National Buy Nothing Day Essay Example for Free

National Buy Nothing Day Essay ​A hard-working, single mother receives her pay-check that to her horror reads a measly $225.30. She doesnt use the money for her, instead she uses that money to care for her two children, she needs to pay the rent, and the electricity but her kids need food to grow. As she heads to the bank to cash the check she passes the neighborhood local store and no cars are outside and the light are dim. Nothing comes to her mind as to what seems different, she proceeds to head over to the bank, and notices that there is no clerks and no long lines? So many things run through her mind so she parks her beat-down car, that clanks and rattles. As she becomes even more worried there is a bright white paper that reads, Due to the over-consumption rates, the government has issued a National Buy Nothing Day, we are sorry for any inconviences. Her world is instantly shut down and she becomes scared as to how she is going to feed her children. This is exactly what I fear will happen if a National Buy Nothing Day is issued, so in my opinion, a National Buy Nothing Day would be a bad idea. ​A National Buy Nothing Day would become a huge inconvenience to many people over the world. Many people in the United States work minimum wage jobs and have a family to care for. 75% of the population works pay check to pay check just to give the basics to their family, and majority of the money is spent on food that they hope will last them the whole month until they are paid again. Sadly, more times than you would like to see parents unhealthy and always tired because they put their children before themselves, and what if the National Buy Nothing Day just so happened to fall on pay day. The heartbreak that would radiate from the couple, and the worry that rushes through their mind as to how they are going to feed their kids tonight and when t hey are going to be able to come back and cash that paycheck? Now that the parents view is shown, imagine the reaction of the kids that come home and see that there is no food on the table and the have to be told from their parents tha t they have to go to sleep hungry tonight. Thats heartbreaking for anybody, and everybody. ​Along with an inconvenience to many Americans, a National Buy Nothing Day would hurt the life of a teenager, very significantly. Teenagers  are the main percentage of individuals that add to the rate of over-consumption. Even though they are the big spenders in this era, they often rely on the quick stops to help them proceed with their school day. 8 out of 10 teenagers have a car in high school and with having a car comes a huge cash flow. Many teens can barely wake up in time to go to school and this often leads to them not eating, and scientists have proven that this can greatly affect their performance with anything they do in the day. So they make a quick stop at either McDonalds, or in New Mexico Blakes Lotaburger for a quick burrito, so they can eat something to fuel their bodies for the day. High school athletes rely on eating more than anyone, because they need that fuel to burn off, either at their zero-hour basketball practices or their afternoon football practice. So, the Buy Nothing Day would send these athletes hungry to school and the only thing they will eat is their lunch, and with starting school at 7:00 and not even eating until 12:00, thats a 5 hour long span of lacking concentration in class. ​Medication is more times than others bought on a daily for many individuals with medical problems and the vast majority of this is children. 30% of individuals die annually because of lack to medications that can save them, and 10% of them are children. Thats almost half the percentage! Children are more venerable to illnesses and harsh sickness than adults due to the fact that their bodies are still developing. What if on the National Buy Nothing Day that one child that has for instance, epilepsy, runs out his precious medication that prevents seizures. At any moment in the day he could experience pain in their head and in a blink of an eye, they are having a seizure. On the daily, 2/3 children die a day from seizures and helpful medication prevents this from ever happening. How must it feel for a mother to know that you cant go and buy your child medication because the government just shut down all stores for a day that may open the eyes to consumers? Anxiety that passes th rough mother knowing their child is at any time vulnerable to a life-taking illness. ​Of course, many feel differently. One argument cited by many others is that a National Buy Nothing Day would open the over spending ways of many Americans. Yes, maybe this all we need to open our eyes but would just like other events that were supposed to help us, more times than others we just go back to our old ways. Like for instance, in the time of The Great Dust Bowl, Farmers were  plowing heir fields non-stop and destroying the once fertile land. Then once the Dust Bowl came wiping out anything that was in its way, Farmers soon realized that their ways were in desperate need of reform, but what happened again? Farmers were back to their old ways and doing what they just did before. Its the mind of the American people that determine everything we do. Now should it be the governments job to show us our wrongs? Why no! We can say were going to change but do we ever really do? For a national objective to work, everyone has to consent to it. ​Although a National Buy Nothing would open the eyes of many consu mers everywhere, it can greatly impact others in different ways. Like the mother who cant find a way to feed her beautiful, small bundles of joy, or the teenager that cant buy his breakfast for the day, more negatives aspects come out of this than the good.

