How Our State Should Change: Problems with the Current State of Our Union: Taxation and Education

Where We Stand Today

Statism, Taxation and Education

A theme that seems to be taken for granted in America today is that we supposedly all want the same things. The essential idea that many people hold here is that the majority of the United States population has common interests; therefore, taxation is effective because it expresses the will of the majority. This is a Utopian (or perhaps fascistic) aspiration for society that has not yet been achieved. First, we must take into account how the poor, middle, and elite classes are extended the opportunity to get educated. Second, we must address what the different WE's want to do with tax dollars in our local communities, states and countries.

The opportunity to become a taxpaying citizen is not equally distributed in any society. Yes, Horatio Alger’s stories are moving, but there are Mexican day laborers who work harder than most Americans and make less than minimum wage. This makes the opportunity to pay for one's own healthcare very difficult. It appears once we make some coin, WE don't want to share revenue with others in the form of taxes for Education and Healthcare....well, fine. Create a fool proof system that guarantees everyone is contributing to the economic pie, and then pay for these essential needs. I am certain this will involve taking away some freedom of choice and liberty; all you have to do is look towards practical, real life examples of communism or fascism in the 20th century to understand this fact.

Often there exists a class of people (generally the ones with the power and wealth) that don't want to allow others to become well educated. This class often ends up keeping all the wealth and opportunities to themselves.

You will have a fight on your hands.

What will you do with that group, their political influence, and the power behind their wealth?

Education in many forms is necessary in order to compete for wealth creation opportunities. Unfortunately, when one becomes wealthy it is natural to become headstrong, conservative, protective, and over confident about how they created personal wealth.

Men kept women from education and wealth creation opportunities, Whites did this to Minorities and Jews, and the Upper class has done it to the lower classes since the beginning of time, and everyone has exercised their supposed inherent authority over youth in some manner or another.

Can we uncover this practice today? You have to dig deep into the legal framework of most societies to uncover institutionalized systemic practices that deny opportunities to others. Overt discrimination is no longer acceptable. Most developed societies can cover up systems that deny opportunity to groups with propaganda and anger over issues like illegal immigration. It is common to scapegoat a group and cover up the real truth. The wealthy can use their wealth to steer contracts and business opportunities in their direction and better educate their offspring to perpetuate a closed system. Often these people know exactly what they are doing, but the offspring have no clue until it is too late. Well...knowledge is power, and it is never too late to share.

Are we sharing with lazy people who are not contributing to the economic pie? This seems to be the dilemma we have with ourselves over issues like Healthcare. To calm the poorly informed citizenry, academics should get out of their Ivory Towers perhaps they can uncover who is contributing and who is undeserving of Healthcare from tax dollars.

The practice of financial aid is a perfect example of a way to reverse the continuation of a systemic practice that allows the wealthy to keep more of the wealth in the hands of a few families, as is affirmative action. While affirmative action may irritate some minority geniuses and conservative thinkers, it will produce people who can be voices for the problems in the system, i.e. a voice for the lack of opportunity in the system from education to job creation and in the work force. Financial aid gives opportunities to the less fortunate in education and brings fresh eyes into a system that has previously excluded them. It is not just about tax dollars, healthcare and education, but it is a fresh perspective on various unresolved issues.

Taxation originated as a process whereby the government would step in and redistribute money from the rich to the poor, as well as collecting a communal pot that could be used towards fulfilling societal desires. However, this money can get tied up or redirected by clever politicians and business leaders, and never fulfill its intended purpose: to create more opportunity for all citizens.

At some point back in history someone created the foundation that allows a family’s wealth to be created; this foundation may have been legal or illegal (whether it is via the free market and trade, slavery, or warfare). Once established their process of building wealth can be considered legitimate by the government for many years and generations. With this historical framework in mind, to take a snapshot today of and create policy that will affect future generations is irresponsible. It is not impossible to find many people from lower incomes with 4.0 GPA's, who have worked harder in school but will only make half as much at their job as you or I will someday.

