Student Loans & The Economy

The majority of American college students graduate with a significant amount of debt due to student loans(~66% of students in public colleges graduate with student loan debt). Students loans aren’t just a problem for college students though, they impact the entire economy. With student loans and debt, many college graduates don’t have the funds they need to start new businesses that are potentially revolutionary. The major problem with a lack of entrepreneurship is that it has a major impact on the job market. Around sixty percent of jobs revolve around small business and their demand for labor, which means if the number of small businesses decreases unemployment will increase. A large percentage of the population have college degrees meaning they no longer have the edge they need toget a well paying job soon after graduation.

Home ownership and the real estate market are also directly impacted by student debt. Students can no longer afford to buy houses meaning an entire generation won’t be able to enter the market until later in life. At the moment there is roughly one point one trillion dollars in student debt and the average per student is thirty thousand dollars. It can take them several years to get a stable enough job to begin paying off their debt. Students no longer focus on getting advanced degrees needed for high paying jobs because it would simply cost too much. There has been a sharp increase in the past several years of students choosing career paths in low paying public interest jobs. While public interest jobs are necessary for our economy to function, there should still be interest in other fields.

So how do we solve the student debt crisis? A popular solution would be to simply forgive student debt altogether, and many believe this would cause economic growth. A major factor in the debate over forgiveness is that many believe it is unfair to those who have just finished paying off their student loans. However we can’t cater to everyone, while some people won’t directly be benefited, a stronger economy is good for everyone. Forgiving all student debt may not be the only solution. Another popular opinion is to create policies so that seventy to eighty percent of loans would be forgiven, and the government could forgive student debt to graduates who choose career paths in government.

I believe we should take advantage of student debt to stimulate growth in certain, undeveloped or understaffed fields. Graduates who go into certain fields(like government work) could get exemptions they need, but that would skew growth to favor select professions. Supply of labor would be in surplus, while the demand will only decrease. For those who don’t want choose exempt career paths, alternative policies or opportunities could be implemented. These policies could focus on those with lower incomes and thus allowing them to focus on developing their own lives. This solution would benefit individuals, underdeveloped/understaffed fields, and society as a whole.

 

Sources:

https://studentloanhero.com/featured/effects-of-student-loan-debt-us-economy/https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/25/business/the-ripple-effects-of-rising-student-debt.html

https://studentloans.net/students-inquire-about-eligibility/http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-student-loan-debt-be-forgiven-for-all

https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-college-debthttp://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/24/5-facts-about-student-loans/

https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/http://kightlaw.com/student-loan-relief-part-1-the-income-based-repayment-plan/

North Korea and the informal powers of the presidency

Richard Neustadt, after serving as an advisor to the President, felt the need to convey the reality of the presidential power. He felt many Americans over-exaggerated the Presidents formal power, and I’d like to explore the informal powers and their influence in our lives. Fortunately we have a strict system of checks in balances that prevents the President from taking full control, and this is the primary reason as to why the President doesn’t have significant power. A growing issue today is the bellicose rhetoric our President is spewing out towards the rogue state of North Korea. Many people today are worried the presidents actions will result in a war. In reality the President can not formally declare war without the consent of Congress, however he can most certainly instigate one. Trump may very well be “kicking the hornets nest” with his onslaught of insults towards the North Korean leader. Trumps words have caused increased military build up along the demilitarized zone of North Korea, and as commander in chief he ordered a carrier fleet to be deployed right of the coast of the rogue state. There is now a very real possibility of armed conflict be it nuclear or conventional, and a primary source is the presidents reaction to the growing nuclear threat. Whether or not his actions are appropriate or not is of no consequence to the issue being discussed. We can see very clearly that by simply making a few comments very real actions take place. The increased tensions allow us to see how the President acts as a key diplomat. By touring through Asia and talking tohis peers across the ocean Trump has increased relations between several Asian countries. Simply by visiting he is able to bring diplomatic change. He is responsible for how other nations perceive us which could change anything from our economic status to whether or not we have allies in a potentially very bloody conflict. This power doesn’t derive from the constitution, but from the informal power the President carries. He’s what Americans elected to be a key representative. He’s someone the United States feels best reflects their beliefs. He’s shown the entire world the he, along with the rest of the nation, will no longer tolerate increased aggression and will meet any such aggression “with fire and fury.” The world is left to believe that we as a nation completely agree with his statements. The international community sees the entire nation not because of our policies, but just by the presidents way of speaking. His incredibly informal tweets may be what sends the world into a third world war where millions of lives are to be potentially lost. Several nations would be engulfed in a bloody and vicious war if his statements were to provoke an aggressive response. Earlier this week Trump made inaccurate comments about the United States nuclear arsenal. He claimed we had hidden nuclear silos(there’s no reason, once the missles launch it doesn’t matter from where they launch) and that a standard Air force bomber was capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Unfortunately those bombers are used frequently in exercises along the Korean border. There is a very real possibility that North Korea would see this as a possible nuclear attack and war would break out almost immediately. Every word Trump tweets is heavily analyzed and the possibility of misconstruing his statements is very high(or just taking them too seriously). Trumps words have increased tensions and turned up the heat on international tensions showing that by simply making statements the President receives an informal power that can be used to make real changes.

