The two readings in “They say, I
say” are both on agreement with each other, but each has a different emphasis.
In Herbert’s reading he is saying that the American Dream is dead since our
education system is bad and we’re spending a crazy amount of money fighting wars.
In the second reading, Cal Thomas agrees with Herbert, but Thomas insists on
pointing the finger at someone for causing all of these problems. He ends up
pointing the finger at the left side of the political spectrum for this, (this
doesn't surprise me that he blames Democrats and the left considering he’s a
panelist on Fox News). In the last reading “why the rich are getting richer”,
Reich uses a metaphor of 3 boats to describe the situation people are in. He
says that Routine Producers (manufacturing jobs) are losing jobs at a very fast
rate while In-Person Servers (Hospitality) are gradually losing jobs and
compete against each other for In-Person Service jobs. Lastly, Reich says that
symbolic analyst (political analyst) are growing at a great rate and are being the
most stimulating and major part of our economy.
I think the “why the rich are getting
richer” serves a great purpose to help our problem. When looking at Routine
Producers, these people are at the base of our economy as well since they serve the important role of creating the products that we use every day, be it our cars or our
electronics. I would also like to keep this in relation to the off shoring of
jobs too. In Reich’s reading he referred to the off-shoring of ATT from
Louisiana to Singapore and lastly to Thailand, which resulted in the loss of many American jobs. A more recent example is the
Moto X phone which used to be assembled in the DFW area got off-shored to China,
when another company bought the manufacturing or something like that. My point
is the off-shoring of the jobs though. As a strong advocate of American jobs I think
if we learn from this and stop off-shoring jobs I think that our economy will be
able to thrive. The more people work, the more money they make, which means
more money is circulating in our American economy. If we could find ways to
retain jobs, like the Routine Producer jobs, and with the help of technology,
we won’t have the domino effect explained by Reich of the Routine Producers spilling over into the
In-service category of jobs. Right now, the economy is on a long recovery from the
Great Recession 8 years ago, but we are better off than we were at that time
and the change has started to become noticeable. It’s the recovery that shows
us why it’s even more vital for us to ensure that as many Americans are
working, here in America and not sending off jobs to Asia or somewhere else on
the other side of the globe.
To summarize your argument; you are saying that Thomas and Herbert have the same argument about why the American dream is dead but Herbert’s view point and emphasis is a little different. In the passage by Herbert, he says that America in general is focusing and putting money towards the wrong things. Like fighting wars, and also our schools education system is why the American dream is dead. But in the passage by Thomas he doesn’t blame or point the finger at things or cultures, more like a person or group of people, Politics. Then in the passage by Riech, he says that there are three boats to describe Americas people and everyone fits into one of these boats. They are Producers, In person servers, and in person service jobs. Even though every single one of these passages goes down a different path and explains it a little different, they are all talking about the same thing; The American Dream Dying. & your view on how to solve this is more people working means more money being made which means more money in the economy.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you on how you would solve the whole ”American dream is dying” issue. More people having jobs would equal more money and more money being spent but I don’t think America anytime soon will do anything to change this. Its so easy to have machines do the work for you and it more cost efficient that way as well. The leaders of company’s don’t care about how the product is made just that it gets done in the fasted and cheapest way possible. It will be very hard to turn America around.
John believes that in order to save jobs and help make the economy thrive, is by stopping off-shoring jobs. He endorses keeping jobs in America to keep money circulating within itself. I agree with him that jobs should stay within the United States. Yes it is cheaper to have foreign countries do the work, but is it worth thousands and thousands of American citizens and residents to lose their jobs? For the American government it is important for them to get things done quickly and on the cheap, but then stop to wonder why the unemployment rate is so high. This however is something that won’t be fixed soon, if at all. It is all about the profit. As long as there are ways to cut corners to put more into their pockets, it is very likely that more and more people will be without jobs.