Please feel free to comment below, but remember to be thoughtful and respectful.

(Because getting two points on a 10th grade extra credit blog assignment simply isn’t worth anyone’s time if you aren’t willing to sit down for a while, and think.)

Shackleton and Discovery

This is a picture of Ernest Shackleton's ship crashing in Antarctica. Shackleton was an explorer of the late 1800s and early 1900s. His goal was to become the first explorer, along with his crew, to cross Antarctica through it's central pole. During the expedition, their ship got stuck in the Antarctic ice. Two rescue ships were sent, but neither could get close enough to Discovery (the original ship) to free it from the ice. However, in february of 1904, some of the Antarctic ice began to break around Discovery, and Shackleton's ship was freed.

Robespierre Trial

I believe that Robespierre was one of the most horrendous people to live, therefore he was guilty. In the trial, we prove him to be guilty. The main reason he was such a terrible person was because he killed hundred of thousands of innocent people. Why would he think he has the power to do such a awful crime. Many people tried to stop him but when they did they were sent to the reign of terror. A man like Robespierre deserved to die and suffer because after all the killings he should!

This mad disgusts me.

Napoleon Trial

I personally thought that Napoleon was guilty, he took part in many terrible actions and decisions, the main being not signing the proclamation of Rights of Man. Being the King of France his duties were to make sure the people were happy, but by not signing this proclamation he angered almost all of France. Once he realized that he upset pretty much all of france he escaped. As the King you should NOT leave and tell no one where your going. He did not just leave he tried to escape which is a big no no for the king. He also believed that slavery was a good thing. Which i strongly disagree with. He thought oh slaves are great, you can use them if you want. But really slaves should not have been legal when he was king its terrible way of treating humans and all humans should be treated fairly. There were more points in the trial which proved him to be as guilty as they come in my mind.

Extra Credit Post

Today’s game that we played gave me a much better understanding of what life would be like in Europe in the 1800s. Luckily I was a single woman going into the Industrial Revolution because providing for just one person is hard enough. In order to eat decent food, have suitable clothing and a roof over one’s head, one must work all day ever day. In order for all of these things to be made possible for more than one person, then it is necessary for everyone in the family to work as well, including the children. I saw some families where children died due to the horrific working conditions, which as tragic as it was, in some ways benefitted the families due to now there was one less mouth to feed. I felt that the factory managers should have been a bit more lenient and conscientious of the wages they were paying their workers. Yes, I realize that they had to make livings for themselves and their families at home as well, however when it is at the point where families are going hungry or living on the streets then I feel as though something must be changed.

When it came time for the second round to commence, I felt as though I had a better idea of how to be successful. Although eating less may be harmful to my body, eating only potatoes saved me an amble amount of money. Also, as awful as it may sound, it was quite beneficial to me that Layla passed away early on for I would not be able to provide for the two of us. She would have been too little to work in a factory and I would have been unable to bring her with me to work. All in all, I feel as though it would have been extremely difficult living in the times that we are studying, and it is highly doubtful that I would be capable of living a successful life back then. Playing this game allowed me to grasp a deeper understanding of what life for people of that era was like, allowing me to gain more interest in the topic as we continue to study it.

