Lowest Jobless Rate in 5 Years Raises Chances of a Fed Move

Finally! Good news about the United States Economy. Nelson D. Schwartz wrote an article that has been published on December 6th in New York Times for all to read. The unemployment rate is finally beginning to decrease- and quite dramatically may I add. The Labor Department spread good news about the 7 percent decline in the unemployment rate which seems to be just the beginning of good news.

Since the Great Recession, we haven't seen an improvement in unemployment quite like we are seeing now. We also haven't heard good news from the white house in a while, either. It seems that the good news about unemployment just kept getting better. We begin to observe the increase in many other areas throughout our economy as well. Economic growth started making an upward revision in positive correlation with increase in employment. A small increase in manufacturing has been reported along with the other two revisions recently taking place.

With the good news comes the sad news.. Due to the decrease in the unemployment rate, the government is considering easing back on its stimulus efforts. Although the changes won't be made until beginning of 2014, it is still concerning to many Americans. No one is ready to see a change in the unemployment rates. We want them to keep going down, and if the government decides to ease up there is a chance that these rates could start heading in the opposite direction.

The improvements in unemployment caused a change in several different aspects of the average work criteria. For example, with an increase in employment we have observed an increase in hourly earnings, as well as an increase in the length of a typical work week. Another positive observation is that the increase in employment has been taking place in both the private sectors as well as the public sectors.

The best part about the positive change in our economy that is taking place is the increase in jobs across the board. We have not observed an increase in one particular area, we have observed an increase in several different job areas. These jobs include manufacturing and construction, and other jobs both in services as well as the goods-producing industries. This article gives hope to many Americans that our economy is turning around. The only fear for some is that if the government eases up on its stimulus efforts, the improvement may come to an end. Although unemployment still remains an issue, we are hopeful that things can continue moving forward from here.

Pollution Economics

Taxes and pollution are continuously two topics of concern for many Americans. We wonder why things are so expensive nowadays. Perhaps it is because our government is trying to control things that could be taken care of in a simpler, less dramatic, way. The New York Times recently published "Pollution Economics", an article written by Dirk Forrister and Paul Bledsoe that compares the cap-and-trade (or "market") approach to solving issues such as pollution and taxes, with the Government's regulatory approach. 

China has recently adopted the cap-and-trade approach to aid towards cleaning up the dirty air they are forced to breathe, lowering the warming temperatures they are forced to walk in, and even solving food production problems that they are battling every day. The cap-and-trade approach takes these issues off of the governments hands, and allows the market to work itself out. How come the Chinese are smart enough to use this technique, and not Americans? After all, The United States is the designer of the market approach- also known as cap-and-trade approach. I can't help but believe since we succeeded with using this technique to solve acid rain problems, the Chinese observed that the cap-and-trade approach was the best solution to solving emission problems they are facing. 

While the United States has abandoned the carbon market approach to help deal with pollution problems, other nations are just beginning to adjust to the carbon market life style. Places such as Europe, New Zealand, and Shenzhen are all using the cap-and-trade approach for many different reasons. The primary reason is that their greenhouse gas emissions are improving in a cheaper way. Therefor, as Americans are forced to pay high electricity bills to aid the government in regulating pollutants, other nations are using a simpler method, the market method. 

The main difference between the government regulatory approach and the cap-and-trade approach is mentioned in this article. The regulatory approach is much more costly than the cap-and-trade approach. By using the cap-and-trade approach, environmental goals are aligned with market incentives, and therefor appeals to supply and demand creating a domino effect. With the carbon market being handled by the cap-and-trade approach comes a cheaper way of solving pollution. How could this approach not sound appealing?   

If the carbon market were to be taxed, this would force solutions to pollution in America, like it is helping in other nations. The carbon market could generate revenue that would inevitably lower other taxes thanks to a domino effect that easily occurs in economies. Taxes and pollution could both be solved with the help of the cap-and-trade approach. It's about time the government loosens their grip on the reigns and allows the market to take care of itself. 

The Co-Villains Behind Obesity's Rise

A large debate taking place in America is the answer to why Obesity rates have soared over the years. Sendhill Mullainathan wrote an article titled "The Co-Villains Behind Obesity’s Rise", published in the New York Times, that discusses the multiple causes of Obesity in America.

The first cause that is addressed is the behavioral economics in the United States. Our decisions on what foods to buy at the grocery store, as well as out to dinner, play a big role in obesity's rise. Suppliers strategically choose what to provide for the consumers based off of what is most demanded at the time. Behavioral economics play a big role in obesity, but perhaps not the major role.

The article focuses primarily on the biology villain and his role in rising obesity rates. Mullainathan draws attention to the importance of both the economic side, as well as the biological side of obesity.

Focusing in on biology, animals have been able to help prove the importance of biology when dealing with obesity. Why is it that animal obesity rates have increased with human obesity rates? This couldn't only be because of behavior economics could it? Well, an experiment held with twin mice helps to prove the biological role in obesity.

