Imagine going to a bake sale and instead of paying a listed, generic price paid by everyone, just envision yourself paying for a cupcake according to your race and gender. I am sure you are thinking, what does my gender or race have anything to do with how much I pay for a cupcake?
That is exactly what the students of the Berkeley College Republicans at the University of California Berkeley thought. This past week they decided to hold a bake sale in a satrical protest against the Affirmative Action like bills awaiting the signature of approval from Governor Brown. The prices of the baked goods were based on your gender and race. $2.00 for a white male, $1.50 for an Asian male, $1.00 if he was Latino, $0.75 if he was Black and $0.25 if he was Native American. All women received $0.25 off that price. This bake sale was taken place at the same time and location of a phone bank taken place in support of the SB185. SB185 is a bill initiative to reverse the effects of Proposition 209 that had originally eliminated the use of affirmative action throughout the state. SB185 would let public universities consider race when selecting applicants in their outreach and retention programs.
Although its intentions were satirical and not meant to be anything more then a demonstration, many students were outraged. Students thought the bake sale was shameful, racist, and just didn't understand what the point was.
I'm not too sure where I stand on this issue. I thought the bake sale was rather witty and a clever, somewhat peaceful demonstration to shed some light on the issue. I do not think it is necessarily fair for someone to get into college based on race over someone who is just as or more qualified in other areas. Coming from an Asian descent, being Asian didn't help me get into any college any easier or might have even hurt me at the schools looking for more diversity.
On the other hand, since Proposition 209 came into place, the number of students in higher education that are Latino, African American and Native American descent, has remained stagnant since 1995. I believe race plays a part on people's opportunities to an extent and it is more about someone's socioeconomic status. Yes, socioeconomic and race are correlated to an extent, but there are people of all races who are poor. A lot of people don't have the opportunities to participate in extra curricular activities, or take Advanced Placement classes, or have tutoring on the SAT because they cannot afford it or their area does not offer it. If anything, someone's socioeconomic status should be taken into consideration to make the system more "fair" and give everyone an equal opportunity.
It is a lot to think about and it is a sticky situation when it comes to race. A lot of it is based on bias and the perspective of your own race which affects how you would view this demonstration. Based on your race, would you be offended by this bake sale?
Friday, September 30, 2011
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Who Decides the Cuts
As my last post last week commented on how the lower class Americans cannot afford healthy food, I wanted to shift gears and commented my views on the economy. It is no rocket science that our economy is in trouble. It seems to me lately the stock market is PMSing harder than a lady going through menopause. (no offense to any woman experiencing menopause but you have to admit your mood swings are out of control)
The George W. Bush tax cuts end at the end of 2012 so Obama's administration has the duty whether to keep the tax cuts or reverse them. Without getting into a debate of what Obama should do, I always wondered, who advises the presidents to make these kind of decisions? Are they politicians with a background in economy? Are they economist intellectuals? Are they economists pulled from scholastic institutions?
I ask this question with a purpose. Within the study of macroeconomics, there is an idea, the Ricardian Equivalence Proposition. Stated simply, the Ricardian Equivalence proposes that in the long run, all government purchases must be paid for by taxes. So cutting taxes without decreasing government spending does not help anyone. By prolonging these payoffs, it is only increasing the amount we have to pay. Knowing that everything has to be paid off eventually, does not give the consumers of America any incentive to change their current consumption. (which the purpose of tax cuts is to try to increase GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, by giving consumers "more" money to spend) With a temporary increase in income (i.e. a tax cut), history shows that consumers do not go and spend it, but rather save it for the future.
So why does the government keep cutting taxes if it doesn't seem to help us short term and definitely does not help us long term? Obviously I am not as well versed on all of our economic policies so maybe I am missing something key. Clearly I am not in the White House, but maybe someone who remembers the basics should be.
Like me, I feel like a lot of America is just as confused.
The George W. Bush tax cuts end at the end of 2012 so Obama's administration has the duty whether to keep the tax cuts or reverse them. Without getting into a debate of what Obama should do, I always wondered, who advises the presidents to make these kind of decisions? Are they politicians with a background in economy? Are they economist intellectuals? Are they economists pulled from scholastic institutions?