Industrial Revolution

When reading about the Industrial Revolution, it was clear to see that it was a time of complete transformation. Change for the positive, that is, with new inventions being released constantly. The coal-fired steam engine, the spinning jenny, the power loom, and the cotton gin were just some of the many beneficial tools that added to the “culture of innovation.” (Page 528 Ways of the World)
However, the positive aspects of the Industrial Revolution were all that were stated in this section. It got me thinking if along with all of the beneficial effects this time had on society in the late 1700’s, if there was a downside as well. After some further research, I found that there were some negatives as well. According to Wikipedia along with various other websites such as Yahoo Answers, the main downsides of the Industrial Revolution were enclosure, pollution, child labor, and insanitary working quarters.
Enclosure took place where those of the wealthier class took money/land from those of a lower class, forming one larger and better lot, leaving the farmers jobless. The machines and factories caused pollution, which dirtied the once clean air. The factories needed more workers than just adults, and in turn hired children to work their machines. Due to the fact that they were hiring children, they were able to get away with paying them below minimum wage as well as having them work in extremely close and unsuitable environments.
As one can see, the Industrial Revolution brought both positives and negatives to society in the 1750s-1800s. The positives, however, strongly outweigh the negatives. All of the beneficial things the new inventions brought truly improved the way Europe matured as a whole, opening up countless doors to even more future opportunities. The negatives were in fact harmful in some ways, and it is understandable as to why some saw the Industrial Revolution as damaging to those who lived through it. Yet as a whole, I feel as though for the most part all that came with the Industrial Revolution was beneficial and “this continuous emergence of new techniques of production and the economic growth that they made possible mark the past 250 years as a distinct phase of human history.” (Page 528 Ways of the World)

Marx + Smith Handout

I think that the outcomes of the Industrial Revolution, at first, only helped improve the lives of the wealthy. The rich people took advantage of the poor, and left them to live on unlivable wages. The rich were the only people who could afford luxuries, and other inventions that came out of the revolution.

However, over time, inventions and other luxuries began to decrease in price. Workers gained more rights, as they formed unions and America moved towards social equality for all.
I agree with Marx that people were unequal during this era, however, I also agree with Smith that capitalism can be successful, as long as we keep those with capital in check.

The Industrial Revolution was a horrible part of America's history: it was full of oppression, discrimination, manipulation, and greed. However, it did give birth to economic success, revolutionary inventions, and global development in the long run.

Karl Marx

I thought the view of Karl Marx on the Industrial Revolution was refreshing. Instead of just viewing it as a time of technological advancement and urbanization, he saw it from the point of view of the workers. He felt that they were being treated unfairly and were being exploited. He recognized that there were two classes: the workers selling their labor, and the capitalists who were buying it. He saw that since workers were making the product that the factory workers were selling, the factory workers were paying the workers as little money as possible in order to make the largest profit. they were getting rich and sitting back, while the workers were spending long grueling days in the factory and being paid next to nothing for it. Marx said that the machine spread the working ability of the family, since it took away the value of strength. Workers just needed to be able to repeat the same motions all day, and the machines did the rest. this made it so that the man was paid less, and therefore the rest of the family was forced into working in order to earn enough money to support the family. even children were forced to work since strength and intelligence were not needed. He felt that the use of machines and lower wages to workers made the factory owners boatload of money, while the rest of society suffered. He believed it was time for the working class to revolt and rule society, Making everyone equal. It was socialism

Industrial Rev Activity

I personally thought that the activity was not well done and poorly organized. The main problem I had with the activity was that someone could go to the beach for one star of luxury for only a dollar but they could go the opera for 30 dollars and only get 3 luxury stars. This messed up the whole activity by the end because everyone ended up with like 20 luxury stars because they spent all their money on walks to the beach. Also another problem was that the citizens had no idea how much money their wages should be and so the owners could charge us for really low wages and they would profit a lot of money and we would have no money for use to spend. I guess that send us the right message about the corrupt owners but I still had a problem with the pricings so if this was changed then the activity would be beneficial and helpful.

Adam Smith

Adam Smith was a philosopher that wrote the wealth of the nations. He contained many beliefs that I'm going to investigate in this blog. One of the things that I want to talk about is the idea that people should be divided into 3 classes. These classes were those who have land, those who have money, and those who have labor. I don't think this was a proper way for society to be divided in two because of the fact that some people could be in all 3 of these classes. This would create tension and inequality between the citizens of this government. For example, a wealthy farmer that owned his own land and worked his own land.