Between the twin mice, one was obese and one was not. This raised curiosity because they were being fed the same diet. This immediately excludes the idea that behavior economics is the only factor that leads toward obesity. The obese twin was discovered to have a type of "gut bacteria" that lead to obesity.

This "obese gut bacteria" is thought to possibly come from toxins, processed foods, or even antibiotics. Another thought is that perhaps the bacteria can be spread such as the flu. Scientists are still researching into this idea of how obesity is growing, and it could be a relief that it is not purely based on behavioral economics, am I right? Hopefully, once we further understand this "obese gut bacteria" we will be able to understand more about cravings and possibly be able to shift those cravings and put a halt in the rising rate of obesity throughout America. 

Behind the Roar of Political Debates, Whispers of Race Persist

The controversial topic of Government Spending and Healthcare has opened the doors to many other issues that people have been dealing with for quite some time. John Harwood explains these issues in detail in his article "Behind the Roar of Political Debates, Whispers of Race Persist" published in the New York Times on October 30th.

President Obama brought attention to immigration issues and the tension that Whites are feeling as Asian American, Blacks, and Hispanics gain a louder voice in US Politics. There is a division in the  ideas about politics and government power between the races. For example, many Whites oppose legal status for illegal immigrants, whereas many Hispanics and blacks support it. Keep in mind that this is just one example out of many that demonstrate the increasing polarization between race and politics.

The major issue discussed in this article is the rising problem that soon Whites may have a very small volume in political voice. Blacks, Hispanics and other races believe the Government should have a greater say in the United States. The majority of Whites, however, believe that the less government interference the better. Big government is a growing concern for Whites. Many feel that a big government will explicitly help Democrats, and will loosen the White's power in the United States.

The first issue brought to the surface is that the Democratic coalition is made up of mainly nonwhites such as Asian Americans, blacks, and Hispanics. This means that the majority of Whites make up the Republican side of the government, which is the side that strongly disagrees with many of Obama's decisions. This is where we see racial tensions begin to grow, according to Obama as well as other politicians.

In conclusion, politicians claim they do not want race to be an issue between sides in the government but they are claiming that the strong disagreement on Obama's health care law is an example of the racial issue between Democrats and Republicans. Can these tensions deminish as time goes on and "as rising generations replace older ones"?

Are Used Cars Losing Their Style?

     Wholesale auto auctions have been the trend for years since the days of the recession. The used car market is much larger nowadays than the new car market. Economists are sensing a shift in the demand from used cars to new cars, as we experience a lower availability of the favored models. That is, the later models of wanted cars with low mileage.

     As the recession took place, consumers heavily leaned on used car dealers to help get deals on the popular cars of that time. This worked for quite a while- up until now. As demand is high for those used cars, dealerships are finding it harder and harder for car dealerships to supply available used cars.

     Since fewer people bought new cars, fewer used cars are available to sell. Analysts say that this is allowing supply of new cars to come closer to meeting demand. With this also comes the rise of the price of used cars as supply shrinks. Now we see almost an equivalent price range for new cars, and used cars.

     There is still hope for used cars, however. In 2016, car analysts are expecting an excess of used car availability due to the increase in leases this year. As the new car leases end in 2016 we will see an inflation in the used car market and therefore a decrease in the prices of our favorite style cars.

     Supply and demand go hand in hand. This is incredibly evident in the car business. During the recession, the demand for used cars increased due to a major shift in peoples incomes. In turn, this caused a decrease in the supply of new cars. Nowadays, however, we see a decrease in the availability of used cars because the new cars have stopped being produced and therefore, used. This clearly means that there will be an increase in the demand for new cars due to the fact that used cars are almost equivalent in the price of used cars. This action is a result of the scarcity of used cars.

     As I read Jaclyn Trop's "After Running Hot, Market for Used Cars Is Cooling" from The New York Times, published recently on October 18th, I found it interesting to be able to personally recall the time period in which used cars first became popular. I remember helping my mom pick out which cars to lease, or buy, and I remember her explaining the idea of used cars to me as a child. Being able to connect the idea of supply and demand with this article has allowed me to further understand why industries are always shifting and having to adjust to peoples demands. Looks like I will be waiting to buy my first car near the year 2016.

Discrimination and Health Care

     "The Color of Affordable Care" written by Nancy Folbre mentions several different issues that are discussed throughout this article. The top priority issue would be the topic of racism and how it affects our economic choices. The racial "loyalties shape..perceptions of economic benefits" even though Americans try not to discriminate. Folbre mentions the habits of people to overestimate who benefits the most from health care changes and our government representatives. The answer to who benefits is picked from a handful of options. The article talks about the racial aspects, as well as the different social classes. Many high class citizens disapprove of the health care laws because they believe it will only benefit the lower class. Folbre makes a good point when she mentions that those upper class individuals aren't necessarily in need of health care, but they feel discrimination since they aren't benefiting.

