Connections

Political and cultural rants in the form of sarcastic replies, and utter disregard for opposing viewpoints (I'm being sarcastic already). This is my way of joining the conversation, and I'll try my best to be inclusive and positive in this project.
Do We Ignore Social Class in America?

One of my priorities this year has been to understand our lack of discussion and understanding in regards to socio-economic status. It’s a common notion that in American culture everyone is “middle class.” I think this notion is a result of a very positive popular belief in equality under the law and in social situations. Basically, we all believe any person, no matter their economic position, should be treated the same under law and social situations. Think of David Petraeus, who was having an affair and subsequently resigned. He was the head of the flipping CIA and he was held just as accountable as some immoral teacher. This belief in equality has caused a subsequent erasing of class lines and hierarchy in American society.

Read More

Text
So for those that don’t know, I’m going to my first presidential inauguration this week. I leave tomorrow on a redeye flight to D.C. In the spirit of the trip I’ll post a portion of my review of a book I would definitely recommend, All the President’s Men by Washington Post Reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward.  All the President’s Men focuses on the journalistic side of covering the opaque Nixon administration. The Washington Post reporters embark on a winding journey started by the Watergate break-in. Through many unwilling and hesitant witnesses, to the angry secretaries, the reporters write the seemingly ever growing story piecemeal. However, unlike my previous conceptions of the scandal as instantly uncovered, the tale was much more frustrating and uncertain.From Woodward and Bernstein’s investigation, I learned how news organizations interact with the U.S government. I never fully pictured the many inner-government sources that the media uses to report the news. Especially the extent that non-authorized members of the government speak to the press. So the coining of the group of people covering up the Watergate scandal from the media as the “plumbers” was especially fascinating to me. The plumbers added an extra dimension to the battle over information that the media seeks to uncover, and helped me visualize the bigger ecosystem of hidden government information: the leakers and the plumbers.Lastly, I learned of the high personal toll politics take on those involved. Sloan, the CRP’s treasurer, exemplified a well-meaning individual caught up and negatively affected personally by politics. His physical loss of weight portrays the strains of politics visually. Just like the increase in grey hairs for Obama has often been cited as “the pressures of politics.” Even for non-people like News Organizations, the stakes are high. The Washington Post would get ensnared in FCC investigations over media properties it owned, and its reporters would be excluded from government social events during the course of the Watergate investigation. I was surprised how long Woodward and Bernstein persevered, especially for results that seemed so uncertain—the full uncovering of the Watergate Scandal which would result in the most powerful person in the U.S to resign, president Richard Nixon. 

So for those that don’t know, I’m going to my first presidential inauguration this week. I leave tomorrow on a redeye flight to D.C. In the spirit of the trip I’ll post a portion of my review of a book I would definitely recommend, All the President’s Men by Washington Post Reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward. 

All the President’s Men focuses on the journalistic side of covering the opaque Nixon administration. The Washington Post reporters embark on a winding journey started by the Watergate break-in. Through many unwilling and hesitant witnesses, to the angry secretaries, the reporters write the seemingly ever growing story piecemeal. However, unlike my previous conceptions of the scandal as instantly uncovered, the tale was much more frustrating and uncertain.
From Woodward and Bernstein’s investigation, I learned how news organizations interact with the U.S government. I never fully pictured the many inner-government sources that the media uses to report the news. Especially the extent that non-authorized members of the government speak to the press. So the coining of the group of people covering up the Watergate scandal from the media as the “plumbers” was especially fascinating to me. The plumbers added an extra dimension to the battle over information that the media seeks to uncover, and helped me visualize the bigger ecosystem of hidden government information: the leakers and the plumbers.
Lastly, I learned of the high personal toll politics take on those involved. Sloan, the CRP’s treasurer, exemplified a well-meaning individual caught up and negatively affected personally by politics. His physical loss of weight portrays the strains of politics visually. Just like the increase in grey hairs for Obama has often been cited as “the pressures of politics.” Even for non-people like News Organizations, the stakes are high. The Washington Post would get ensnared in FCC investigations over media properties it owned, and its reporters would be excluded from government social events during the course of the Watergate investigation. I was surprised how long Woodward and Bernstein persevered, especially for results that seemed so uncertain—the full uncovering of the Watergate Scandal which would result in the most powerful person in the U.S to resign, president Richard Nixon. 