The difference between communism, socialism, and capitalism

Although having socialist countries are widley assumed to be communist this is not always the case. Russia, despite having a long history of being communist, now has a president yet is still considered socialist. What socialist according to dictionary.com means is "system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole." HOwever is later associates socialism as the stage after a capitalist economy and before having communism. Communism and socialism are quite simmilar, they both believe in a sharing of recourses. Communism has the government be totalitarian and therefore can be no rebellion. Many in Enlgand during the time of the industrial revolution were pulling for a socialist economy so that there was not such a huge gap between the rich and the poor. In a communist country the government would take the factory and assign its people to work there. Treating them all as equal and having not one person be higher than another. The only way a communist country can work well is if the government is almost perfect. It cannot have people in it that are greedy otherwise then it will turn into the people of a country dying and having a very few government officials that are well off. The problem usually with communism (such as in north korea/dprk) is that the government is too corrupt and since it has all the power destorys itself. Socialism is not so specific in how the government will act. Although the government might still own the factory, there could be promotions as to who is charge among the factory owners. SOcialism is a more reasonable form of communism. Captialism is every man for himself. You have to work very hard in a capitalist society and if you are stuck at the bottom your whole life will be awful. That is what happened during the industrial revolution.

Industrial Revolution: Positive/Negative?

I think that the Industrial Revolution helped the higher more wealthy classes and people but it didn't help the poorer lower classes. I think that the higher classes noticed that the lower classes were poor and in need of money. When they realized this they hired more people from the families to work on the machines and then they paid each individual a smaller wage. That way the factory workers could produce maybe 3 times more than they were and then they would only have to pay a little more than before. Then the poorer people felt that they were making more because the prices in potatoes and other goods were lowered because of all the work that was being supplied. There were so many workers working to make money that many of the products doubled and tripled in production. Therefore the poorer people were able to afford a little more than they could before. This did help lower class a little because of the price drop but in relation to the wealthy people, the high class people were coming out way wealthier than the poor lower class. From the documents, the lower class was gaining some things like education, but it started slow so it wasn't real effective in the beginning compared to education now and where it can take you. But it was a step in the right direction. There were many points in these documents that mentioned the beatings and injuries inflicted on the laborers. This is obviously not very positive for the working class.

I think that Smith was right about how the "masters" or industrialists or factory owners were using the laborers because the laborers need to work to get money to survive, and the factory owners could have actually lived without workers, but the factory owners preferred workers so that they could produce more inventory and therefore make more money. I think that Marx was right about the point that the laborers should ideally make a time limit and set boundaries for when they work because otherwise they would be selling themselves and their freedom to the factory owners, and then essentially become slaves. The problem is that the laborers need the money to live and support their family and so they aren't always given the option of choosing how long they are to be employed. So I think that Marx had a good point and it makes sense but it wasn't exactly realistic for all of the laborers.

Extra Credit Game Reflection

The game was a very good was to experience what the lower classes were going through during the industrial revolution. At first i was barely scraping by. I had a family of three, and all of us had to work long, hard hours in order to earn the minimum wage paid by the factory owners. I could only afford the cheapest food, and a small room with no extra money for any form of luxury. I survived the first round without going into debt, and having 5.5 points left over. I was able to accumulate more money than my neighbors because i only had to feed 2 adults and one kid, who didn't eat as much. I was also able to work out a deal with a factory worked to pay me 6 points a round instead of four, and i forced my wife and kid to work, so i had three streams of income, so we all made enough money to feed ourselves. The second round was much better. the prices of everything were lowered a good amount, so i managed to save up 20 points by the end of the round which i was able to spend on luxuries, like meat, and walks on the beach. The game really demonstrated the unfair situation the factory owners were in. They were paying us bare minimum, and working us all day on grueling and tedious tasks. They were making thousands of times more than we all were. They all came off with more than 1000 points after round two, and we barely were making 20. I would have supported Marx because he was supported unions and fairer treatment of the working class. He also felt that workers deserved more power in society.