I ask this question with a purpose. Within the study of macroeconomics, there is an idea, the Ricardian Equivalence Proposition. Stated simply, the Ricardian Equivalence proposes that in the long run, all government purchases must be paid for by taxes. So cutting taxes without decreasing government spending does not help anyone. By prolonging these payoffs, it is only increasing the amount we have to pay. Knowing that everything has to be paid off eventually, does not give the consumers of America any incentive to change their current consumption. (which the purpose of tax cuts is to try to increase GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, by giving consumers "more" money to spend) With a temporary increase in income (i.e. a tax cut), history shows that consumers do not go and spend it, but rather save it for the future.
So why does the government keep cutting taxes if it doesn't seem to help us short term and definitely does not help us long term? Obviously I am not as well versed on all of our economic policies so maybe I am missing something key. Clearly I am not in the White House, but maybe someone who remembers the basics should be.
Like me, I feel like a lot of America is just as confused.
Friday, September 16, 2011
Hungry? Well America Is
Every day I always try to enlighten myself by skimming the news headlines on CNN, LA Times, and Yahoo. Although Yahoo provides a lot more lifestyle stories, I like to read these articles to keep me up to date on other news, just not headline, breaking news. Stumbling this morning, I came across an article titled What Does It Mean to Be Poor In America? What really stood out to me was this fact:
"According to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report released this month, 14.5 percent of American households--more than 17.2 million households, in all--were defined as "food insecure" last year. That means that poor households lacked sufficient money or other resources to obtain access to adequate food supplies. Among those with incomes near or below the poverty line, rates of food insecurity were said to be "substantially higher."
To think that, that this many American are considered "food insecure" but rather when you look around, you notice the lower-income families are generally considered fat. To me, this made no sense at all. If you were poor, how on earth would you be able to afford food. Researching further into this topic, I learned, if you were poor, you were not able to afford healthy food.
Upon reading about an experiment done by Dr. Adam Drewnowski, with a hypothetical dollar at the grocery store, he found you can buy well over 1,000 calories of cookies or potato chips. But a dollar would only buy 250 calories of carrots. A dollar could buy almost 900 calories of soda… but only 170 calories of orange juice. It is so much cheaper to buy very processed, packaged foods instead of organic, healthy, natural foods.
HOW DOES THIS EVEN MAKE SENSE?
Michael Pollan, a professor at the University of California Berkley went on to ask that same question and discover the answer. (I highly recommend reading Feed Me*, this fantastic article on Pollan's works) He, like Dr. Drewnowski, discovered it was the fattest foods that is the cheapest. So if you only had $5, would you want to buy a head of lettuce and some carrots or a value meal at McDonalds?
This really opened my eyes to food prices and there is a tremendous difference between healthy and process foods. It is unfortunate that we have to pay so much more money for foods that are better for us but if you think about it, it takes a lot of work to harvest fruits and vegetables and farmers really do not get paid that much.
I guess the real question is, how much are you willing to pay for healthier foods? Is it worth it? What should these poor people do?
"According to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report released this month, 14.5 percent of American households--more than 17.2 million households, in all--were defined as "food insecure" last year. That means that poor households lacked sufficient money or other resources to obtain access to adequate food supplies. Among those with incomes near or below the poverty line, rates of food insecurity were said to be "substantially higher."
To think that, that this many American are considered "food insecure" but rather when you look around, you notice the lower-income families are generally considered fat. To me, this made no sense at all. If you were poor, how on earth would you be able to afford food. Researching further into this topic, I learned, if you were poor, you were not able to afford healthy food.
Upon reading about an experiment done by Dr. Adam Drewnowski, with a hypothetical dollar at the grocery store, he found you can buy well over 1,000 calories of cookies or potato chips. But a dollar would only buy 250 calories of carrots. A dollar could buy almost 900 calories of soda… but only 170 calories of orange juice. It is so much cheaper to buy very processed, packaged foods instead of organic, healthy, natural foods.
HOW DOES THIS EVEN MAKE SENSE?
Michael Pollan, a professor at the University of California Berkley went on to ask that same question and discover the answer. (I highly recommend reading Feed Me*, this fantastic article on Pollan's works) He, like Dr. Drewnowski, discovered it was the fattest foods that is the cheapest. So if you only had $5, would you want to buy a head of lettuce and some carrots or a value meal at McDonalds?
This really opened my eyes to food prices and there is a tremendous difference between healthy and process foods. It is unfortunate that we have to pay so much more money for foods that are better for us but if you think about it, it takes a lot of work to harvest fruits and vegetables and farmers really do not get paid that much.
I guess the real question is, how much are you willing to pay for healthier foods? Is it worth it? What should these poor people do?
