With the recent events in Haiti it was only a matter of time before private contractors would try to enter in and make their mark. In this article it explains how governments create summits so that private corporations can try and win contracts within distraught places. Similar situations can be traced back to Iraq as well as New Orleans. Now that Haiti needs to be rebuilt, businesses are jumping at the chance to try and get a piece of the action.
Naomi Klein discusses this in The Shock Doctrine as disaster capitalism. Klein explains this as when massive disaster occurs and businesses use it as an opportunity to cash in on the circumstances. However, the people that are often suffering in these situations feel much different and don’t want their lives replaced with something new. Klein explains,
“Most of the people who survive a devastating disaster want the opposite of a clean slate: they want to salvage whatever they can and begin repairing what was not destroyed; they want to reaffirm their relatedness to the places that formed them” (Klein 10).
From this we can see that often people don’t want to start over, they just want to repair the aspect of the lives that they can. I believe that trying to force people to start over just makes them suffer more and feel and even larger disconnect to the place that they used to call home. They want to continue to try and control the small parts of life that they still can in these situations and when contractors come in and tear everything down and start all over, these people just feel more lost and hurt. Thus, maybe the better thing to do for Haiti is not try and start fresh, but try and help these people reclaim a place that once felt like home so that it may be able to again.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Friedman in the News
We discussed earlier in the week our frustrations with parking in the city and as a city driver myself, I consistently feel this annoyance. Chicago has just installed in many places meters where it costs $1.25 to park for an hour as well as expensive parking garages where it can cost anywhere from $10-$50. The Chicago Tribune discusses how other States may follow suit after the success Chicago has had after privatizing much of their parking. The Tribune explains since this change “Chicago reaped an upfront payment of $564 million for its parking garages in 2006, and about $1.2 billion upfront for its parking meters a year ago” (Uribe). These meters and parking garages are run by Morgan Stanley and have helped Chicago fill some of the holes where the budget has thinned.
This is Friedman at his finest. As a firm believer that what the market place can take care of, it should is exactly what Chicago is doing here with their parking garages and meters. Friedman preaches privatization and it shows that it works. Though we may not want or like to pay for parking often it becomes a necessary evil after circling to find that free spot for 35 minutes. Chicagoans, as well as their visitors, have grown to accept that to find parking in Chicago one must pay for parking in Chicago. However, we have proven that Chicago parking is a business with a high demand and a low supply, therefore, it will continue to make profit and take the money of the public and proceed to give it towards the private businesses that own it.
Though I am one of those people that have to pay for this ridiculous parking where someone is more than likely to hit or scratch my car anyways, I understand it is a gold mine. I am interested to hear your thoughts though, should we be paying for parking? Should it be privatized? How else may this problem be resolved?
This is Friedman at his finest. As a firm believer that what the market place can take care of, it should is exactly what Chicago is doing here with their parking garages and meters. Friedman preaches privatization and it shows that it works. Though we may not want or like to pay for parking often it becomes a necessary evil after circling to find that free spot for 35 minutes. Chicagoans, as well as their visitors, have grown to accept that to find parking in Chicago one must pay for parking in Chicago. However, we have proven that Chicago parking is a business with a high demand and a low supply, therefore, it will continue to make profit and take the money of the public and proceed to give it towards the private businesses that own it.
Though I am one of those people that have to pay for this ridiculous parking where someone is more than likely to hit or scratch my car anyways, I understand it is a gold mine. I am interested to hear your thoughts though, should we be paying for parking? Should it be privatized? How else may this problem be resolved?
Monday, February 15, 2010
Marx in the News
Anyone living in Chicago or even someone just visiting Chicago has more than likely had first-hand experience with the CTA. Frequent users have felt the strains of cost increases over the years and more recently the reduction in their overall vehicles as a whole. Not only have these changes affected the patrons of the CTA, but the workers themselves have felt the tension of the struggling economy. The Chicago Tribune discusses that “the CTA has laid off about 900 bus drivers union members and 150 train conductors” (Byrne 2010). In response to these drastic measures, CTA employees have threatened a slowdown, which would increase the already lengthy time people are waiting for their transportation. If the slowdown were to be put into effect, all CTA users would feel the pain of these actions.
I believe Marx would find such behavior problematic as these people are working more and more, but their time is becoming less valuable. CTA employees are working 12-14 hour days with no hopes of getting their deserved wage, in fact they are more likely to lose their jobs. These workers are continuing to struggle to make a suitable wage with the added pressure that they could still lose their jobs. Furthermore, these changes may lead to a slowdown which would only cause more chaos not only with workers, but for the users of the CTA. Marx explains that labor is supposed to work towards benefitting society, however, these would only create a heightened level on dysfunction to Chicago.
I thought this article related very much to Harlan County USA. Employees are just trying to use their labor power to provide a living for themselves and their families. I feel that if the workers were to strike or decide to input the slowdown many more employees would get fired and be replaced. The CTA Unions are battling to try and prevent anymore job losses, but I think it will only be a matter of time before they retaliate if these behaviors from CTA executives persist.
I believe Marx would find such behavior problematic as these people are working more and more, but their time is becoming less valuable. CTA employees are working 12-14 hour days with no hopes of getting their deserved wage, in fact they are more likely to lose their jobs. These workers are continuing to struggle to make a suitable wage with the added pressure that they could still lose their jobs. Furthermore, these changes may lead to a slowdown which would only cause more chaos not only with workers, but for the users of the CTA. Marx explains that labor is supposed to work towards benefitting society, however, these would only create a heightened level on dysfunction to Chicago.