Game Reflection

From the beginning my family did not do very well. By drawing a 4 and starting off with less money that pretty much every one else, I was already struggling. In the first round, I made $5 more and my wife made $4. I had four kids that could have worked, too, but the boss of the textile factory refused to hire them for any pay whatsoever. I'm not sure why the industrialists were reluctant to hire more people because it seems like they would just make more money. So after the first round, where I didn't but anything except for potatoes and clothes for my family, I was $4 in debt. Even if the debt went away, I wouldn't have a place to live or the slightest thought of a luxury item. 

In the second round, the industrialists were slightly more willing to hire workers, and all of my family members got jobs. The pay slightly increased for my wife and I, and, surprisingly, our four kids received the same wages as my wife and I. So when the round was over I had the opportunity to buy a room and go to the beach a couple times. I was also able to ay off our debt from the previous round. Even though our family was started to be able to live a normal life, it was still annoying how much money the industrialists hoarded. While 6 people in my family brought home around $30 for their hard work, the industrialists were bringing home hundreds and hundreds of dollars for just sitting and watching everyone else do their work. It seems like the average person in society would live a much better and healthier life if their bosses just weren't so greedy.

Reflection of the Game

The game helped me realize how easy it was for the factory owners. I didn't have to go through the pressure of barely having any money and barely getting by. I made so much profit while my workers got almost nothing. After Round 2 I had made almost $1,300 in profit while my workers made $6 each. It really showed me how hard everyone else had to work. I remember Marjory having to kill one of her sons because she couldn't afford food for him. If that was what life was like then that is horrible. Luckily I was a very nice factory owner so at the end of the day I gave all my money/m&m's to my workers. Something the wealthy owners should have done to help out there workers. I generally had a lot of fun during the game. At times it was a little hectic having everyone fighting over jobs and going crazy over m&m's but it really showed us how little money people had to spend and you could even say helped set us up a little bit more for our trip for community service on Monday.

Extra Credit Post: Reflection of Game

In the game, I was in debt the first round because the Industrialist wouldn't take my kids to work for them. They are both old enough but one of the factories wanted more older women rather than children. So in the first round I didn't earn enough money. Then in the second round prices went down and the Industrialist took my whole family. They paid me more than they had in the previous round but I think that there was some sort of change and because they also made more. But after the second round I was out of debt. I didn't buy any luxury items because I wanted to make sure that I would have enough money for the next round. I am not sure if that was the right choice but my family is just going to have to be happy with the "poor" options. I think that this game was kind of confusing and I missed the beginning of class because of a doctors appointment which may have included some information or explanation. I think that if we go over the different times and why each thing happened and what shifts were made to cause these different effects, then it will be really helpful in learning what happened and what it was like.

Extra Credit Game blog

I did not do very well in this game. It was very hard to persuade the head workers to employ the members of you family, because of the enormity of people who needed work. It was a very big mistake to have six kids to support, and as a result I could not afford any money. I was not able to support the very basics of survival requirement. And it would be very many rounds before I could even toy with the idea of buying a luxury item, for after even two rounds I was close to $15 in debt. Life must have been ridiculous for the laboring class.

Extra Credit blog: Reflection on the Game

Extra Credit blog: Reflect on the game we played:

What happened to your family?

At first, I was living alone in Manchester. I was making enough money to survive on basic necessities, but I was by no means living in luxury. However, later on I decided to bring my six family members over from Africa. I chose to do this because the amount of money they had the potential to earn, was much greater than the costs of extra food, housing, clothing, and other necessities. By the end of round 2, my family was able to afford extremely luxurious things, such as tailored clothes and expensive foods. However, we chose to continue to live modestly. The only luxuries we purchased were regular visits to the beach.

What did you feel about the Industrialists?

The industrialists were pretty greedy: they paid us as little as they could get away with, and worked us like dogs in the coal mines and factories. At one point there were rumors floating around that people wanted to create unions, but no one was ever organized enough to actually start one.

