our seminar and feel like I have gotten a lot out of it.  At first I didn’t though.  At first I didn’t really have a good idea about what globalization is and was really disappointed with what I was discovering globalization meant, and frustrated and overwhelmed with all the new technologies we were learning so quickly.  As we started to get further into the topic though I started to become really interested.  I think a lot of my interest has had to do with Greenlaw’s seminar style class. There are only a handful of people I genuinely like, and an even smaller handful of teacher I have genuinely like, but Greenlaw one of them.  Greenlaw sincerely cares about his students and want to be more to them than just a traditional teacher.  He challenges us to think and embraces the challenges that we throw back at him which I think is great, but its also kind of in my nature to call people out too.  Sometimes the challenges are frustrating, but frustrating in a good ‘now-I’m-really-thinking-about-this’ kind of way. Sometimes, quite a bit actually, I think that I might teach someday.  I like the idea, and hope that if/when I do teach that I’m the kind of teacher like Greenlaw and the other small hand full of teachers I like who care about their students and through caring are able to make their students also care. Mostly this seminar, largely through blogging, has made me care a lot more about a lot of things, which seems to have been the goal of all freshman seminars.  When people care they have the power to do at least two things: make others care, and to channel their potential to make positive changes and transform them, through a lot of hard work, into realities.  Having ‘completed’ this course I feel more engaged not only with political and economic issues, but with everything. Thank-you Greenlaw and thank-you fellow classmates.

The experience would not have been the same without anyone of you.

While studying for my political science 101 final exam I ran across this quote in my textbook:

“since 1939, there has not been a single day that war was not being waged somewhere in the world (Shively, W. Phillips. Power and Choice: An Introduction to Political Science 10th ed. 404)

I wonder how much, assuming it has, globalization has instigated fighting throughout the world.  As the world has becomes smaller, why is it that we tend to fight so much with our global neighbors?

Countries have been trading internationally for thousands of years and intercontinentally for hundreds of years, the later know as globalization.  Globalization is the process of eliminating geographic and political distances or barriers through the extreme interconnection, integration, and rapid convergence of the politics, economies, and cultures of the peoples, businesses, and governments of the different countries involved driven by international trade and investments, and technology.  At the end of the twentieth century the world entered a new phase of globalization accelerated by new technologies like the Internet and cell phones.  Well established economies and governments like those of the United States have much too loose to increased competition spurned by globalization as well as much potential growth and development.  Countries whose governments, currencies, and internal production and transportation infrastructures are stable tend to benefit the most from globalization.  By addressing certain weaknesses within domestic industries and working towards greater energy independence, the United States will be able to react more flexibly to changes in the volatile global market and benefit much more.

Both domestic the agriculture and manufacturing industries face intense competition from abroad.  Though competition leads to greater efficiency, productivity, and profit, bringing lower prices to all, it also drives some out of business along the way.  Today American cotton farmers, equipped with the most sophisticated tractors and fertilizers, are far more productive than their Africa competitors, yet American labor is so expensive because of high American wagers and standard working conditions that American cotton must be subsidized to be competitive in the global market.  Without the subsidies American cotton farmers, although far more productive than African cotton farmers, would cease to exist because their labor costs would far exceed their absolute advantages of superior technology.

In 2000 the American cotton industry of only 25,000 farmers was subsidized nearly $4 billion, which American taxpayers and consumers ultimately absorb (Rivoli, Pietra. The Travels of a T-shirt in the Global Economy. page 51).  As a country that morally claims to support free trade these subsidies are not only embarrassing, but also detrimental to our own American consumers and dire for our African cotton-producing neighbors.  It speaks boldly of that American cotton subsidies are greater than the entire GDPs of many poor, cotton-growing African countries (Rivoli, 7).

Counterproductive agricultural subsidies need to end.  The American agricultural subsidies, such as those on cotton, not only hurt many of the world’s poorest, they also hurt American consumers all to benefit such a small minority.  I support a phase reduction in agricultural subsides, that may be difficult to reconcile in the short run (during the phase out the government is morally responsible to ease the transition for the affected American farmers as much as possible), but will be much more cost effective in the long run.

More protectionist trade barriers that undermine the United States claim to support free trade and globalization can be found in the textile manufacturing industry. Over the past few decades, complicated tariffs on foreign textiles have been instituted to protect domestic industry.  The story of American textile factory workers is very similar to that of American farmers.  Since the beginning of the textile revolution, textile technology has been advancing, gradually replacing more and more manual functions with mechanization.  Not only is American labor too expensive to remain competitive in a free market without tariffs, the need for American and foreign labor alike is disappearing.  Investing so heavily in an industry in which human labor is becoming increasingly unnecessary is at best a poor labor investment in the future that should be terminated.  This point is further exacerbated by the fact that today Americans pay more in tariffs to protect the domestic textile industry than the factory textile workers whose jobs are being protected receive in wages (Rivoli 148).

In contrast, there should be much more investment in making the United States more energy independent, by reducing the amount of energy consumed, while also using cleaner, more sustainable forms of energy.  The government should promote energy conservation by encouraging the production and consumption of products that are more energy efficient, in particular by making hybrid and electric cars more affordable.  The government should increase investment in alternative forms of renewable energy such as solar, hydroelectric, and wind energy.  The United States needs to accept nuclear energy, as France and Japan have, as incredibly efficient, reliable, and safe.  Although the startup costs are very expensive, nuclear energy is a promising investment on the way to energy independence.

