Money, It Ruins Everything!

I have been hearing the phrase "fiscal cliff" everywhere recently. The "fiscal cliff" this, the "fiscal cliff" that, the "fiscal cliff" here and there. This phrase is just right out consuming the political articles on every mainstream and political blog I have come across lately. I honestly had no clue what this phrase meant or even if it effected me at all (I tend to think most political factors don't effect me... I know, I'm naive). I found one site, The National Priorities Project, that assisted me with defining the "fiscal cliff": 

"Fiscal cliff" refers to a host of different federal budget cuts and tax increases that are all scheduled to take effect at the start of 2013. These looming budget cuts and tax increases are referred to as a "cliff" because, if they all actually took effect in 2013, it would be a major setback for our weak economy.

Even with this definition I come out a bit hazy on what exactly is going on and after reading the multiple articles I have in regards to this particular topic, it seems to me that the political world in general isa bit " hazy." Are they proposing these solutions based on what they believe to help the United States as a whole, or just their self? It seems we are kind of have ourselves a "chicken fight" on our hands. Who will back down first? Will it be the Democrats or the Republicans? This is not the time for a political showdown! 

I do believe the only quote that I have seen to be remotely clear and level headed is from Amy Brundage, a White House spokeswoman, within the article G.O.P Balks at White House Plan on Fiscal Crisis by Jonathan Weisman: 

Right now, the only thing preventing us from reaching a deal that averts the fiscal cliff and avoids a tax hike on 98 percent of Americans is the refusal of Congressional Republicans to ask the very wealthiest individuals to pay higher tax rates. The president has already signed into law over $1 trillion in spending cuts and we remain willing to do tough things to compromise, and it’s time for Republicans in Washington to join the chorus of other voices — from the business community to middle-class Americans across the country — who support a balanced approach that asks more from the wealthiest Americans.

Shouldn't the real reason behind all propositions brought to the table be for the betterment of our country overall? If I am reading this article correctly, are we arguing on whether the rich should pay higher taxes or not? On whether the top 2% of our country that make several times the average citizen (which remember is considered to be around $50,000 a year) actually be in a higher tax bracket? Perhaps it's just me or maybe I'm not getting the entire picture here, but I don't really think that is unreasonable. 

Are people really that stingy?

 Hah! I forgot that this world is full of Mr. Scrooges! 

Anyways...While I'm not a huge fan of Obama or any one in a political office at this point in time, I do believe President Obama's proposition for resolving or at least lessening the damage of the fiscal cliff is better than the alternatives that have been brought to the table. And Mr. President, if it's any consolation, which I'm sure it's not, when I make enough money to be within the top 2% wealthiest of our country, you can higher my taxes. 

Technology VS. Man

 I took an interest on the topic of droids being involved in military warfare when reading my colleague Robert Nguyen's article, " Unmanned Strike." I read both of the articles that were embedded in Nguyen's article and happen to completely agree with his standing on this matter. While I also do not condone violence and would rather come across a more peaceful route than the "war" we are apart of today, I do believe that droids are a much better alternative than having our soldiers, the men that volunteer to fight for our country, sent off with the possibility of not returning.

When droids are mentioned, or humans being replaced by technology in any fashion, the thought of a very well known movie pops to mind... The Terminator. Many people believe that our technology is rising so far that soon enough people will be out of jobs due to computers being able to perform better and more efficiently. Honestly, even if this is the case, I would much rather see a droid get shot down than a fellow human being. So what if that droid takes the place of one of our valuable soldiers? We can build more droids (even though it costs what seems to be like a bajillion dollars) but we can not replace a lost life.

As Nguyen has stated, the loss of life is to be expected when involved in a war. However, if we can reduce the numbers of those lives that are lost, even if it is just by a small number, it's worth every penny. There's no point in sending our men and women off, possibly even losing their life, if there is a safe alternative.

Show Me The Money!!!

The average income of a US Citizen is estimated to be about $50,000 a year. Barack Obama, our current President and candidate for the Democrat Party, had an average income of around $1.6 million, a total of 32 times the average citizen and 4th among the richest presidential candidates. Mitt Romney, the candidate for the Republican Party, had an income estimating to be a little more than $26 million in 2010. That's more than 400 times the income of an average citizen. He is ranked number one among the richest presidential candidates. Looking at those numbers alone, does it seem plausible that the the average Joe, or even Jane, can actually have a chance at running for the Presidency? 

HIGHLY UNLIKELY! 

As stated in one of my previous critiques, the average Presidency Campaign takes up to $1.25 billion. That's $1.25 billion every 4 years! I've never even managed to see a total of $1000 in my bank account before it's taken right back, divided among the many bills that I have. I live from paycheck to paycheck, a lifestyle I'm sure many US Citizens have experienced or are still experiencing at this moment. If I am considered to be the "average Jane," how is it possible that I can accrue $1.25 billion only to spend at a chance to become the President? It's not even a sure bet! It's not... I could do all the canvassing I wanted, beg for donations and gather a number of supporters, but I think I would still end up short about oh... $1.24 billion?! 

I'm sorry ladies and gentlemen, my average Joe and Jane aspiring to be the next president, but I have to break the bad news to you... It's just not possible! From the way I see it, you could be the absolutely best person for the job, could even make the changes that the United States desperately needs, but the opportunity will never be yours due to the fact that you just don't have enough money. 

If you are outraged as much as me at this particular situation, here are some fun facts and reading material: 
                 
Top Earning Presidential Candidates
As Income Inequality Widens, Rich Presidential Candidates Dominate
Yes, The Rich are Different
Household Income for States: 2010 and 2011