     This article outlines the idea of economic freedom, in a way. The final sentence states "access to affordable health insurance should be considered a civil right for everyone." The issue with this is that not "everyone" can possibly benefit in the same way. As our government aims for improvement America must recognize the presence of discrimination between classes, as well as race, and work with it rather than try to avoid it. 

Technical Delays with Obamacare

     Jackie Calmes published an article titled "Urging Patience, Obama Says Problems With Health Care Sites Reflect Demand" in The New York Times on October 5, 2013. The issue at hand is a debate questioning why Obama's health care enrollment, which opened on Tuesday, has experienced so many technical glitches. Obama has made several statements claiming the the technical issues are actually a good response and a result of how popular the demand for health care is. Others, however, are foreshadowing the technical glitches as a symbol of the failure expected within the program. House Republicans immediately began to demand that the "health care law be defunded or delayed" as the government experienced a shut down, also taking place on Tuesday.
     Since the United States is considered a mixed economy as well as a market economy, we practice both private individuals and the government directing our economy. With this being said, the citizens of the United States have a right to health care and the government has a role to play in that. Obama has been fighting for Obamacare to be available to the mass and to ensure all Americans have the health care they desire. This is why so many people are questioning the fact that there have been so many issues on the website that Americans are supposed to be using to enroll for healthcare. The public has kept their word and followed through with their enrollment, but has Obamacare kept their word and ensured health care for all those attempting to enroll? We are observing tension rise as Republicans use this incident to articulate the need for a delay in Obamacare, and Democrats respond with the ensuring that the technical disturbances proves Obamacare will be a huge success. Have the individuals been let down by the government within these last few weeks?

True or false- Capitalism?

     In a recent article published by The New York Times, Jennifer Schuessler descibed a piece of art work that was displayed in Times Square on Friday. "Times Square Art Project Keeps Score on Capitalism" spoke of several different views on capitalism. Steve Lambert made a 20 foot by 9 foot sign that read "Capitalism works for me!" Attached to one end was a number that showed the number of votes that claimed the statement was true, and on the other end was a number that showed the claims that the statement was false. Lambert explained that his invention was a way of opening the lid to the conversation over capitalism. He stated that too many people get frightened by the topic and will run away when capitalism is mentioned. His assumption proved to be true. It took quite a while for people to build the courage to publicize their opinion. Finally a brave 18 year old pressed false and explained that although capitalism may work for a few people, it would not work for the greater amount. The next voter claimed just the opposite, however. He claimed that competition is better for everyone, and voted true to capitalism. Soon enough, a pattern had developed. Those in the working class voted false, whereas the more "prosperous" class tended to vote true.
     One of the ideas that we have discussed in class is that the U.S. values a raise in salary, a job promotion, and working a person's way to the top. In other words, the reason our economy has been successful is due to competition among the workers. Many people view capitalism as the competition needed for an economy to work. Those that voted true are correct, just as much as those who voted false are correct. A competition is needed for people to work hard and to help our economy improve upon itself. With no government interference however, we would see the rise of monopolies, and perhaps the rich taking over. In our economy today, we have little government interference so that private owner's may run things how they wish; until that owner begins to abuse their power, however. Capitalist ideas, as well as entrepreneurship's, are important in order to keep our economy growing and keep it from shutting down. Steve Lambert's artwork will be displayed again October 6-9 in New York and we will find out more opinions of those in the U.S. 

Duryodhana

     On September 13, 2013, The New York Times publshed an article titled "Legal Tussle Over Statue Turns Nasty" written by Tom Mashberg. This article tells of a legal battle over a statue of Duryodhana, a "hulking Hindu warrior." The U.S claimed that one of the world's largest auction houses is attempting to make money off of a looted artifact. The argument over the statue has led to the halt of the movement of the statue and the U.S. government believes they should take sole responsibility for the return of the Hindu statue since it was supposedly a stolen artifact. This claim was troubling because an Hungarian art collector by the name of Istvan Zelnik had offered to buy the statue for one million dollars and later donate it back to Cambodia. Now that the case is in court everyone involved is digging for evidence to prove whether the statue was stolen, and whether the United States is responsible for it's return to Cambodia, or not. The issue is put on hold in anticipation for the next court date which is scheduled for October 14.

     As I read this article I began to wonder about how much power our government has. In the United States we are thought to have economic freedom, but as our government is fighting for "sole credit for the statue's return" one can't help but wonder why? Why must our government spend so much time and money over how a piece of artwork gets returned to its home? We are blessed to live in an economy where we can choose what we want to do with our lives and have the economic freedom we do. As I read this article however, I began questioning how well our government considers economic equity. Are we distributing our money, as scarce of a resource as it is, in the most important areas?



Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/14/arts/design/legal-tussle-over-statue-turns-nasty.html?ref=arts&_r=0