http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/china/120104/china-cuts-entertainment-tv
The Chinese government recently decided to take two-thirds of television shows off of the air as a result of "excessive entertainment". Instead of the popular TV shows, the time will be filled extended news bulletins, as well as programs promoting socialist core values and traditional virtues. Now obviously if this kind of action took place in the US, then everyone would freak out and there would be mass chaos.
The new rules that were put in place were as follows:
" The total number of entertainment shows aired daily by the 34 channels between 7:30 PM and 10 PM is restricted to nine. For each channel, only two entertainment programs are allowed in a week, and will be limited to 90 minutes each. The new directive does not give a definition for entertainment shows or to what extent they will be considered excessive, but lists match-making shows, game shows, talk shows, talent shows and reality shows as its primary targets."
As big of couch potatos that we Americans are, the Chinese have the biggest television audience in the world. The Communist Party claimed that they're helping the citizens of China and the changes are going to make them happier people and make their country look stronger. Personally, I feel like this doesn't make them look any better and they're just trying to brainwash the people in a way. On one hand, it's not a bad thing to try to rid of brain cell killing shows (ie. like our Jersey Shore), but the people should also get to make their own decisions.
What's your reaction to this article? Do you think they've taken a step too far or is this not very surprising?
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Monday, January 2, 2012
"EPA rolls out new mercury limits"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70758.html
I realize this is not environmental science, but this is finally some potential good news concerning our world. The EPA is moving to limit the mercury, arsenic, selenium, cyanide, and other toxic chemicals emitted from power plants in the US. Over half of mercury emissions come from the power plants, and with reducing these harmful chemicals in the air, smog emissions will also be reduced.
Now this sounds like a pretty good thing to do, right? Our environment is in really crappy shape thanks to our love of burning coal. "EPA says the new standards will prevent 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year, along with 130,000 childhood asthma symptoms and 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis in children." So, as well as helping the environment, it will improve the health of everyone living here.
The EPA has been pushing to make these new standards for 20 years, and many republicans in congress are still opposing and aiming to stop the new rule. Their arguments include: " the science behind the requirements is unclear, since childhood asthma has gone up recently, while overall pollution levels have gone down. Other concerns surround the timeline for the rule’s implementation, and whether the expected mass shutdown of older coal-fired power plants will affect reliability of the electric grid."
I think that (along with more jobs being created) the new standards are going to be a positive change in the long run for the environment and our country. Everyone needs to move forward in trying to clean the air anyways, so I don't understand why there is opposition to something that is desperately needed. Do you agree or disagree with the new limits on mercury/ other toxic chemical emissions? What would be any benefits if the rule is stopped?
I realize this is not environmental science, but this is finally some potential good news concerning our world. The EPA is moving to limit the mercury, arsenic, selenium, cyanide, and other toxic chemicals emitted from power plants in the US. Over half of mercury emissions come from the power plants, and with reducing these harmful chemicals in the air, smog emissions will also be reduced.
Now this sounds like a pretty good thing to do, right? Our environment is in really crappy shape thanks to our love of burning coal. "EPA says the new standards will prevent 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year, along with 130,000 childhood asthma symptoms and 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis in children." So, as well as helping the environment, it will improve the health of everyone living here.
The EPA has been pushing to make these new standards for 20 years, and many republicans in congress are still opposing and aiming to stop the new rule. Their arguments include: " the science behind the requirements is unclear, since childhood asthma has gone up recently, while overall pollution levels have gone down. Other concerns surround the timeline for the rule’s implementation, and whether the expected mass shutdown of older coal-fired power plants will affect reliability of the electric grid."
I think that (along with more jobs being created) the new standards are going to be a positive change in the long run for the environment and our country. Everyone needs to move forward in trying to clean the air anyways, so I don't understand why there is opposition to something that is desperately needed. Do you agree or disagree with the new limits on mercury/ other toxic chemical emissions? What would be any benefits if the rule is stopped?
Friday, November 18, 2011
US companies affected by Euro debt crisis
http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/u-s-companies-feel-impact-of-european-debt-crisis/article_9a2fe073-bab6-5a9d-ab3a-84105533f0bf.html
So as wonderful as the US economy is... the crisis in Europe is having a great impact on our companies and banks in a negative way. Just what we needed, right?