Education and Acculturation in Our Lives :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Do you believe that there is more than one way to â€Å"see† things? If you were given a piece of art to look at, what would you â€Å"see†? Would you see the same thing as a three year old, as your friend in Korea, or as your art teacher? Why is it that each person would see the picture differently? Is the picture not the same in each case? Why would each person not see the same thing or interpret it the same way? According to Cole, the way we perceive things in our day-to-day lives is highly due to our education and acculturation. Each person sees things differently because of the way they have been raised, and the culture and education they have been given.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The senses play a vital part in the lives of individuals and the way they interpret the things around them. â€Å"[The sense of] touch has been described as the most primitive and the most personal of the five senses† (Colombo, Gary pg.27). Touch, though often unnoticed, is the physiological sense by which external objects or forces are perceived through contact with the body. Lopez writes, â€Å"Eventually I visited many places, staying with different sorts of people. Most worked some substantial part of the day with their hands† (pg.32). Many times touch is overlooked as an educational tool. Touch is one of the things that are very significant in developing people both physically and emotionally and in linking us to other human beings. The sense of sight plays an important role as an educational device. We use our sense of sight to visually interact with our surroundings. With this sense we can recognize objects around us and make new discoveries. The mind plays a direct role in the way we respond to and interpret the things we see. The human eye provides the brain with vast amounts of visual information, in which the brain then registers or disregards in memory. The brain oftentimes transmits signals back to the person which cause a physical or emotional reaction. For example, when one touches a pointy object or hits one’s knee on a hard surface, one feels pain not from the pointy object or the hard surface but by the interpretation in one’s mind from electrical signals inside the brain. This is what causes one to yell out in agony when these particular situations occur. The more educated one becomes, whether it is by learning through experience as one gets older and/or being educated in school, the greater ones capability to sense their surroundings is. Education and Acculturation in Our Lives :: essays research papers   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Do you believe that there is more than one way to â€Å"see† things? If you were given a piece of art to look at, what would you â€Å"see†? Would you see the same thing as a three year old, as your friend in Korea, or as your art teacher? Why is it that each person would see the picture differently? Is the picture not the same in each case? Why would each person not see the same thing or interpret it the same way? According to Cole, the way we perceive things in our day-to-day lives is highly due to our education and acculturation. Each person sees things differently because of the way they have been raised, and the culture and education they have been given.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The senses play a vital part in the lives of individuals and the way they interpret the things around them. â€Å"[The sense of] touch has been described as the most primitive and the most personal of the five senses† (Colombo, Gary pg.27). Touch, though often unnoticed, is the physiological sense by which external objects or forces are perceived through contact with the body. Lopez writes, â€Å"Eventually I visited many places, staying with different sorts of people. Most worked some substantial part of the day with their hands† (pg.32). Many times touch is overlooked as an educational tool. Touch is one of the things that are very significant in developing people both physically and emotionally and in linking us to other human beings. The sense of sight plays an important role as an educational device. We use our sense of sight to visually interact with our surroundings. With this sense we can recognize objects around us and make new discoveries. The mind plays a direct role in the way we respond to and interpret the things we see. The human eye provides the brain with vast amounts of visual information, in which the brain then registers or disregards in memory. The brain oftentimes transmits signals back to the person which cause a physical or emotional reaction. For example, when one touches a pointy object or hits one’s knee on a hard surface, one feels pain not from the pointy object or the hard surface but by the interpretation in one’s mind from electrical signals inside the brain. This is what causes one to yell out in agony when these particular situations occur. The more educated one becomes, whether it is by learning through experience as one gets older and/or being educated in school, the greater ones capability to sense their surroundings is.

