In a sense of common, the United Nations basically help everything about the living stand of humans. They use millions of dollars to solve poverty problems and also reduce homelessness. Therefore, why do we need Arc or social enterprise? It seems that the United Nations can deal with everything. 

Actually, the impact between the United Nations and social enterprises is different. Social enterprises mostly in the charge of reducing poverty by teaching people how to make money. On the other hand, the United Nations just donate money to those people, which leads to a vicious circle that when the money has been used up, the United Nations has to do the donation again.

However, we still need the help from the United Nations. The money flow from the United Nations can help people in a short term, which can deal with some urgent issues. For the long term, getting help from the social enterprise is the right decision to solve the problem of poverty. This is because a new and good enterprise can boost the development of an area. More job opportunities will be provided and this can help people to make sustainable profit. 

In conclusion, more and more social enterprise projects should be launched in the near future to deal with the poverty problem.

The article i have chosen argues about how China is about to take drastic measures in order to improve the air quality in Beijing before their latest meeting with APEC on November 7th, where multiple authorities will be attending, hence China would like to leave a good impression to its “peers”. The measures taken include shutting down 69 major factories for a period of time and also several bus lines, metro lines, and schools are granted a 6 day vacation for the air to become cleaner. Although this can indeed improve the air quality in Beijing during the APEC meeting, as it did in Shanghai a couple years ago, the effect is only short term, and soon after Beijing will go back to its bad pollution that is overdue in being attended to. People are raging on about events like these happening multiple times, where the Chinese government takes measures to improve the air quality only when there is business to attend, and how the actual smog is expected to decrease life expectancy by 5.5 years average. The question raised is, is China and its government only interested in improving their economy? Or do the people actually concern them? if so, why aren’t more drastic measures taken to resolve the air quality issue? And even if they have plans in providing solutions, how long will it actually take for China to reach a sustainable level of pollution that doesn’t affect the people so much? These questions are still left unanswered.

<http://www.cnbc.com/id/102126022#>

Hi! After reading your blog, i cant help but feel sorry for what is going on in Congo. However, the coal mining business has been labelled as “dirty” for a time far too long. some of these children aren’t even willingly working there, but were abducted and used for cheap labour. The coal mining industry itself cares only about the money, and nothing about the ethical judgements that should be taken into measures. There is a well known phrase known as “blood diamonds” which refers to african people, especially children being used in cruel labour like slavery in order to boost the production of diamonds. There was a campaign some time ago telling people to stop purchasing diamonds so this cruelty can come to an end. Coal mining is not so different than that, and the people behind it should be brought to justice. I agree with you saying that business shouldn’t always be just about money but also about the well being of the people. the customer should be satisfied, but not in terms of the process being something far from humane. The coal mining business should definitely stop exploiting people and measures should be taken to save all these children!

<https://blogs.ubc.ca/cheongk/2014/09/11/child/>

Hello, I really liked the way you discussed the issues between the aboriginal groups and the Canadian government, since it is an issue that has been going on for quite some time. From your blog, I can clearly understand that although the Canadian government would like it to “seem” as if the aboriginal groups had a say in all of the operations that might have an effect on their lifestyles, their true intentions are probably maintaining a good image while still proceeding in their original plans. It seems that although the government is looking for a new resolution for unemployment, it is also not typically eco-friendly, since their actions will intentionally destroy aboriginal land sites and interfere with the lifestyles of the aboriginal groups. I think that the First nations are a valuable people and their culture should be preserved, since it is unique regarding ethnicity. Our current world is developing so quickly at the moment, it is very important for culture to be remembered, so it may be lost to phenomenons such as globalization. I also think that events like this may cause the aboriginal groups an the government to get into fights, which in the long run, may not be beneficial to the Canadian government, since they should be doing their best to support the First nations.

<https://blogs.ubc.ca/darrenxu/2014/11/03/first-nations-versus-the-broader-interest-hydro-power-or-no/>