The European Union is the United States' number one trading partner, "Nearly $475 billion in goods crossed between the regions in the first nine months of 2011. About 14 percent of revenue for the 500 biggest U.S. companies — roughly $1.3 trillion — comes from Europe." So their spiraling downfall is obviously going to affect the companies and people living here in the US. Companies are losing a lot of profits, hesitant to hire, and people are not willing to spend during these hard times, forcing the prices to drop and hurt the companies even more. Companies such as: Whirlpool, General Motors, Nike Inc, Abercrombie & Fitch (although I wouldn't mind their prices dropping) are some examples of places losing lots of money due to the European debt. Even small businesses are getting hit by this. Some of the US corporations actually not hurting are Sara Lee, Kraft, and McDonalds.
The banks are also being greatly impacted as you could probably assume. They're cutting lending and holding onto all their cash so in case this crisis doesn't end soon, we're not hit AS much. If the crisis worsens, the debt we hold of European governments could lose value which would definitely be bad for our economy. The fear is that the US and European governments may be worried each other can't cover losses that the lending would stop completely. That would impact the whole global economy.
What should people in the US do to prepare for the Europeans potential downfall? How should companies try to increase profits while this whole crisis is undergoing? How may their crisis affect people our age in America?
So as wonderful as the US economy is... the crisis in Europe is having a great impact on our companies and banks in a negative way. Just what we needed, right?
The European Union is the United States' number one trading partner, "Nearly $475 billion in goods crossed between the regions in the first nine months of 2011. About 14 percent of revenue for the 500 biggest U.S. companies — roughly $1.3 trillion — comes from Europe." So their spiraling downfall is obviously going to affect the companies and people living here in the US. Companies are losing a lot of profits, hesitant to hire, and people are not willing to spend during these hard times, forcing the prices to drop and hurt the companies even more. Companies such as: Whirlpool, General Motors, Nike Inc, Abercrombie & Fitch (although I wouldn't mind their prices dropping) are some examples of places losing lots of money due to the European debt. Even small businesses are getting hit by this. Some of the US corporations actually not hurting are Sara Lee, Kraft, and McDonalds.
The banks are also being greatly impacted as you could probably assume. They're cutting lending and holding onto all their cash so in case this crisis doesn't end soon, we're not hit AS much. If the crisis worsens, the debt we hold of European governments could lose value which would definitely be bad for our economy. The fear is that the US and European governments may be worried each other can't cover losses that the lending would stop completely. That would impact the whole global economy.
What should people in the US do to prepare for the Europeans potential downfall? How should companies try to increase profits while this whole crisis is undergoing? How may their crisis affect people our age in America?
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Europe's New Debt Crisis
As you all already know, Europe is in a lot of trouble and going nowhere fast. I found this article: http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2011/10/27/europe%e2%80%99s-new-debt-crisis-agreement-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly/#ixzz1bz684XXk that talks about the "good, bad, and ugly" aspects of the debt crisis agreement.
The European Union has seemed to have been putting off dealing with this problem for awhile. Members are getting nothing done by simply arguing and coming to no agreements each and every day. Major changes need to take place, but someone is going to have to be the bigger person and let there be progress. The good points from the negotiation this morning were that members are finally having a reality check and trying to make something happen. Steps being taken are increasing the fund's (ESFS) "capabilities by using it to guarantee private bondholders against losses on sovereign debt purchases".
The bad and ugly parts definitely outweigh the positive possibilities. Nothing is fully determined and nothing is very clear. The EU isn't sure that every member will actually help provide, which will only cause more problems. The bank recapitalization plan calls for banks to raise 106 billion euros in fresh capital, but that's not even half of what's needed.. so a temporary solution or stall. Also, after the bailout in Greece, there's no certainty of how much money will be left. As well as they will have major debt to pay off still.
The deal also includes trying to get money from China, which is completely desperate and pathetic. Just because they're doing well economically doesn't mean Europe can go begging for cash. Even if they did help it still would only be a tiny portion of the amount they need.
Obviously nobody knows all of the answers to solve such a crisis, even the top political members are still mind-boggled.
What do you think the missing pieces of the deal should include? Should China throw them some spare change to get them off their backs or leave them out cold?
The European Union has seemed to have been putting off dealing with this problem for awhile. Members are getting nothing done by simply arguing and coming to no agreements each and every day. Major changes need to take place, but someone is going to have to be the bigger person and let there be progress. The good points from the negotiation this morning were that members are finally having a reality check and trying to make something happen. Steps being taken are increasing the fund's (ESFS) "capabilities by using it to guarantee private bondholders against losses on sovereign debt purchases".