ReplyDeleteIn this blog you are saying that the most important and probably the easiest change is to find a way to ensure more jobs stay in America instead of going over seas or to foreign countries where it is our economy that loses out on the work and salary our citizens can make and put back into the economy. Also this could be very helpful to the economy, the question about this arises of how this would be done? With many countries tied into Americas debt messing with foreign tariffs or taxation on production could become a very sticky issue very quickly. The simple fact of the matter is that companies find labor cheaper in lesser economies because they are still developing while we are considered “developed”. If anyone ever cared to ask me my opinion on the matter (which I doubt) I would be inclined instead to propose the trickle down effect companies could have on the economy by lowering executive salaries. Reich mentions how Executives are paid vast amounts of money to oversee jobs that they have their staff, which are also on a different payroll, complete. If either through federal regulation or state overview executive salaries were capped or lowered so to speak then the company would have more money to either invest back into the expansion of the company or to pay employees a more equal share. Now I know what you are thinking about how this really helps, but how does the economic drift lessen when the rich only spend money at the fanciest of restaurants or on the fanciest of products. If middle class America had more money to put back into middle class America or the expansion of small companies (which would create jobs) then we would begin to see the bridging of a gap that has had steady growth for a long time now.
ReplyDeleteIn the blog "Made in America" written by John Espinosa's blog, he states that he believes the best the article "Why the Rich Are Getting Richer" would be most useful in solving America's problem with poverty. In our economy, our lower and middle class job opportunities are decreasing, some faster than others. So more and more people are losing their jobs. That puts a wrench in our economy because when people are not making money, they spend less. When people cut back on their spending, businesses are making less so they make cut backs by either by laying people off or off shoring jobs to other countries. These people in other countries are willing to work for less than minimum wage, I can see why companies outsource. It is a good move for the company but that negatively affects our economy. The heads of these companies still make their 6 figure salary but everybody under them suffers. The gap is steadily increasing. I agree with John that big corporations like AT&T should stop off shoring jobs. It will help turns the cycle around. When people have jobs, they spend more, when people spend more, businesses do well. It keeps money circulating through the economy. Creating more jobs will help solve our poverty problem though. But are willing to make that change? I honestly do not think so. I do not think they care enough, as long as they have money in their pockets. Some people are just looking out for themselves
ReplyDeleteJohn argues that the three readings create a strong incentive for the United States to stop off-shoring jobs and work to keep as many jobs within the country as possible in order to help the American economy by having a strong workforce and a circulation of American money through the economy. To support this, he mentions the off-shoring of jobs to both Singapore, Thailand, and China by companies, resulting in a loss in American job opportunities. He also explains that we can work to create more American jobs through the use of technology and prevent a domino effect of job loss in the country. I agree with his argument, because off-shoring American jobs to other countries has created a significant impact on both the job opportunities available and the strength of the economy in the United States. To prevent this from continuing, the United States needs to create more incentives for companies to keep jobs in the country instead of sending them elsewhere in the world. John is also right about the American economy benefiting from keeping jobs in the United States because it does result in a strong working population and a constant circulation of money within the American economy. I also agree with his statement that the United States is on a long road to recovery from the recession. What we do to fix the American economy will take a significant amount of time to actually get us into a stable position again, and we need to address the issue with a long-term view as a result.
ReplyDeleteI agree with John in that people should be working over in America instead of overseas. This is a fault not by many workers, but instead the employers. However, this does make sense to get to cheapest labor. Because of this I trace the problem back to the government, and laws placed on businesses. Moreover, the lack of jobs is because of employers not hiring. The reason for employers not hiring is because the government restricts them. Laws such as mandatory health care, create a reason for company’s not to hire people. To explain this further I will set up a hypothetical example. If a company has twenty employees and each employee brings in on average three hundred dollars the company makes around six thousand dollars. If the company is already paying three thousand in health care benefits the profit is now three thousand dollars. If a company has over twenty employees then they must pay an extra five thousand dollars. Now if a company has twenty-one employees they are paying eight thousand in health care benefits, and only bringing in six thousand three hundred. Which means the company is losing money, and in turn will not hire an extra person. That is why people are working multiple part time jobs. This is why companies are outsourcing simple tasks. I believe that the key to creating more national revenue is to create more jobs. To create more jobs we must first make it as easy as possible for small business to thrive in our economy.
ReplyDelete