Media Law Privacy: A study on its impact on journalists in HK

Great Britain was a powerful empire back in the days. It boasted of large areas of lands she colonized and conquered – with territories ranging from the Americas to the Far East and the pacific. For so many years England has conquered these territories and left a considerable influence on their cultures, such as newspapers and the media. Two of the best examples of these territories would be Hong Kong in the Far East and Australia in the pacific.IntroductionThese two countries were once the colony of the most powerful country back then the British Empire. But now as the time would have it, the two were given their independence by Britain, Australia in 1939 and Hong Kong’s turnover to the Chinese Government in 1997. Now you may ask, what is the significance of the past activities of these two countries in relation to their media laws? Let’s look on how www.asiawind.com describes the difference. First, both have considerable influences from Britain in the freedom o f expression, the media for example, and the other laws that go by it. Second, the turnover to two different cultures sets the difference for their journalism and media laws. The second reason will be discussed in detail in the next few paragraphs.When Britain handed over Hong Kong to china in 1997, the pre-colonial journalism style was different. Journalists were given full access to whatever news they can go into, in short full independence on the freedom of speech. The post colonial journalists now have a dilemma in their hands. With the pre colonial freedom that they’ve enjoyed now partly gone, its almost impossible for them to write something which may be of raging influence or may be detrimental to many authorities or the mainland politicians will call as propaganda against them.   It would then be taken to assumption that there had been evidences with regard to invasion of their privacy or political plans (Workshop).Media Law in Hong KongIn a survey taken from the si te of Media Law as adhered to by the government, such is evident that disclosing private issues if will not be detrimental to ones health or safety or for a person’s well-being, its better to let the persons concerned or organizations know.   Given such standpoint, in this case I think the Chinese Central Party will disagree with me. Considering the fact that any leak into the private affairs of the big bosses’ there and may be in fact, be detrimental to their   health if the media will get their hands on it (â€Å"Inmedia†).Most of the news that go against the tide of the mainland politicians will either be ignored or a big possibility will not be published at all by China News Agency, the news agency that is controlled by the Chinese Mainland communist party. The above mentioned is indeed a big difference on the media styles, laws and certain freedoms that are practiced back in the days of the British Empire controlling Hong Kong.   Certain news whether be beneficial to the communist party could either be not published for the sake of secrecy laws that are imposed by the communist party. Hence, Secrecy laws which are based from the interests of the ruling party in Mainland China.Hong Kong media as seen from the eyes of its neighboring countries and the world reflect somewhat a negative view. Media in Hong Kong is the under the repressive arms of the Chinese mainland. The journalists in Hong Kong have to bear with the overly protective policies of the mainland. But the repression that the journalists go through in Hong Kong puts them in a somewhat feisty approach towards expressing their views and puts them in a delicate political situation. In terms of expression, the privacy laws and policies that the mainland imposes indirectly on to the journalist’s possess a different view and approach to a media that others may think is in dire need of air from an already tight squeeze from the mainland’s hands.However, media in Hong Kong still give some respect to the big bosses in the mainland. Prior to the turnover in 1997, the central party was used to the distinctively quiet atmosphere of the media there. Now as the feisty and active reporters of Hong Kong are becoming often aggressive in bringing out the truth, in reference to Taiwan, they do still maintain a high level of respect for the state’s privacy laws in expressing views over the issue.Media Laws in AustraliaThe media laws of Australia on the other hand, propose and show a different approach to how the state allows its journalist to practice their crafts. State laws passed by the House of Commons states that it allows journalists to practice under such media regulations, freedom of speech and other policies that follow governing laws. In terms of privacy, the state does allow journalists certain protocols in regard to privacy ((OLDP)).Take for example, state provisions that allow foreign nationals to take certain control of certain perc entages of media institutions.   It does in a way grant private or corporate individuals to express the freedom of speech. The freedom must be exercised according to state laws and specifically, privacy related. The state itself does value the freedom to exercise that right but it has to coincide with certain ethics just to make sure that no privacy issue will be exposed that may be detrimental to one’s or an organizations well being.True that such freedom exercised in Australia has pointed out and brought great deal of scandals and corruptions hiding within the bureaucracy. If we look at the past, the Australian press has served their country well. Corruptions and misbehaviors from both the private sector and the government have been brought up by investigative journalists in response to needs of the people to know what is going on and their mission to bring out press freedom to a higher level of information dissemination.  Ã‚   As a matter of fact, this sort of freedom allows investigative reporters to practice press freedom to a much higher extent. But certain details have to be polished first before any publication gets out exposing such private issues which investigative journalists may deem necessary to let the public know.Complications in PressCertain hindrances may affect Australian press’ freedom. Take for example, the Trade Practices Act, which in a much broader sense is likely to be violated with the inclusion of press and cross- media ownership puts the credibility of Australian press on the line. With a lot of publications competing for sales in the Australian market. With various highly unlikely that the freedom may be jeopardize as more publications may go a bit extreme to bring out privacy related issues in the news for the sake of creating a stable share in the market (Smartt).Moreover, the degrading factor that some laws come in a variation of issues that rise in the field of obscenity, regional censorship and the other medi a restraints imposed by the laws crafted by the legislating individuals.   Aside from that it had been noted that consequently, one of the most striking deprivation of Press Freedom are the extent of regulations falling on the surface of morality.   This then stresses the standpoint that there had been certain instances wherein the Media advocates believe that the skill they have acquired for the pursuance of such projects in disseminating information to the contemporary society is stringed on the desires of those who are in office (Tugendhat and Christie).ConclusionIn conclusion, I believe with all these facts brought up the privacy issues of the press between Hong Kong and Australia. In my view Australian journalists enjoy a more subtle freedom in expressing their views in relation to private issues as compared to Hong Kong’s journalist who experiences a tight grip when it comes to details in press freedom. Culture differences, I also believe play a vital role in defini ng media privacy issues between these two countries’ journalists.   The arena of media may be not of that which entails absolute freedom as well as with the point of divulging on the creativity of the aforementioned individuals.   Thus, issues on privacy which were sought to be degrading in a form of nuisance and surveillance, is a point of fact that democracy is not well established in the society of today.References:(OLDP), Office of Legislative Drafting and Publishing. â€Å"Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005.† ComLaw – Federal Register of Legislative Instruments, 2005.â€Å"Inmedia.† IDEA 2007, 2007.Smartt, Ursula. Media Law for Journalists. Sage Publications Ltd 2006.Tugendhat, Michael, and Iain Christie. The Law of Privacy and the Media: First Cumulative Updating Supplement. Oxford University Press, USA, 2004.Workshop, New Media. â€Å"Hong Kong–Inmedia.† University of Hong Kong ‘s Journalism and Media Stu dies Centre, 2007.