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Always Remember, Never Forget
If you're like me, remembering what I happened yesterday seems light years away so remembering something that happened 10 years ago seems impossible. But September 11th. I can distinctly remember it being a sunny day over here in Southern California while I was figuring out what to wear. I thought it was odd that I could hear the TV on downstairs, my mom never watches TV and especially never in the morning.
I couldn't even fathom what I was seeing on TV. It just didn't make sense, how could planes possibly be crashing into the tallest buildings in New York City?? Even after my mom explained to me the little that she knew, my 11 year old brain just could not wrap around it. School that day was just full of confusion and eerie silence. No one knew what was going on, we were all scared for the people in NY, for all the families who didn't know where there loved ones were, and for the possibility of something happening in LA.
Ten years ago our generation was born. During the time we were learning about the ancient Mesopotamia, algebra and science, our innocent world got turned upside down. To think we didn't even have Facebook, or Twitter, or even blogs to hear about the news. Just cold hard facts live from the TV.
Yet in the darkness of the sky, our country pulled ourselves together. We found our strength through the tears over our lost loved ones. Regardless of our age, our nationality, our sex, our religion, our size, our color, we came together as a family. As one of my friends in the Navel Academy nicely put it: "America is a family. We argue with each other, we hurt each other occasionally, but if you mess with any one of us, you mess with all of us. Our ability to come together when it counts is our strength. God Bless America."
I would just like to take the time to thank all the brave men and women who risked their lives to protect us. To thank all the remarkable men and women on the two planes that crashed and Flight 93. To thank all the angels in heaven who had to die on this day.
Always Remember. Never Forget. 9/11 RIP.
I couldn't even fathom what I was seeing on TV. It just didn't make sense, how could planes possibly be crashing into the tallest buildings in New York City?? Even after my mom explained to me the little that she knew, my 11 year old brain just could not wrap around it. School that day was just full of confusion and eerie silence. No one knew what was going on, we were all scared for the people in NY, for all the families who didn't know where there loved ones were, and for the possibility of something happening in LA.
Ten years ago our generation was born. During the time we were learning about the ancient Mesopotamia, algebra and science, our innocent world got turned upside down. To think we didn't even have Facebook, or Twitter, or even blogs to hear about the news. Just cold hard facts live from the TV.
Yet in the darkness of the sky, our country pulled ourselves together. We found our strength through the tears over our lost loved ones. Regardless of our age, our nationality, our sex, our religion, our size, our color, we came together as a family. As one of my friends in the Navel Academy nicely put it: "America is a family. We argue with each other, we hurt each other occasionally, but if you mess with any one of us, you mess with all of us. Our ability to come together when it counts is our strength. God Bless America."
I would just like to take the time to thank all the brave men and women who risked their lives to protect us. To thank all the remarkable men and women on the two planes that crashed and Flight 93. To thank all the angels in heaven who had to die on this day.
Always Remember. Never Forget. 9/11 RIP.
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Today's Public Intellectual
During the Age of Enlightenment, the streets were filled with the works of intellectuals such as Sir Isaac Newton, John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and Voltaire. Even during a time where the literary rate was a mere 30 – 60% of males and only 14 – 27% of women, the thoughts, the ideas, the knowledge from these public intellectuals were still made known through public spheres, institutions and coffeehouses.
But over time, what ever happened to these public intellectuals and public spheres? Thanks to the age of technology and the evolution of education, the concept of the public sphere rapidly declined. No longer do we have to visit a coffeehouse to learn why the earth is round; we have Google for that. The ideas, the thoughts and the knowledge of these smart individuals never went away but the perception or even the need of the being a “public intellectual” disappeared.
Now a days, the term public intellectual is not a common household word. You may be asking, what even is a public intellectual? According to the MITcommunications forum a public intellectual today is, " Such a person is often a trained in a particular discipline, such as linguistics, biology, history, economics, literary criticism, and who is on the faculty of a college or university. When such a person decides to write and speak to a larger audience than their professional colleagues, he or she becomes a "public intellectual." The New Democratic Review adds on, “The measure of public intellectual work is not whether the people are listening, but whether they’re hearing things worth talking about.” The public intellectual has declined but I don’t believe is dead. They are still out there, they are just not the under the same definition.
A public intellectual is someone who uses his or her knowledge and findings to enlighten the public for the greater good. The public listens and respects these views and opinions because the intellectual has a background of expertise.
