I am by no means a brilliant economist. In fact, I scraped my way through MicroEconomics with a "C" in college. But there are two economic issues that I have opinions about in this election: taxes and regulation.
Taxes
John McCain claims to be against increased taxes... there's even a link on the main page of his website called "Don't Tax Me Joe" (referring, of course, to the now infamous Joe the Plumber). McCain voted for the Bush tax cuts, and he's already said he wants to continue those cuts and expand them as much as possible. The economic theory behind this is that keeping money in the hands of the people encourages business growth and creates new opportunities, while also providing incentives for people to move up in the world.
From a purely economic standpoint, that sounds great. After all, it's easy to decry Obama's tax increases for the wealthy as socialist attempts to spread the wealth around, and what all-American citizen would want that?!?
Well, I would.
You see, I'm looking at the economy from the other side, as someone who's struggling to make ends meet. I have a great education (BA in Sociology and MA.Ed. in Elementary Education) and a job with a great company (teacher in Nike's Child Development Programs). I perform a service that is valuable for our society, a service that I am uniquely trained to do. I take care of people's most precious commodity - their children. Yet there are still months when I have a difficult time making ends meet.
For years before starting my current job, I had no health insurance because none of my employers offered it and I couldn't afford my own policy on my meager income. I've only recently started saving for retirement, and I know I'm not saving as much as I'll actually need (but it's a start). I live in an apartment, and - even in the current "buyer's market" - owning a home seems to be a long way away for me. And I would love to be a mom, but no matter how much I squeeze my budget, I can't afford to have a child anytime soon.
If I'm having a tough time on my salary, I can't imagine how people who make less than me are faring. I did the math... a married couple in which each person makes minimum wage takes home even less money than me - much less! And that's in Oregon, where the state-mandated minimum wage is much higher than in the rest of the country. Somebody's got to do those jobs. We all eat in the restaurants where the bussers and dishwashers make minimum wage. We all load our children onto school buses where the drivers make less than a living wage. We all eat produce that was harvested by people making dismal pay. We all rely on working class people every day. It doesn't make sense to me to create an economy in which a large portion of the population does honest work and still can't live a satisfying life.
The common rhetoric is "Well, if they'd gotten an education and made different choices, they could have worked their way to the top, too." But that makes no sense. In order for our economy to operate, somebody's always got to be at the bottom. We couldn't all "pull ourselves up by our boot straps." Who would wash the dishes, drive the school buses, harvest our vegetables, care for our children while we're at work?
So if a slight increase in taxes on the wealthiest people and corporations (for example, Obama is proposing a three-percent increase on any business's profit above $250,000 per year) will allow for the funding of social programs to help the vast majority of us who will never make that much money in our lifetimes, than I support it.
The gap between the poor and the wealthy in America is ridiculous. There is no reason for someone to make millions of dollars a year, not when there are entire families living in one-bedroom apartments and wondering whether they should pay their heating bill or their car payment that month. Here's an example: according to the SEC, the CEO of Exxon-Mobil made over $16 million in 2007. Of course, that's not much for a company whose net profits totaled over $40 billion that same year. If you do the math, I would have to work 444 years to equal the amount Rex Tillerson made in one year. And Exxon-Mobil brings in the same amount of profit each SECOND that I earn in gross income every two weeks. I don't mind people doing well for themselves, but that's kind of nuts.
Regulation
The idea behind de-regulation is that when we leave free markets alone, they regulate themselves. And they probably do... over time. But the most compelling argument for regulation that I can think of involves the things that happen in the short run while the markets are balancing themselves out.
By their very nature, capitalist markets are driven solely by profit - corporations are designed to do whatever will make the most money. So ethical concerns become a factor only when they impact the bottom line. Here's an example to illustrate the point:
A toy company comes up with a bright new idea for a brilliant baby toy. They shop around for the least expensive means to produce and distribute the new toy in order to maximize its profit potential. Let's say that in this case, that means producing the toy in mass quantities in a large factory overseas. The factory is staffed and managed externally, so the original toy company has very little direct insight into the production process - but that's okay... after all, this particular factory was the cheapest bidder. They must be doing something right.
Only it turns out that the production was so cheap because it relied on poor quality materials, ones that hadn't been fully tested or approved for use in children's toys.
Eventually, the market will self-regulate. Children will begin to get sick and recalls will be necessary. The toy company will lose market share because parents will be afraid to buy their toys, so they'll switch to higher-cost factories or institute stronger internal oversight measures. They'll make sure their new toys don't contain the dangerous materials that caused the original problem, and they'll advertise like crazy to compensate for the decrease in sales. They won't do any of this because it's the morally correct thing to do - they'll do it to regain their market share and keep their profit rolling in.