Repealing The Second Amendment

In the midst of mass shootings and gun violence, the right for Americans to even own guns has become a national issues. The second amendment guarantees United States citizens the “right to bear arms” and for states to have “a well regulated militia.” When people talk about repealing the second amendment they are usually focusing on the personal liberty of owning guns. This is stated in the constitution to prevent tyrannical or oppressive governments to take control of the people. At the time that idea did help preserve America’s freedom, but is it still relevant in our modern live?  

When the second amendment was added to the constitution the military only had cannons and muskets. There was little difference between the types of weapons the people and military were able to arm themselves, but today an incredibly large rift has formed. The people of the United States are at most, legally, allowed to own semi-automatic weapons, while the military is armed with automatic weapons and significantly more powerful weaponry and technology. If the people tried to revolt against the government, the government would be able to quickly and decisively suppress them.

The military of the United States of America is one of the most sophisticated and technologically advanced militaries in the world. They are well funded, more than most other nations including our allies, and prepared to fight against any threat to the American people. It is important to note that the military exists to protect the citizens of the United States, not necessarily the government. If the government tried to use the military as a tool against the people, they may find the military to be non compliant.

As a tool to protect against a tyrannical government, the second amendment has become completely obsolete. However many argue now that they need it to protect themselves from threats to them or their families. Do arms really help protect people from criminals and murderers? There are many that would argue it does, but guns have been a major source of deaths in america. In 2013 alone roughly 33,000 died to causes related to firearms, and in countries that have banned personal firearms a massive decrease in firearm related deaths have occurred. Furthermore the United States has one of the highest mass shooting rates in the world. If people are concerned for their personal safety then they should be in favor of banning firearms. It’s just as easy for criminals to obtain firearms as it is for the regular american citizen putting everyone at a greater risk.

The last commonly argued point is that a well regulated militia is needed in order to protect the people of the United States. There isn’t much dispute over this, but many have said that it’s enough of a reason to leave the entirety of the second amendment in tact. This argument fails to take into account  that to ban firearms is not necessarily to repeal the second amendment. Another amendment can always be added that cancels out a certain part of another amendment. So should we repeal the second amendment? No. We need to preserve the necessity of a state militia, however we also need to protect citizens from gun violence. Only a certain part of the constitution has been made obsolete by time and new technology, and we as nation need to adapt. We need to follow in the

 footsteps of other nations that have faced high gun violence rates, and in response have banned personal firearms.

The Filter Bubble: A Threat To American Democracy

The Filter Bubble prevents American citizens from completing their civic duties, and prevents the nation from progressing into the future. A filter bubble is the term used to describe the way in which companies, such as search engines or media outlets, tailor the information provided to each individual user in order to make their experience more enjoyable. Catering to every person may appear, at first, to be convenient, but some very serious issues arise. People become uninformed about different perspectives regarding both domestic and international issues. They lose the ability to understand the way in which the other side is thinking. In our democracy it is each citizen’s responsibility to stay informed so that they can make the right decisions for our nation.

    If people are unable to see major issues facing their community, how can they possibly make a decision that will solve it? People need to know where their community, and our nation, should be focused. Some issues are more pressing than others, and in order to dictate which ones should be solved first all of them need to be understood. The way in which the problem is solved is also changed by the filter bubble. Both sides will present solutions, but if they are not working together a compromise will never be met ultimately leaving the problem unsolved. There are several issues today that provide examples of this. Currently our nation is debating over a government-funded healthcare system. Neither side is willing to hear the others perspective. A lot of talking is happening, but no one seems to be saying anything beneficial. If both sides understood each other and worked together a compromise would occur much faster.

    The Filter Bubble is polarizing this nation’s political parties creating a massive rift in the population. History has shown us time and time again that having two extremely different radical viewpoints leads to disaster. In Weimar Germany the communist left and the conservative NSDAP party fought, in some cases to the death, over who should control the government. Power struggles  occur and one side ends up being oppressed just like in Weimar Germany.  When the conservatives seized power being a member of the left party became illegal with punishments as severe as death. Major rifts lead to internal conflict and the potential demise of our way of life completely. Regardless of how strong our government is we could succumb to the same fate. For the sake of our democracy we need to realize they don’t have to agree solely with one side. They are allowed to agree with differing parties on different issues.Very few fall into just conservative or liberal and neither side objectively better than the other.

    The ability of the people to thoroughly understand certain situations is impaired by the filter bubble. Citizens only see the good aspects of the political party they align themselves with. Without recognizing the faults of their campaigns/candidates there is no way to improve. If they only see the victories they will be shocked when they lose an election. In our most recent presidential election most democrats didn’t believe the republican candidate would win because they only heard negative things about him and only heard the positive aspects of their candidate. Many people were outraged by the loss, and it may have caused some to lose faith in democracy completely. When people lose faith in voting they stop doing it, causing the collapse of democracy completely.

    In order to maintain our government and way of life, it is essential that we rid ourselves of the filter bubble. We need to stay informed on global and local issues, even those that don’t interest us as much, so we can make the right decisions. Most importantly we need to be able to understand and accept the other side’s argument, and realize that we don’t have to just fall on one end of the political spectrum.