What The Glass Steagall Act Was Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 5 Words: 1548 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Finance Essay Type Narrative essay Did you like this example? The Roaring Twenties was a decade of prosperity and financial boom. The Wall Street Crash of 1929 brought an end to this era and marked the beginning of the Great Depression. Prior to the Crash, a speculative bubble in the stock market kept increasing the price of stocks. Several Americans thought that investing in stock was the quickest and and surest path to prosperity. A significant number of investors had taken loans in order to purchase stock and defaulted on them when the stock market crashed. Banks themselves had heavily invested in the stock market. Unable to recover the money they had invested, several banks were forced to shut down. As news of banks shutting down spread, people panicked and began withdrawing money from the banks that were still functioning which further led to a series of bank runs throughout the United States. This caused even more banks to close and led to a nationwide banking failure. As Gailbraith (1954, P.196-7) notes, When one bank failed, the assets of others were frozen while depositors elsewhere had a pregnant warning to go and ask for their money. Thus one failure led to other failures, and these spread with a domino effect. Several economists, such as Krugman (2009) and Milton Friedman (1963) argue that it was the banking crisis that turned a recession into a depression. The Glass-Steagall Act (GSA) was an emergency response to the Wall Street Crash, the nationwide banking failure and the Great Depression. The GSA was sponsored by Senator Carter Glass and Representative Henry Steagall and passed by the US National Congress in 1933. It was a depression era regulation with two major provisions; the insurance of bank deposits and the separation of commercial and investment banking . Between 1929 and 1933, the United States witnessed a series of bank runs which eventually led to a a nationwide banking failure. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was established by the GSA to provide deposit i nsurance in the event of such bank failures. By insuring deposits, the FDIC regained depositors trust in the banking system and virtually put an end to bank runs. In 1943, the FDIC insured deposits up to $2,500 per depositor. This amount increased over the years and is currently $250,000 per deposit. The GSA also created a regulatory firewall separating commercial and investment banking. This was done to protect deposits form risky investments. Any bank that accepted deposits could not trade in securities (with the exception of government bonds) and any bank that underwrote securities or engaged in speculating could not accept deposits.   As Krugman (2012, p. 59) explains, any bank accepting deposits was restricted to the business of making loans; you couldnt use depositors funds to speculate in stock markets or commodities, and in fact you couldnt house such speculative activities under the same institutional roof. The financial crisis of 2008 began with the bursting of t he real estate bubble in the the United States and transformed into the worst recession the world has experienced since the Great Depression. The housing bubble in the United States peaked around 2006. Several people took out mortgages they couldnt afford and subsequently defaulted on them. However, these mortgages were resold as securities to various financial institutions around the world. As soon as the bubble burst and people defaulted on their loans, the value of these securities fell and led to the destabilization of the global financial system. But the housing bubble alone did not cause the global financial crisis. Various policies and regulations of the financial sector contributed to the establishment of the crisis. The sudden boom is housing prices was caused by the expansive monetary policy of the US Federal Reserve (Fed) between 2003 and 2005. As Anna J. Swartz (2009 p. 19) explains, An asset boom is propagated by an expansive monetary policy that lowers interest rate s and induces borrowing beyond prudent bounds to acquire the asset. The Fed kept interest rates at a historical low between 2003 and 2005. These low interest rates increased the appeal of adjustable rate mortgages  [1]  (ARM) to borrowers. Borrowers found it easily affordable to meet monthly payments due to the initial low interest rates on ARMs. After 2005, the Fed increased interest rates. Interest rates on ARMs were reset in response to the Feds decision. This made monthly payments unaffordable and consequently many borrowers defaulted on their loans. Deregulation of the financial sector was a major factor that was responsible for the financial crisis of 2008. Financial deregulation in the United States began in 1980s under Carter with the passing of Control Act of 1980, which ended regulations preventing banks from paying interest rates on different kinds of deposits. This change increased competition between banks based on interest rates offered on deposits. While this w as good for depositors, it meant that only those banks willing to make risky loans