Monthly Archives: November 2014

Above, President Obama explains his support for net neutrality and why you too should support it.

Net Neutrality is the idea that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should not be able to restrict people’s access to various websites.   If Net Neutrality is not followed, ISPs can use their ability to restrict or slow connections (often called “throttling”) to websites to solicit money from these websites in order to guarantee a fast connection.

Earlier today, I was linked this blog, The Oatmeal, in which the author calls out US Senator Ted Cruz who tweeted:

"Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) November 10, 2014

In this open letter to the Senator, the blogger humorously takes the stance of attempting to educate Cruz about Net Neutrality and why it is important to support it, as it is instrumental in keeping the Internet a free and fair place for individuals and companies alike.   The Oatmeal paints it as the bipartisan issue it is, as it is unnecessary to attempt to divide the country over an issue everyone should support, while also pointing out the absurdity of comparing Net Neutrality to Obamacare.

A graphical depiction of Comcast’s throttling of Netflix, with comments by The Oatmeal

However, it is also pointed out that the Senator accepted a lot of money from telecom giant Comcast in support of his campaign for senator, and that Comcast has already abused throttling in order to force Netflix to pay them millions of dollars and of course would oppose net neutrality.

Overall, this blog post has emphasized two issues that I believe will be incredibly important in American politics over the next several years.  One, will Americans fight to preserve the Internet as a bastion of independence and freedom? And two, will the American public continue to allow corporations to buy off politicians through “campaign money” or will they use their votes to preserve the sanctity of the American democracy.

Works Cited:

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality

https://www.aclu.org/net-neutrality

http://consumerist.com/2014/03/11/comcast-goes-on-capitol-hill-spending-spree-in-advance-of-merger-hearings/

http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/united-nations-638×425.jpg

If the UN was fully funded, I believe that Arc and Social Enterprise would still be necessary because the UN wouldn’t necessarily be able to help all those who need it.For example, even if the UN was fully funded, I don’t believe it would be efficient enough to help all of those in need, as it is difficult to get the 193 members of the UN to agree on an issue and to effectively organize a way to aid said issue.

Furthermore, while Arc has helped small groups of entrepreneurs in Rwanda, the UN would most likely not focus on helping this small subsection of people; instead it would focus on larger problems, such as the current Ebola outbreak in Africa.  In addition, Social Entrepreneurs tackle issues with the goal of increasing social value, through attempting such things as increasing the college enrollment rate of the poor in developed countries.  The UN, meanwhile, may be tackling issues such as hunger or disease, in less-developed countries, where the consequences of the problems is death.

Works Cited

http://skollworldforum.org/about/what-is-social-entrepreneurship/

http://www.sauder.ubc.ca/Global_Reach/ARC_Initiative

Upward Arc

http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/unms/whatisms.shtml

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49310&Cr=ebola&Cr1=#.VGLJkfTF800

http://www.bendib.com/newones/2007/may/small/5-7-Wanted-Immigrant-Labor.jpg

This blog post is in response to Ingrid Yau’s blog post analyzing this opinion piece from the New York Times, which argues that Americans have gotten softer over the years and are therefore are less willing to work the same jobs as they have in previous decades/centuries.  As a result, immigrant workers fulfill can fulfill the need for hard labor that Americans are unwilling to fill.  Through the discussion of an anecdote from the comments of the original article, Ingrid concludes that immigrants to America do not actually take jobs from Americans because “even the most unskilled American worker wouldn’t want a job that is physically demanding” and that “the generation nowadays just cannot stand boring assembly-line jobs.”

As an American who is entirely for increased immigration, I disagree with the conclusion Ingrid draws from the article.  While it is true that the number of Americans who work jobs requiring manual labor has decreased, so have the number of jobs requiring manual labor as the US has transitioned from a manufacturing economy to a service economy.  Furthermore, many assembly-line jobs have been replaced through the use of machinery and robotics to automate the process.  Finally, although the story of “pooch43” in the comments is an interesting one, for every story of people avoiding a job requiring hard labor, there are just as many of people doing incredibly difficult work in order to make ends meet.

Works Cited

Response to NYT Blog – Hard Work is what Immigrants do

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/10/09/what-happened-to-the-american-work-ethic-2/hard-work-is-what-immigrants-do?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C%7B%222%22%3A%22RI%3A14%22%7D