Discussions | Political Science News

Keep a Loaded Prepaid Card Handy for Emergencies

: Image via Wikipedia

I like to consider myself a somewhat financially responsible human being, but we all encounter situations that test our financial strength. For various reasons, everyone has unexpected costs. Whether textbooks for school or gasoline in your car, some costs can catch us off guard. While managing finances is not that hard with online banking, I often find myself checking it every week or so rather than daily like my OCD parents. I for one, always think I have more than I actually do, which is perhaps due to my constant coffee runs or late night fast food runs.

Either way, I was in a pickle, because I had several bills looming over my head and not enough money to pay for them all. Paychecks never seam to come fast enough, and I was going to run out of money well before my next check. Unfortunately, this happens to me more than a few times each year, so I developed a backup emergency plan to bail my unorganized butt out of financial torture. After the first incident a few years ago, I got a prepaid card and kept adding $50 to it each month, which acts as my personal credit card I use for times like these, except it does not impact my credit score.

One of the reasons I like the prepaid card is because I can pay my bills with them and use it at an ATM is necessary to withdraw cash to my bank account, which covers any incidentals and protects me from those nasty overdraft charges. I know there are better options out there, but the prepaid card has saved my account from over-drafting on more than one occasion. Put a little money in the prepaid card each month, and you have yourself a zero interest credit card.

Filed Under: Discussions, Society

Family and Maternity Leave

How does the Family Medical Leave Act of the United States compare with other countries? Let’s take a look.

In the United States, a person is allowed up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for family medical reasons. These reasons can include the birth and care of the employee’s child, or adoption of a child, taking care of a family memeber’s health, or taking care of an employee’s own health. The 12 weeks that are allotted are within a 12 month period, and your job is protected during this time. Unfortunately, this act does not apply to those who have been at their job for less than a year before taking their leave, and you have to work for a company that is considered “big enough”; at least 50 employees.

In many other countries, similar policies are considered Parental Leave. Most other industrialized countries have a significantly different view of Parental Leave than the United States.

In Canada, all employees are covered. If you are a full time worker, contract worker, or part time worker, you will be covered. In Canada, there are different types of leave, depending on the situation. If you have member of your family who is seriously ill, you are allowed up to eight weeks leave, unpaid, with job security. For maternity leave, a woman is allowed 15 weeks paid leave for the birth of a child, if she has worked at least 600 hours in the last 52 weeks. There are also 35 weeks of parental benefits allowed to be shared between the mother and the father.

In England, most women are entitled to up to one year of maternity leave. If you are self employed, working in the armed forces, are a share fisherwoman, or normally employed abroad, you will not be entitled to this maternity leave. During the first half of this leave, your employment contract is still in effect. You are still entitled to acrue paid time off and any other benefits.

Filed Under: Discussions, Society Tagged With: Family, Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, Home, United States

Fighting for the Middle

The success of either political party depends on which one is able to win over the hearts of independent voters. Democrats have done the best job in recent years of reaching out to those in the middle but now it looks like the pendulum is swinging again back in favor of Republicans. A new Gallup poll reveals that more independent voters now disapprove of the job that President Obama is doing than approve of it.

The same survey also found that independent voters believe that more republicans are needed in Congress to try and stop out of control government spending. A new political action committee has been established to help the GOP capture the independent vote this fall, it is known as the Resurgent Republic. Former Republican Party head Ed Gillespie formed the group along with political activist Whit Ayres last year with an eye on the 2010 Congressional races. The goal of the group is to try and shift the balance of power in both the House and the Senate. It was formed after the President pushed his health care reform plan through the Congress.

At its website the Resurgent Republic makes it clear that jobs will be the key issue that they focus on during the fall campaign. The group says while new government jobs have been created this year thanks to the census, there is no significant growth in employment in the private sector. They question the effectiveness of the government stimulus program backed by the democrats which was supposed to help create new jobs. The Resurgent Republic supports tax credits for small businesses instead which they say would provide real economic growth and put millions of out of work Americans back on the job. Polls show that creating new jobs remains the number one concern of people across the country.