I thought this article related very much to Harlan County USA. Employees are just trying to use their labor power to provide a living for themselves and their families. I feel that if the workers were to strike or decide to input the slowdown many more employees would get fired and be replaced. The CTA Unions are battling to try and prevent anymore job losses, but I think it will only be a matter of time before they retaliate if these behaviors from CTA executives persist.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Locke in the News
This article I found in the Chicago Tribune discusses the struggling battle that Americans have with their weight. Though obesity is not always a comfortable topic to talk about, I believe we would be doing a greater disservice by avoiding the issue entirely. This article focuses on the importance of making all aspects of your life conducive to a healthy environment. Therefore, when you are at work, your employers should be taking positive steps to encourage a healthier way of living and perhaps even punish those who choose to continue eat poorly. Though I am not sure I agree with the punishment aspect of this article for those who do not lose weight, I believe taking positive actions towards make definitive life changes would not only benefit obese people, but everyone involved. It forces individuals to take a look into every aspect of their life and figure out how they themselves can be healthier as well as motivate those around them to do the same.
Locke’s views on property are applicable here in the sense of his ideas on limitations. No person should exceed their rightful and natural limits and if they do so they are stealing from others within the community. There are many people that do not get the necessary food that they need and many Americans abuse the access that we have to it. Thus, I think that Locke would promote this movement which hopes to help people live a healthier life style that does not involve excessive eating and working towards the common good. Though such a controversial idea may take a little while to input, I think it is definitely one that deserves attention of all of us.
Locke’s views on property are applicable here in the sense of his ideas on limitations. No person should exceed their rightful and natural limits and if they do so they are stealing from others within the community. There are many people that do not get the necessary food that they need and many Americans abuse the access that we have to it. Thus, I think that Locke would promote this movement which hopes to help people live a healthier life style that does not involve excessive eating and working towards the common good. Though such a controversial idea may take a little while to input, I think it is definitely one that deserves attention of all of us.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Aristotle in the News
Each morning when we check the news whether it be on our computers, our televisions, or even our newspapers we find these pages and screens riddled with money woes, unhappy employees, and blood-thirsty businesses, and today was no different. As I browsed the news I found something a little closer to my heart though in The Chicago Tribune. This article discusses the potential takeover and hostile bids that Kraft has put towards the British owned candy company, Cadbury. Though finding this particular author as appealing as Swine Flu, I couldn’t help but return to the actual subject matter of his article. Basically, Kraft wants to buy out Cadbury and they are not interested even after an offer of $17 billion as well as some “cash in hand” (Chu, Chicago Tribune).
Being a Brit myself, I believe it would be a shame to lose another company to the Americans, especially with one that has such a resonating history with the British public. However, this is loss is bound to happen anyways, but with another company who Cadbury’s have already been working with, Hershey. Though unfortunate, desperate times call for desperate measures and it appears that we ‘bad-teethed’ Brits may need a way out.
On a more serious note, Aristotle remained in the back of my brain while reading this article. Our world today has become one that is dependant and thrives on what people can call their own, whether it is a car, a house, or a business. I personally don’t believe that Aristotle had is quite right, but we live in very different times today so I think my disagreement is more easily founded. I think private property in today’s society is important and necessary to keep our businesses, as well as our private lives, functioning at an optimal level because there is less confusion to who can be held accountable. However, I do not think ownership gives us a right to be inhumane to people, but it definitely makes it easier. I believe if you work hard to own something, like a business, it is up to you and the people involved to decide how the money you have earned is spent and who receives it. I think the idea of sharing all the things you have after your needs are met is a nice idea, but not very practical. Though the Cadbury-Kraft argument is more just about the focus on owning property I think it’s necessary to realize that it is just a part of today’s dog-eat-dog world. My final thoughts are if Cadbury don’t want to sell their company to Kraft, I say too bloody right!
Being a Brit myself, I believe it would be a shame to lose another company to the Americans, especially with one that has such a resonating history with the British public. However, this is loss is bound to happen anyways, but with another company who Cadbury’s have already been working with, Hershey. Though unfortunate, desperate times call for desperate measures and it appears that we ‘bad-teethed’ Brits may need a way out.
On a more serious note, Aristotle remained in the back of my brain while reading this article. Our world today has become one that is dependant and thrives on what people can call their own, whether it is a car, a house, or a business. I personally don’t believe that Aristotle had is quite right, but we live in very different times today so I think my disagreement is more easily founded. I think private property in today’s society is important and necessary to keep our businesses, as well as our private lives, functioning at an optimal level because there is less confusion to who can be held accountable. However, I do not think ownership gives us a right to be inhumane to people, but it definitely makes it easier. I believe if you work hard to own something, like a business, it is up to you and the people involved to decide how the money you have earned is spent and who receives it. I think the idea of sharing all the things you have after your needs are met is a nice idea, but not very practical. Though the Cadbury-Kraft argument is more just about the focus on owning property I think it’s necessary to realize that it is just a part of today’s dog-eat-dog world. My final thoughts are if Cadbury don’t want to sell their company to Kraft, I say too bloody right!
Mark to Market Debate Channel
I found the youtube channel for Mark to Market Debate in case anyone wanted some information about it.
http://www.youtube.com/user/marktomarketdebate
http://www.youtube.com/user/marktomarketdebate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