But how many children got sick before this happened? And could stronger government regulation have prevented the problem in the first place by requiring oversight of all materials used in the manufacturing process? And what about the other problems that arise when cutting costs is the highest priority? Like dismal wages and working conditions in third-world factories... how will the market self-regulate those things if Americans never really find out about them?
Markets are designed around self-interest and profit maximization. I don't have a problem with that. But there are certain instances when the bigger picture needs to be considered... ethical issues, health issues, and other areas where the potential cost is just too high for any self-respecting society to pay. That's where regulators step in - to do what markets themselves are unwilling or unable to do.
Like Bush before him, McCain has always supported deregulation or worked to undermine the existing regulatory laws. They believe in giving corporations and the market free reign, something that I'm just not comfortable with.
While regulation may not be the biggest economic issue this country is dealing with right now, it does serve as a marker for the overall economic philosophies of the two candidates. And on this issue, like many others, Barack Obama has my vote.
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Why I'm Voting for Barack Obama, Part 2: Education
I am a teacher. I was put on this planet to make a difference in the lives of children, and I'm very good at it. Therefore, I can't help but place a high emphasis on educational policies when I'm deciding who to vote for in any public election. Fortunately for me, there are big differences between the educational policies of Barack Obama and John McCain.
John McCain's Policies
John McCain's educational policy is centered around school choice, a topic that I wrote my undergraduate thesis about. He uses the evidence gathered under No Child Left Behind to argue that many schools are failing, and that we must give the children in those schools vouchers to allow them to choose better schools. It sounds reasonable, but here's the problem: this plan doesn't address the reasons why those schools are failing in the first place, and it doesn't do anything to improve the situation for those schools in the long run.
I've worked in some of those failing schools, and I can tell you why they're failing. My first year of teaching was spent in an urban environment outside Washington, DC. I had no teaching degree or experience, but they were so desperate for teachers that they'd hire anyone with a Bachelor's Degree. I was hired three days before school started and received almost no training. I was paid a daily wage that added up to about $19,000 per year with no benefits. I had twenty-nine fourth graders in my class, several of whom had violent histories and had already been in trouble with the law. We only had 25 desks, and there were only 15 copies of each textbook. At the beginning of the year, only six of my students were reading at a third grade level - the average reading level in my class was first grade. Is it a surprise that my students did not meet state or federal benchmarks on their standardized test that March? Should I, as a teacher, be penalized for that? Isn't there a minimum base line of quality that should be offered in education if we expect it to be successful? And shouldn't that base line of quality be available in every school, rather than giving students vouchers to seek out the schools that are offering it?
Aside from leaving behind the schools that are already failing, vouchers have one other problem: they only work if they are universally applied and if all families take advantage of them. The reality is that the voucher amounts proposed by McCain (and all the other republican school choice proposals I've ever looked at) aren't enough to cover the full costs of tuition at private schools, so they don't really offer poor families a valid choice. They also do not take into account challenging logistic factors like transportation. And they don't adequately inform or educate parents about their choices or the benefits of vouchers. So here's what we'll see: the families that are already involved in their children's education and have adequate resources will pull their children out of underperforming schools and take advantage of the voucher system, while the families who are already struggling the most will stay where they are... and the funding will follow the children who are leaving the underperforming schools... and the gap will grow bigger... and innocent children will continue to fall farther behind as their schools go even further downhill.
I'm not okay with that. I am a stand for ALL the schools in America having the resources they need to succeed and for ALL children receiving an excellent education FOR FREE and in their NEIGHBORHOOD'S PUBLIC SCHOOL. That was the original dream of public education in America... let's not give up on it yet.
John McCain does talk about resources for public schools, but he primarily reallocates money that is currently being spent. So every improvement he suggests in one area (like increased professional development for teachers) will necessarily remove funding from another area where it is currently being used. When bills to increase funding for education have come up in the past, John McCain has consistently voted against them. The only actual increase in funds proposed by the McCain campaign during this election is earmarked for increased access to virtual learning programs. These are basically online courses that have made a difference for some children, but should never be a replacement for quality public schools.
Barack Obama's Policies
There are several pieces to Obama's educational policies that I love. These don't represent his entire set of educational policies, just the parts that convinced me to vote for him this year.
1. Obama proposes increased funding for schools to help them address the gaps in performance that have been identified by testing under No Child Left Behind. I'm not always a fan of increased spending, but education is one area where we need to put our money where our mouth is. Remember: 29 students, 25 desks, 15 textbooks... that just doesn't add up.
2. Obama supports quality after-school programs that will help students in underperforming schools catch up, which gives them a chance to break the cycle that has trapped them for years. After all, how does a fourth grader who's reading at a first grade level have any hope of passing the standardized tests that face him for years to come. He's too far behind to catch up during regular school hours, and the strain placed on teachers takes their time and attention away from the students who are performing at or above grade level, causing them to eventually fall behind, as well.