Filed Under: Current Events, Discussions Tagged With: Barack Obama, Ed Gillespie, Republican

August Top Links

http://www.gutefrage.net/picoftheday/bpoilspill.html

http://digg.com/story/r/Neanderthal_s_Cozy_Bedroom_Unearthed_2

http://digg.com/story/r/How_to_Live_to_1_000

http://www.gutefrage.net/picoftheday/sporn.html

http://digg.com/news/entertainment/Apparently_Supergirl_Has_A_Vision_Problem_Pic

http://digg.com/news/entertainment/8_of_the_dirtiest_sexual_innuendos_in_children_s_cartoons

http://digg.com/news/entertainment/I_love_my_childhood

http://www.gutefrage.net/picoftheday/carwrecks.html

Filed Under: Discussions Tagged With: Google, Hosting, Web Design and Development

Will Elena Kagan Become the Next Supreme Court Justice?

: Image via Wikipedia

The hearings in the U.S. Senate have wrapped up and now we wait for the vote. President Obama is very optimistic that his nominee for the Supreme Court will win approval even though she has never served as a judge in any capacity in the past. Elena Kagan is currently the Solicitor General of the United States and is a former Dean at the Harvard Law School.

At her confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kagan promised to keep her politics separate from her judging. She says she will decide cases based on the law and not her personal feelings but some Republicans are not convinced. There are a number of conservative senators who are already on record saying they will vote against her. Senator John McCain did not like the way that she blocked military recruiting while she was Dean of the Harvard Law School and says he can’t support someone who discourages military service.

While there are a handful of senators who have said they will vote no, there are many more who say they will vote yes. They are not concerned over her lack of judicial experience and point to other great justices who did not have any experience at the time that they were named to the court like William Rehnquist. They are also quick to point out that she does have high court experience serving as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall. Democrats hold a 58 to 41 seat advantage in the Senate so it would appear to be a lock that she will be approved and the question becomes how many Republicans will vote in favor of the nomination. There were eight Republicans who crossed the aisle and joined Democrats in supporting President Obama’s last high court nominee, Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Filed Under: Current Events, Discussions Tagged With: Elena Kagan, Supreme Court, United States

Libertarianism In A Bipartisan World

: Image via Wikipedia

As political bickering clogs the headlines of most news publications, it can be frustrating for even the most optimistic voter to imagine our politicians solving the country’s problems in an efficient manner. Much of the problem lies in the US’s political infrastructure – an unwieldy bureaucracy by anyone’s standards. If we take a close look at our democracy, it becomes increasingly clear that it is anything but; our voices are surely not being heard nor acted upon. In light of this, let’s look at libertarianism as an alternate mindset. Though it sometimes gets a bad rap, in fact, libertarianism can be a uniquely fulfilling state of mind.

National Change Vs. Personal Change

In his landmark book, <u>How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World</u>, Harry Browne outlines many libertarian principles. For instance, he argues that believing that we can make a difference with our votes is largely a fallacy. Even if people rally around a specific cause, it is often a waste of time, since it’s very difficult to organize enough people to produce a political result. The opportunity cost, Browne argues, for such a course of action is high: what are we missing out on during the time we spend trying to influence others? Is there, perhaps, something more fulfilling to our own happiness and the happiness of our friends and family that we could affect? Though protesting and political organizing can be satisfying and even fun activities for some, it is hard to imagine that these people would not be happier doing something that would have a higher likelihood of changing their lives on a smaller scale – something that they actually have the power to change. If more political activists considered this, perhaps more would choose to self-actualize rather than rail against something that is often as immutable as the weather.

Filed Under: Discussions, Politics Tagged With: Harry Browne, Libertarianism, Politics

Why Does McDonalds Go After the Kids?

: Image by Mr ATM via Flickr

The Center for Science in the Public Interest has had it with McDonalds. They are trying to put pressure on the fast food giant to stop marketing its products to kids. The group has accused McDonalds of predatory marketing by using its Happy Meals to get generation after generation of children hooked on unhealthy junk food. While the Center calls the practice “creepy” the top executive at McDonalds is calling the claim absurd.