Muhammad Yunus is today’s public intellectual.
So Muhammad Yunus not only decided to just give to the poor, but he gave the poorest people of Bangladesh, specifically women, the opportunity to learn how to save and the ability to take out loans. This was how the Grameen Bank was formed. This micro-financing bank provided loans to the poor without any collateral. True to The New Democratic Review’s definition of a public intellectual, Yunus and the Grameen Bank’s works have been heard. They are currently now under investigation by the Bangladesh government for a controversy with it’s funding.
So how did the Grameen Bank even become introduced into the public sphere? Let’s start with Yunus’ academic background and how he became an intellectual.
Muhammad Yunus was born and raised in 1940 in Chittagong, Bangladesh. While studying at the Chittagong Collegiate School, he passed the matriculation examination, in which he secured the 16th position among 39,000 students in East Pakistan. He obtained both his Bachelor of Arts and his Masters degree in economics at Dhaka University. Although he did not leave Bangladesh until he earned his PhD at Vanderbilt University after receiving a Fulbright scholarship, he travelled to many other countries such as the West Indies and Canada as an active boy scout. Yunus began teaching as an assistant professor of economics at the Middle Tennessee State University until he moved back to Chittagong in 1971 where he became head of the economics department at Chittagong University.
In 1974 Bangladesh was hit with a terriblefamine. Yunus recalled, "We tried to ignore it, But then skeleton-like people began showing up in the capital, Dhaka. Soon the trickle became a flood. Hungry people were everywhere. Often they sat so still that one could not be sure whether they were alive or dead. They all looked alike: men, women, children. Old people looked like children, and children looked like old people.” Knowing that he could just not do anything, Yunus decided he had to do something.
Bangladesh has a population of approximately 160 million people but only 28% of those people live in an urban development. This means the rest of the Bangladesh population lives in rural areas, many without running water, electricity or ways of modern technology. While visiting the poorer villages around Chittagong during the famine, Yunus discovered the women of Jobra, a local village. These women, who made bamboo furniture as a living, had to take out extreme loans to buy the bamboo. All the money they had made would go right back into repaying the money loaners so they would end up with making nothing. Seeing these struggling women was where he came up with the idea of making tiny loaning to self-employment to help them make a living.
Muhammad Yunus’ first loan was $27USD out of his own pocket to the bamboo furniture-making ladies and that was the start of the Grameen Bank.
A public intellectual has the responsibility to enlighten others and influence them in a particular way.
Grameen Bank started out as an idea in the classroom after Yunus made that first loan to the bamboo furniture making ladies. Him and his students developed several plans but the bank loan idea quickly became the most successful. Grameen Bank is a community bank based off of microcredit that is known to make loans to impoverished people, mainly women, without collateral. These loans were extended to only the poorest of the poor. To obtain a loan, the families must demonstrate that they own less than half an acre of land. The borrowers are under strict discipline to ensure they pay back the loans and develop good credit. Yunus strongly believed in loaning to women (they made up 95% of the loaners) because according to him only 1% of borrowers in commercial banking represent women.
Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank have helped finance over 4.4 million families. Yes, over 4.4. million families have beaten the odds and climbed out of begging. Skeptics will say “so what?” it is just from a lot of donations. Well that would be over 4.7 billion dollars in donations, and with those kinds of donations, why wouldn’t we just beg for that kind of money to get the US out of debt? But what is so unique about this situation is these people are not only receiving their loans but they are paying the money back. This money in turn just goes back around to finance someone else. Yunus encouraged all borrowers to become savers to help the local capital for even more loans. Grameen Bank has an outstanding payback rate of 98%. Not a bad percentage coming from people who literally have nothing. These banks soon became self-sufficient and the community was able to help each other out.
The success of the Grameen Bank quickly became public and was soon heard around the world. Over 25 other countries have established similar institutions. In 2006 Muhammad and the Grameen Bank was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. According to Alfred Nobel’s will, the prize is awarded to the person who “...shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” This award must go to someone who is publically known and internationally acclaimed and respected. This honour would not have happened if the Grameen Bank had not have made such a huge impact on the world. This worldwide phenomenon would not have occurred without the brilliant mind of Muhammad Yumus. A small intellectual man from Bangladesh was heard all over the world. People like him prove that public intellectuals still exist. They are just harder to find but are certainly out there.
To learn more about Muhammad Yunus, read his book Creating A World Without Poverty
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)