Although the United States claims to support free trade in name, they do not always do so in practice.  The United States, because its government, economic, and infrastructure are strong, has to either gain or loose through globalization.  To ensure that the United States benefits from globalization to the fullest extent possible, the government needs to continue working for yet still higher levels of stability, while maintaining flexible to the morphing modern global market.  The United States must counter short term difficulties head on to ensure long term success.

Countries have been trading internationally for thousands of years and intercontinentally for hundreds of years (the Silk Road, colonization, etc.), the later know as globalization.  Globalization is the process of eliminating geographic and political distances or barriers through the extreme interconnection, integration, and rapid convergence of the politics, economies, and cultures of the peoples, businesses, and governments of the different countries involved driven by international trade and investments, and technology.  At the end of the twentieth century the world entered a new phase of globalization accelerated by new technologies like the Internet and cell phones.  Globalization affects all countries differently, sometimes positively other times negatively, according to many factors, including whether they are democracies or non-democracies.  Those developing countries whose governments, currencies, and internal production and transportation infrastructures are stable benefit most from globalization regardless of whether they are democracies or non-democracies; however, the economies of those non-democracies that have benefited most from globalization since the late twentieth century are in many ways starting to resemble the older, well established capitalist democracies such as the United States and much of western Europe.

When facing globalization, well establish democracies like the United States that high wages and standards of living have a lot to loose to foreign competition and well as a lot of potential to benefit outsourcing unskilled jobs.  Certain domestic industries, such as manufacturing and agriculture, face intense competition from abroad that seeks to increases efficiency, productivity, and profit, bringing lower prices to all.  While domestic consumers and foreign producers benefit from the greater access globalization provides to markets, it is difficult to reconcile the potential of such access with the welfare and survival of domestic industry.  American textile factories and farms are much more productive than those of China and Latin American where much of the work that in America is performed by machinery is still performed manually.  Although Americans are more productive, American labor is much more expensive that it is more economical for domestic consumers, foreign producers, and, in the long run, domestic producers alike, to outsource these professions.  In the United States textile workers are dependent on but also still struggling with a confusing series of tariffs and quotas, while the agriculture industry is maintain through major government subsidies, which American taxpayers and consumers absorb.  The proof that these jobs should be outsourced: American cotton farmers receive more in subsidies than entire GDP of several African countries, while Americans also pay more to sustain domestic textile manufacturing than the factory workers receive.  Justifying to American farmers and textile workers that their country would be better off without them while they have families dependent on them, understandably has cause for concern.

In weaker democracies such as those in Central and South America, globalization means something different.  The governments and economies of many of these poor democracies are unstable and their internal infrastructure shaky.  The developing democracies of Latin American have mostly benefited from globalization by insourcing their cheap labor, cheaper than domestic labor because wages and working condition standards are lower.  Interestingly, communist China is currently insourcing many of the same types of factory jobs as Latin America, but, because of its seemingly infinite cheap labor supply is able to insource so much more labor than Latin America because of its seemingly infinite supply of cheap labor, also made cheap by low wages and standard working conditions imposed by their communist government, is able to insource many more jobs than Latin America.  Thanks to the cheap labor of these countries consumers worldwide are pleasantly greeted by lower prices of common items like t-shirts.  Additionally, the laborers in these countries producing these cheap products are choosing factory work over farm work, either because they are earner higher wages, working less, or some combination of the two.  The greater economic prosperity in China not only seams to lead to a higher standard of living, but also to a higher value and protection of civil liberties, greater racial and gender equality, and increased suffrage.  As communist China emerges as globalization leader in the twenty-first century observers are quick to note how China’s economy is adopting more capitalist characteristics typical of most modern democracies, such as taking steps to privatize some business sectors and grant some property rights. Women in China today have more freedom because of increased economic independence than ever before. Today Chinese women choose who they want to marry, when they want to marry, if they want to marry.

Many worry about Africa’s ability it benefit from globalization.  Many non-democracies in Africa are also a large source of cheap, cheaper than China, labor, but this labor force is of little use when there governments and economies and not stable, and their internal infrastructure are basically nonexistent.  Some criticize globalization, saying that the rich are getting richer, faster than poor are getting richer, and while that made be true of developed and developing countries and economies, Africa, it appears, is not getting any richer at all.  Many fear that as the developing world becomes more and more industrialized that these countries are simultaneously securing poverty in Africa. Observers also criticize the American cotton industry for providing unfair competition to many of the world’s poorest including Africans.

Globalization is affecting democracies and non-democracies, while most modern democracies support globalization and free trade in name, they do not always do so in practice.  Many non-democracies are seeing that in order for them to benefit most from globalization they need to embrace free trade as a way to increase economic prosperity, leading to higher wages, standards of living, work safety standards, and value and protection of civil liberties.  Those developing countries whose governments, currencies, and internal infrastructures are stable benefit most from globalization regardless of whether they are democracies or non-democracies; however, through advances due to globalization, non-democracies begin to resemble older, more well established democracies.  All countries, democracies and non-democracies alike, face consumer benefits of lower prices due to increased competition, while producers benefit from increased access to markets.  These pushes and pulls on the global economy may be advantageous to some, while disastrous to others, in the short run, but these factors are inevitable and must be overcome for long term success.