could survive in the industry (Krugman 2012 p.61). The trend of deregulation continued under Regan with the passing of the Garn-St. Germain Act of 1982, which decreased restrictions on the types of loans banks could offer and also continued under Clinton, who in 1999 passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB) which repealed provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that separated commercial and investment banking. The removal of this barrier that separated banking allowed commercial banks to indulge in investment banking and hence take more risks (Krugman 2008, p.163). Therefore the deregulation of the financial lead t an increase the amount of risk financial institutions could take. Securitization of sub prime mortgages also played an important role in the crafting the financial crisis. The Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) was the first organization to securitize mortgages in the form of Mortgage Backed Securities  [2]  (MBS). Securitization was limited to prime mortgages, that is until the housing bubble. The securitization of sub prime loans was made possible by collateralized debt obligation  [3]  (CDO). CDOs sliced credit risk into different tiers, the senior share had higher expectations of repayment compared to the junior shares (which receive higher interest rates) and hence received a AAA rating from the rating agencies despite being backed by sub prime loans. Several institutional investors, such as pension funds, were willing to buy CDOs because of their high ratings and hence opened up large scale financing of CDOs ( Krugman 2008, p.150). In 2007, an estimated US$503 billion worth of CDOs were issued (source: Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association). However when the housing bubble burst and homeowners began defaulting on their mortgages and the the value of these securities dropped. But by this time, CDOs had already spread thro ughout the market. Several financial institutions, such as commercial and investment banks, who owned CDOs had to face massive losses. Derivatives such CDOs are traded over the counter (OTC). This means that there is no regulation or supervision of trading of derivatives. The recent financial crisis demonstrates the need for regulation of derivatives. Shadow banks are financial institutions that offer services that are similar to those offered by commercial banks, but unlike commercial banks are not regulated. The shadow banking system includes financial institutions like hedge funds, money market funds, structured investment vehicles. These institutions do not take deposits and instead rely on capital from auction rate security, asset backed commercial paper or by repo market. Initially the shadow banking system was a small part of the financial sector, but by 2007, it had a become an integral part of the financial sector and was bigger than regular banking (Krugman 2012, p.63). A large source of income for the shadow banks emanated from the trading of CDOs. As mentioned earlier any financial institution that owned CDOs faced huge financial losses. These losses weakened confidence in the shadow banking system and led to non-bank bank runs on the shadow banking system. This ultimately led to its collapse (Krugman 2008, p.169-170). The collapse of the shadow banking system led to the destabilization of the financial sector. Therefore it is essential for the shadow banking system to be regulated in order to prevent runs on it from destabilizing the financial sector. As Krugman (2008, p.163) explains, anything that does what a bank does, anything that has to be rescued in crisis the way banks are, should be regulated like a bank. The financial crisis of 2008 revealed how hazardous large and systemic financial institutions can be. The effect that the collapse of Lehman Brothers had on the economy demonstrates the dangers of such financial institutions. Acco rding to Rajan (2010, p.170) financial institutions should be prevented from becoming too systemically important in order to prevent such an institutions collapse from affecting the whole economy. Another problem created by such institutions is that of moral hazard. Such institutions take higher amounts of risks knowing that the government would prevent them from collapsing owing to their systemic importance. Hence regulation is needed in order to prevent institutions from becoming too large and systemic. In conclusion, the expansive monetary policy of the Fed helped propagate the US housing bubble. Deregulation of the financial sector increased the amount of risk in the economy. Securitization of mortgages resulted in large scale financing of subprime loans. The lack of regulation of the shadow banking system and financial instruments like derivatives and the collapsing of systemically important institutions destabilized the economy. Therefore the recent financial crisis clearly demonstrates the necessity for new banking and financial policies. It also points up the need for regulation of the financial sector in order to safeguard the economy from future recessions. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "What The Glass Steagall Act Was Finance Essay" essay for you Create order