The bad and ugly parts definitely outweigh the positive possibilities. Nothing is fully determined and nothing is very clear. The EU isn't sure that every member will actually help provide, which will only cause more problems. The bank recapitalization plan calls for banks to raise 106 billion euros in fresh capital, but that's not even half of what's needed.. so a temporary solution or stall. Also, after the bailout in Greece, there's no certainty of how much money will be left. As well as they will have major debt to pay off still.
The deal also includes trying to get money from China, which is completely desperate and pathetic. Just because they're doing well economically doesn't mean Europe can go begging for cash. Even if they did help it still would only be a tiny portion of the amount they need.
Obviously nobody knows all of the answers to solve such a crisis, even the top political members are still mind-boggled.
What do you think the missing pieces of the deal should include? Should China throw them some spare change to get them off their backs or leave them out cold?
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Greek Riots
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2096177,00.html
At a rate over 16% unemployment, crime, suicides, bankruptcies and homelessness are all on the rise in Greece. The country has been in a recession due to austerity measures that foreign lenders are demanding in return for bailout loans. The Greek citizens have lost almost all faith in their politicians and there's no clear sign of that changing. "it's understood that the government committed the equivalent of political suicide a long time ago with the austerity drive," said political science professor Takis Pappas.
This past Wednesday, a protest broke out in Athens as a reaction to this ongoing crisis in the country. Even high school students gathered, angry about their parent's lost jobs and lack of books and teachers. Greek officers dispersed the crowds using tear gas (which is a reason not as many people showed up to the protest). This is an example of an anomic group because it wasn't organized or necessarily people of the same interest, these people all just protested because they wanted to show their anger towards the changes.
ADEDY and GSEE are the country's two main labor unions, representing 2.5 million workers. They went on strike, and stopped most international flights, trains, closed tax offices and state schools. Greece does not have a good end in sight with the actions everybody is taking. It seems nearly impossible for the government to win support of their citizens in order to turn this deficit around, because according to nearly all Greeks, the measures taken haven't done anything to get their country out of debt.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/02/10/greek.debt.qanda/index.html
This better explains exactly what happened, where they stand, and what exactly the measures are that they're taking, etc.
In my opinion, the country is in so much financial trouble that the citizens should expect nothing less than major changes to take place. The only way the Greeks can hope to meet their deficit is to back the new measures, at least long enough for some progress to be made. Although people in the middle class are struggling, nothing is going to improve the way things are staying, and going on strike is ultimately hurting the economy even more. I don't know the solution to this kind of crisis, but I do know that things have to get worse before they can get better, so the people of Greece need to just come together with their government to figure out some sort of plan.
At a rate over 16% unemployment, crime, suicides, bankruptcies and homelessness are all on the rise in Greece. The country has been in a recession due to austerity measures that foreign lenders are demanding in return for bailout loans. The Greek citizens have lost almost all faith in their politicians and there's no clear sign of that changing. "it's understood that the government committed the equivalent of political suicide a long time ago with the austerity drive," said political science professor Takis Pappas.
This past Wednesday, a protest broke out in Athens as a reaction to this ongoing crisis in the country. Even high school students gathered, angry about their parent's lost jobs and lack of books and teachers. Greek officers dispersed the crowds using tear gas (which is a reason not as many people showed up to the protest). This is an example of an anomic group because it wasn't organized or necessarily people of the same interest, these people all just protested because they wanted to show their anger towards the changes.
ADEDY and GSEE are the country's two main labor unions, representing 2.5 million workers. They went on strike, and stopped most international flights, trains, closed tax offices and state schools. Greece does not have a good end in sight with the actions everybody is taking. It seems nearly impossible for the government to win support of their citizens in order to turn this deficit around, because according to nearly all Greeks, the measures taken haven't done anything to get their country out of debt.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/02/10/greek.debt.qanda/index.html
This better explains exactly what happened, where they stand, and what exactly the measures are that they're taking, etc.
In my opinion, the country is in so much financial trouble that the citizens should expect nothing less than major changes to take place. The only way the Greeks can hope to meet their deficit is to back the new measures, at least long enough for some progress to be made. Although people in the middle class are struggling, nothing is going to improve the way things are staying, and going on strike is ultimately hurting the economy even more. I don't know the solution to this kind of crisis, but I do know that things have to get worse before they can get better, so the people of Greece need to just come together with their government to figure out some sort of plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)