Photo
Welcome to my “replying to conservative scare emails” series. Featuring me biting my tongue as I try to politely respond to friends that forward me this stuff.  Hi [name witheld for privacy],     The information you have provided has been really fascinating. Thank you again for being actively engaged in our American government and political system, and sharing your thoughts with me. I had to do research on this one since it’s true, the mainstream media doesn’t explain this well enough.     I found one of the leading liberal websites that I follow also point out the difference between the U3 and U6 and how it’s confusing. The article basically says the same thing you got from the conservative website, and might be useful for giving a source that liberals tend to respect more, the Huffington Post. Here’s the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-filger/controversy-over-us-unemployment_b_1945235.html  However, since of course this is the liberal perspective it will argue that the numbers tend to be a political game.     After looking at this, I currently agree that looking at the monthly unemployment rate actually isn’t that useful (because they are often revised months after). But, I would argue since we have been using the U3 since Clinton, meaning Bush was judged by the U3, that it makes sense to continue using U3. If we used U6 under Clinton or Bush the unemployment rate would also be much higher. So, if we used U6 on Bush it would say that Bush brought the U.S unemployment rate to over 30% due to his lack of financial regulation. I’m sure Democrats would be using the same tactics if the Republicans were president, so I applaud looking into this. Below is an explanation by someone who is better at writing about this:  “We continue to use the U3 because it rises and falls at about the same rate at the U6. The U6 at this point is trotted out only when the opposition wants to talk about “the real unemployment rate” and use the shock value of much higher U6 number. If you want to use the U6, Obama is doing just about as well as the U3 number. You can cherry pick good numbers from the U6 during this recovery, too: From February to March, the U3 went down only a 0.1%, and the U6 went down more, to 0.4%. from April 2011 to April 2012, the U3 went down 0.9% but the U6 went down 1.4%. We’d be in real trouble if the “U3 gets better but the U6 doesn’t” over a longer period of time, but this is just one month. Obama is just lucky that the U3 number helps his poll ratings.The point is there’s no real reason to use the U6 instead of the U3 as a general barometer. The U6 has its uses outside of partisan politics, but the general story looking at the U6 and U3 numbers is that the job market is getting better, slowly but surely.”    Again, thanks for discussing this with me and feel free to give me your thoughts on my interpretation of the Republican and Democrat sources. You find that looking at both sides offers the best truth, as shown by the overlap. To summarize the overlap, both articles say: unemployment rate is often political, discouraged workers aren’t counted, unemployment rate often revised months after release, unemployment rate in general not the best indicator of economic health. I learned a lot from this research, and I hope you continue the discussion.          —Alex 

Welcome to my “replying to conservative scare emails” series. Featuring me biting my tongue as I try to politely respond to friends that forward me this stuff. 

Hi [name witheld for privacy], 

   The information you have provided has been really fascinating. Thank you again for being actively engaged in our American government and political system, and sharing your thoughts with me. I had to do research on this one since it’s true, the mainstream media doesn’t explain this well enough. 
   I found one of the leading liberal websites that I follow also point out the difference between the U3 and U6 and how it’s confusing. The article basically says the same thing you got from the conservative website, and might be useful for giving a source that liberals tend to respect more, the Huffington Post. Here’s the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-filger/controversy-over-us-unemployment_b_1945235.html
 However, since of course this is the liberal perspective it will argue that the numbers tend to be a political game. 
   After looking at this, I currently agree that looking at the monthly unemployment rate actually isn’t that useful (because they are often revised months after). But, I would argue since we have been using the U3 since Clinton, meaning Bush was judged by the U3, that it makes sense to continue using U3. If we used U6 under Clinton or Bush the unemployment rate would also be much higher. So, if we used U6 on Bush it would say that Bush brought the U.S unemployment rate to over 30% due to his lack of financial regulation. I’m sure Democrats would be using the same tactics if the Republicans were president, so I applaud looking into this. Below is an explanation by someone who is better at writing about this: 

“We continue to use the U3 because it rises and falls at about the same rate at the U6. The U6 at this point is trotted out only when the opposition wants to talk about “the real unemployment rate” and use the shock value of much higher U6 number. If you want to use the U6, Obama is doing just about as well as the U3 number. You can cherry pick good numbers from the U6 during this recovery, too: From February to March, the U3 went down only a 0.1%, and the U6 went down more, to 0.4%. from April 2011 to April 2012, the U3 went down 0.9% but the U6 went down 1.4%. We’d be in real trouble if the “U3 gets better but the U6 doesn’t” over a longer period of time, but this is just one month. Obama is just lucky that the U3 number helps his poll ratings.The point is there’s no real reason to use the U6 instead of the U3 as a general barometer. The U6 has its uses outside of partisan politics, but the general story looking at the U6 and U3 numbers is that the job market is getting better, slowly but surely.”
   Again, thanks for discussing this with me and feel free to give me your thoughts on my interpretation of the Republican and Democrat sources. You find that looking at both sides offers the best truth, as shown by the overlap. To summarize the overlap, both articles say: unemployment rate is often political, discouraged workers aren’t counted, unemployment rate often revised months after release, unemployment rate in general not the best indicator of economic health. I learned a lot from this research, and I hope you continue the discussion. 
        —Alex 
Photo
Finally starting this one up!

Hi friends, random strangers, and employers stalking my web presence, 

This blog is a collection of all my political and cultural commentary with sprinklings of my personal life. I’ll also repost things that I write on my more specific blogs such as my paperless initiative, and amazon or yelp reviews if they’re important enough to me. Basically expect things of this sort. Hopefully no matter who you are you’ll find something useful. Whether that be determining that I’m a crazy person that is negatively influencing society, to someone that amuses you, I appreciate your visit. Thanks!

Text
Single A Theme :: Version 1.3.1 :: By Business Bullpen