3. Under his comprehensive "Zero to Five" plan, Obama supports early childhood initiatives that will support children and their families from the very beginning. As a preschool teacher, I know what a difference early childhood education makes for a child. There is a ton of research supporting the idea that critical brain development happens during the first two years of a child's life. So funding elementary schools is not enough if children are showing up at school without the neurological connections necessary to be successful learners. Reaching families earlier and providing them with the education and resources to be better parents from the beginning works... if you want proof, take a look at the Harlem Children's Zone project founded by Geoffrey Canada at http://www.hcz.org/.
4. Obama wants to make college more affordable, and he's created an innovative plan to do that while also benefitting the rest of the nation. He wants to create an Opportunity Tax Credit worth $4000 in exchange for community service. It's brilliant... similar to Clinton's Americorps program, which led to over 62 million hours of service in 2005 (the year for which statistics are available at Americorps's website).
Please take a minute to think about these eduational policies and the impact they will have on children across America... all children, not just your child.
John McCain's Policies
John McCain's educational policy is centered around school choice, a topic that I wrote my undergraduate thesis about. He uses the evidence gathered under No Child Left Behind to argue that many schools are failing, and that we must give the children in those schools vouchers to allow them to choose better schools. It sounds reasonable, but here's the problem: this plan doesn't address the reasons why those schools are failing in the first place, and it doesn't do anything to improve the situation for those schools in the long run.
I've worked in some of those failing schools, and I can tell you why they're failing. My first year of teaching was spent in an urban environment outside Washington, DC. I had no teaching degree or experience, but they were so desperate for teachers that they'd hire anyone with a Bachelor's Degree. I was hired three days before school started and received almost no training. I was paid a daily wage that added up to about $19,000 per year with no benefits. I had twenty-nine fourth graders in my class, several of whom had violent histories and had already been in trouble with the law. We only had 25 desks, and there were only 15 copies of each textbook. At the beginning of the year, only six of my students were reading at a third grade level - the average reading level in my class was first grade. Is it a surprise that my students did not meet state or federal benchmarks on their standardized test that March? Should I, as a teacher, be penalized for that? Isn't there a minimum base line of quality that should be offered in education if we expect it to be successful? And shouldn't that base line of quality be available in every school, rather than giving students vouchers to seek out the schools that are offering it?
Aside from leaving behind the schools that are already failing, vouchers have one other problem: they only work if they are universally applied and if all families take advantage of them. The reality is that the voucher amounts proposed by McCain (and all the other republican school choice proposals I've ever looked at) aren't enough to cover the full costs of tuition at private schools, so they don't really offer poor families a valid choice. They also do not take into account challenging logistic factors like transportation. And they don't adequately inform or educate parents about their choices or the benefits of vouchers. So here's what we'll see: the families that are already involved in their children's education and have adequate resources will pull their children out of underperforming schools and take advantage of the voucher system, while the families who are already struggling the most will stay where they are... and the funding will follow the children who are leaving the underperforming schools... and the gap will grow bigger... and innocent children will continue to fall farther behind as their schools go even further downhill.
I'm not okay with that. I am a stand for ALL the schools in America having the resources they need to succeed and for ALL children receiving an excellent education FOR FREE and in their NEIGHBORHOOD'S PUBLIC SCHOOL. That was the original dream of public education in America... let's not give up on it yet.
John McCain does talk about resources for public schools, but he primarily reallocates money that is currently being spent. So every improvement he suggests in one area (like increased professional development for teachers) will necessarily remove funding from another area where it is currently being used. When bills to increase funding for education have come up in the past, John McCain has consistently voted against them. The only actual increase in funds proposed by the McCain campaign during this election is earmarked for increased access to virtual learning programs. These are basically online courses that have made a difference for some children, but should never be a replacement for quality public schools.
Barack Obama's Policies
There are several pieces to Obama's educational policies that I love. These don't represent his entire set of educational policies, just the parts that convinced me to vote for him this year.
1. Obama proposes increased funding for schools to help them address the gaps in performance that have been identified by testing under No Child Left Behind. I'm not always a fan of increased spending, but education is one area where we need to put our money where our mouth is. Remember: 29 students, 25 desks, 15 textbooks... that just doesn't add up.
2. Obama supports quality after-school programs that will help students in underperforming schools catch up, which gives them a chance to break the cycle that has trapped them for years. After all, how does a fourth grader who's reading at a first grade level have any hope of passing the standardized tests that face him for years to come. He's too far behind to catch up during regular school hours, and the strain placed on teachers takes their time and attention away from the students who are performing at or above grade level, causing them to eventually fall behind, as well.