Jim Skinner is McDonalds CEO and has put an open letter on the company website defending the chain. He writes that the claims from the Center for Science in the Public Interest are an insult to all of their employees around the world. Skinner says that by selling Happy Meals with popular toys they are carrying on a thirty year tradition that customers love. In his letter to the executive director of the group he writes “that parents understand and appreciate that Happy Meals are a fun treat, with right-sized, quality food choices for their children.”

The Center though compares McDonalds to the stranger on the playground offering kids candy. They claim that the practice undermines parents attempts to raise healthy kids but it appears that public opinion is not on their side. Comments related to this story on the web show that most people are defending the sale of Happy Meals pointing out that kids are not the ones driving to McDonalds and buying the food, parents are. Most people agree it is the parents job to control what their children consume and if they are o.k with an occasional burger and fries then the Center for Science in the Public Interest should be o.k. with it. Others say it is ridiculous to accuse McDonalds of trying to harm children after all the work the company has done establishing Ronald McDonald houses near hospitals all over the world where critically ill children are treated. The houses give the parents a place to stay for free so they can be close to their children while they get treatment.

Filed Under: Current Events, Discussions, Society Tagged With: Fast food, Happy Meal, McDonald

Understanding Our Celebrity Culture

: Image by Getty Images via @daylife

It is probably a truism that there have always been celebrities. Whether it was the nobility or the notorious, people have always been fascinated by the famous. Today, celebrity culture seems to be out of control. Dozens of cable channels are devoted to nothing but tracking every movement of the even slightly famous, and millions of people buy magazines filled with little else other than pictures of movie stars, models, and musicians. Why is our society so enraptured by celebrity? It’s not a passing fad, so there must be something more to the fascination that a cultural trend. Let’s think about some causes for our love of the famous.

Evolution And The Survival Of The Fittest

If we view human psychology from an evolutionary point of view, it can help us understand celebrity culture. The characteristics that we possess are the same characteristics that helped humans survive over the thousands of years that they lived in little hunter-gatherer tribes. In these bands, survival was paramount. The most powerful male or males decided who received the most resources, so it made sense for the average person to align himself with these males. Perhaps keeping tabs on these powerful males made it easier to remain in their good favors.

Wish Fulfillment

It is also a truism that, to the victor go the spoils. The average person in our society, however, is not much of a victor. As Thoreau said, “Most men lead lives of quiet desperation”. Just getting by does not win many spoils, so people often aspire for something better. Unfortunately, again, the average person does not succeed, and then sometimes lives vicariously through others – celebrities. This helps explains why an entire industry has been built around celebrity worship. It may be interesting to study whether there is a correlation between success and celebrity interest.

Filed Under: Discussions, Society Tagged With: Celebrities, Celebrity, Human, People

Raising Kids Isn’t As Easy as Buying Car Insurance

In the report “Life Without Children: The Social Retreat From Children and How It Is Changing America,” authors Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe examine the time adults spend with children. Since 2008, the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University has reported a shift in American society and its priorities. Children are no longer at the front and center of a parent’s life, and kids are not the focus of common goals or public commitments. The United Kingdom is seeing a similar societal shift.

Some parents fail to understand that raising kids isn’t as easy as buying car insurance, where you select one and simply pay for it on a monthly basis. Raising kids takes much more effort than a monthly allowance. If parents and society fail to reverse the trend of placing children on the back burner, both nations may face generations of children growing into discontented adults. One solution may be to teach children how to parent. Kids would gain better parenting skills and the desire to focus on the family in order to raise healthy and happy children.

There are several contributing factors for the decline in nurturing children. The first is a demographic shift. In 1960, five out of 10 American households had young children. In 2010, only three out of 10 have young children. As people live longer and adults wait until later in life to have children, this number may further decline. With the shifting demographics, raising kids may be less of a common community concern because few people in a neighborhood have children to raise.

A second reason may be a shift in the goals for marriage. Earlier generations viewed marriage as a stable environment for raising children. Today’s young couples view marriage as a way to fulfill a deep desire for intimacy, companionship, and personal fulfillment. Children require time and attention, which can reduce the level of fulfillment a couple feels.

Filed Under: Discussions, Society Tagged With: Buying Car Insurance, Kids