Comment on colleague's work #2

I had viewed quite a few of my colleague's work, and I came upon one that was a little similar as to what I had written in my own blog. It's always great to see other's perspective on certain topics, that's of course related to government. My colleague had written a blog from a commentary though the Huffington Post. He had written about the issue on the sequester, on why the flights were delayed, and the where the funds were going to. Although my colleague had written an interesting commentary he lacked important facts as to where the fundingwas going to. My colleague should have provided more information about the FAA, and even identify what it is or what it stands for. Overall, it was written well, with a little sense of humor.

Sequester

 
The title of the article that I read was called, Budget cuts, minus the Inconvenience. Before I begin the commentary, I'd like to first define the word sequester.
        - to isolate or hide away (someone or something)
        - A general cut in government spending
Now, where to begin? First off, why was it so necessary to delay flights at airports all over the country? That, just caused an unnecessary inconvenience for those who needed to get to certain places. I'm not one to point fingers and blame someone, but didn't Speaker John Boehner blamed all the ache of the sequester on the Obama Administration? I don't think he understands the "ache and" until he actually gets laid off, like the others who were forced by their employees.
Why the necessary drastic cuts? Where's all the money going to? Well, apparently $85 billion were spent on eliminating waste, some sort of science/art project, and programs for the poor.
I feel as if they can save money by reducing the cost of their political campaign, travel cost, and other conference expenses. These demands or interest would only cause more aches and pain, especially for those family that are needing the income to survive. I'd like to end this blog by saying,
"I apologize for my hairy legs, I was wearing pants until the sequester cut them off."

Why should welfare recipients be the only one's to get drug tested?

I just recently read an article from whatweshouldknow concerning about government support or also known as Welfare. I completely agree on many parts on his comments as well as from the author of the article. To be honest, I didn't even realize that they actually have drug test for those whom are receiving benefits. I may have just been oblivious to that, because I have not really paid any close attention to such matter. Congressman Stephen Fincher made some valid points on how states should do random drug test for those whom are receiving Welfare in order to keep their benefits.  Why not have others (aside from those whom are receiving benefits) get tested as well? I strongly agree that "random" drug test should be given to employees, managers, Congressmen, and even the President himself if it seems that they are not in their own state of mind.
Overall, I think the blogger himself, has made some valid points as to why he agrees on testing others aside from those who already receive government support.

Novartis: decisions, decisions...

        
     Novartis, what exactly is it? Novartis is simply defined as a pharmaceutical company based in Switzerland and Basel. Editor Andrew Rosenthal states the controversy between India and Novartis on how they (Novartis) should not be given the right to patent a certain cancer drug that was similar to its predecessor. This has been an ongoing battle between the two, which led to global attention.
The cancer drug known as Gleevec was the main controversy between India and Novartis.
Gleevec is a cancer drug for leukemia in which is highly effective. The reasoning for this controversy is because India is the world's largest pharmaceutical supplier for generic medicines. The problem is that the same chemicals made from Gleevec, was not allowable in the country and therefore Novartis was not allowed to patent such drug amongst certain countries. As for the United States, the cost for these medicines will not be affected. As a result the poor people will be able to afford such medication. This case was of a great importance because of the influence it had globally.

School Socket Syndrome

According to this blog written by Michael Wrong, he stated that the term "School Socket Syndrome" best describes the modern technology in Nairobi, Africa. There's almost always seems to be a dispute when it comes to voting, especially using modern technology. Even more so in Africa, where there's fear of militia by angry young men in which would sprung into action, if there seemed to have been glitches when counting the votes. It's terrying especially when security opens fire during an election.
Florida was all that bad when compared to other countries such as Kenya. However, it doesn't have this difficult in my opinion. For instance, one of the bloggers commented on the fact that Egypt did not rely on modern technoly when it came to voting, and yet the error percentage was less than 0.3%. This resulted with no dispute, due to the system that they had used.
It's true from my opinion on what Wrong stated. Mastering the methodologies, can more likely get this systme in a better path.
This blog was retrieved from http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/in-kenyas-high-tech-election-almost-everything-that-could-have-gone-wrong-did/

Immigrants Reform and Worker's Rights

I came across this article that I retrieved from the New York Times.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/opinion/immigration-reform-and-workers-rights.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
To be honest I didn't quite understand the full definition of immigration reform.
I did know that at some point most of us were immigrants coming from different countries to reside in this country. So what does the term reform mean? It's mainly meant to change for the better due to results of abuses, and fixing the situation. There are other definitions for reform but this one nailed it according to this article.

After further reading it has seemed to me that the author has made some several valid points as to stating the fact that Congress, as well as the President whom has made some promises on immigration reform, yet it's all just talk. The author also stated several cases, to which I agree on a couple such as; stopping the abuse to the employees, whom are being threatened to be deported if they do not keep silence. These workers are not only being abused, but they are working hard and hardly getting paid. Where's the humanity in that?

Overhauling immigrants should be ensured worker's rights, before getting recruited. If everyone follows the golden rule of "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you," then we could all benefit from these in the long run.

I think the author should have also stated the definition of reform that way some people like me, has a better understanding on the issue that was written. Also the author should have included specific genre of immigrants. Not just the race, but whether they were men, female, and even a child. Overall, I agree with some of the points that were made by the author.

Second Generation Immigrants

I found this article from website http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/02/07/second-generation-immigrants-improve/1899607/. This article seems to relate most students that are second generation immigrants. It's quite true that the second-generation immigrants seems to be a lot more educated as well as well spoken than their parents.
It's great for those immigrants that are receiving benefits as well as services once they become citizens. It's not, however for most such as Rep. Lamar Smith from Texas. He stated that by "legalizing the immigrants would cause taxpayers millions of dollars."
However, he president believes otherwise. In summary to the President's argument, he believes that by legalizing them, they will be a net plus to the nation's economy. According to the Pew Research Center, they stated that the immigrants will be the "heart of America's working age."
What can be concluded to this article?
I, however consider myself as a second generation immigrant. Although I was not born here, I came here at an early age. My father had adopted me, and married my mother. I take pride of this country. I do not take it for granted, but rather learn more about it. I do care when those that are "living" in this country do not respect it, nor want to educate themselves, when benefits are handed to them.
" The good things of life are produced by learning with hard work; the bad reaped of their own accord, without hard work." - Democritus