3. Under his comprehensive "Zero to Five" plan, Obama supports early childhood initiatives that will support children and their families from the very beginning. As a preschool teacher, I know what a difference early childhood education makes for a child. There is a ton of research supporting the idea that critical brain development happens during the first two years of a child's life. So funding elementary schools is not enough if children are showing up at school without the neurological connections necessary to be successful learners. Reaching families earlier and providing them with the education and resources to be better parents from the beginning works... if you want proof, take a look at the Harlem Children's Zone project founded by Geoffrey Canada at http://www.hcz.org/.
4. Obama wants to make college more affordable, and he's created an innovative plan to do that while also benefitting the rest of the nation. He wants to create an Opportunity Tax Credit worth $4000 in exchange for community service. It's brilliant... similar to Clinton's Americorps program, which led to over 62 million hours of service in 2005 (the year for which statistics are available at Americorps's website).
Please take a minute to think about these eduational policies and the impact they will have on children across America... all children, not just your child.
Why I'm Voting for Barack Obama, Part 1: Introduction
News stories over the past few days have (understandably) been dominated by coverage of the two main candidates for the presidency: Barack Obama and John McCain. I've heard pundits and analysts giving out assessments of the candidates' strategies, I've heard the candidates themselves repeating their chosen mantras over and over again, and I've heard interviews with ordinary people talking about how they'll decide who gets their vote.
Sadly, through all of this, I haven't heard much focus on the things that really matter: the issues. People keep talking about whether or not John McCain is a hero because of his time as a POW during Vietnam, or whether or not Barack Obama's charisma will make him a better leader, or whether or not Americans are ready to elect a black man to the presidency... and so on and so forth.
But not many people are talking about the issues... the bare bones choices that the next president will make, choices that will dramatically impact all of our daily lives as national policies are shaped over the next four years. The personal characteristics of the people behind those policies matter very little to me - I want to know what they're going to DO if they're elected.
So I'm going to post several blogs discussing the policies that matter to me in this campaign. In each case, I agree with Barack Obama's policies and I disagree with John McCain's policies. I'll be sharing why, but (hopefully) in a respectful manner. I understand that not everyone will agree with me, and I honor the fact that everyone has to grapple with these issues for themselves. But I do hope people are doing just that - grappling with the issues. I hope they're not voting because of a gut feeling, or a candidate's public persona (which was probably designed by publicists and handlers for public consumption, anyway), or age or race or any of the other personal details that won't have much of an impact on the real issues that are facing our nation.
I realize these blogs might have made more of an impact earlier in the campaign, since many people have already cast their votes or made their decisions. But I also know that the issues I'm discussing here aren't going anywhere... and it's important for all of us to consider where we stand on each of them. So I believe these posts will remain relevant long after the presidential election - regardless of who wins - as we all consider the direction this country should head in the years to come.
*** Note: I'm only going to use information about the candidates' policies that I get from their own websites and promotional material. I won't be listening to their assessments of each other's policies or the opinions of third parties, since those can be easily skewed. I'm getting the descriptions of their opinions and policies "straight from the horse's mouth."
Sadly, through all of this, I haven't heard much focus on the things that really matter: the issues. People keep talking about whether or not John McCain is a hero because of his time as a POW during Vietnam, or whether or not Barack Obama's charisma will make him a better leader, or whether or not Americans are ready to elect a black man to the presidency... and so on and so forth.
But not many people are talking about the issues... the bare bones choices that the next president will make, choices that will dramatically impact all of our daily lives as national policies are shaped over the next four years. The personal characteristics of the people behind those policies matter very little to me - I want to know what they're going to DO if they're elected.
So I'm going to post several blogs discussing the policies that matter to me in this campaign. In each case, I agree with Barack Obama's policies and I disagree with John McCain's policies. I'll be sharing why, but (hopefully) in a respectful manner. I understand that not everyone will agree with me, and I honor the fact that everyone has to grapple with these issues for themselves. But I do hope people are doing just that - grappling with the issues. I hope they're not voting because of a gut feeling, or a candidate's public persona (which was probably designed by publicists and handlers for public consumption, anyway), or age or race or any of the other personal details that won't have much of an impact on the real issues that are facing our nation.
I realize these blogs might have made more of an impact earlier in the campaign, since many people have already cast their votes or made their decisions. But I also know that the issues I'm discussing here aren't going anywhere... and it's important for all of us to consider where we stand on each of them. So I believe these posts will remain relevant long after the presidential election - regardless of who wins - as we all consider the direction this country should head in the years to come.
*** Note: I'm only going to use information about the candidates' policies that I get from their own websites and promotional material. I won't be listening to their assessments of each other's policies or the opinions of third parties, since those can be easily skewed. I'm getting the descriptions of their opinions and policies "straight from the horse's mouth."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