How were you able to get jobs?

I was able to get a job by speaking with the industrialists. I ended up finding a job at the coal mine, while my wife and kids became tailors.

What made life better the second round?

In the second round, the costs of everything decreased. Because I was spending less money on things like food, and a home, I was able to afford some of the pricier items. Also, in the second round I brought my family over from Africa. Because I spent no money on them and forced them to work for the industrialists, I was able to make a lot of money off of them.

Would you have followed Marx?

I would have supported Marx because he wanted to give workers more power in society. He believed in the formation of unions, and was against the exploitation of the lower class. Also, Marx wanted the proletariat to be in control of the government, rather than the King or the upper class. Marx would have significantly improved my livelihood during this era.

Creative Story About My Character's Move to Manchester, My 'Roots'.

My name is !Xobile. I am a 6'6, 250 pound, 18 year old man from Africa. I have a devoted wife named Amara, and five beautiful children.

A few weeks ago, I was minding my own business, searching through the forest for some watermelons to eat...when suddenly I saw some white men in the distance. Never having seen a white man before, I, being the brave tribesman that I am, decided to investigate.

Bad idea.

Next thing I knew, I had woken up here, in chains, on this pitch black ship cellar. Weeks later, and I still have no idea why I was kidnapped, or what the white men want from me. Every once in a while the white man brings me some nasty food, which I always spit back in his face. I do not eat the food of the enemy. I miss the succulent chicken of Africa, and the sweet purple juices of the grapevine...but I would rather starve to death, than show any kind of gratitude towards my kidnappers.

Yesterday, the white men took me up to the top of the ship, and brought out a long, thick whip. I think they were trying to ask me a question, but I could not understand them at first. Then they began gesturing at me, pointing at my chest and calling me, 'Seymour.' I shook my head in disapproval, and shouted my true name, !Xobile! They don't understand that my name is sacred to me; it has been passed down generation to generation, all the way from our first ancestors. I refused to answer to the white man's call, 'Seymour Cox'. I did not sleep at all that night, as the constant pains of the whip kept me writhing in my chains for many hours.

I have begun to learn a little bit of the white man's tongue over the past few weeks. Whenever I am allowed to visit top the top level of the ship, I always hear white men talking about Manchester. Whenever they do, their eyes get all wide, and excited looking. I'm not sure what Manchester is, but if its as truly wonderful as they say it is, then maybe things are finally looking up for me.
----------------------------------------------------------
This story is vaguely based off of the TV/book series, 'Roots'.

Robespierre Trial- My Personal Opinion

Due to the fact that I was assigned to defend Napoleon on the trial that took place in class, by default I was going against Robespierre. I felt as though both arguments provided were strong, and I was impressed with what the opposing side had to say. However when it comes to my personal opinion on the matter, I feel as though Napoleon’s actions truly betrayed the ideals of the Enlightenment, more so than Robespierre’s did. Although I was assigned to play a witness acting as an expert on the Napoleonic code, while researching the topic, it was clear to see the Napoleon’s definition of equality did not meet those of the French. Of the almost 2,500 statements included in the Napoleonic code, there were sections devoted to equality such as Book 1, Title 1, Chapter 1- Of the Enjoyment of Civil Rights, which in statement #8 states- Every Frenchman shall enjoy civil rights. As our textbook implies, the French Enlightenment emphasizes reason, toleration, natural law, equality, and promotes the ideas of change and progress. As shown by the evidence provided by prosecution of Napoleon, he did not follow these ideals of the Enlightenment. Yes, he did help the people of France and his leadership skills are quite respectable, however I feel as though his constant eagerness to gain more power strayed from the French ideals. In the textbook, it states how in the enlightenment personal discoveries were made by both scientists and philosophers. These individual discoveries were sometimes successful and sometimes failed, however they in some way benefitted the community. An example of this was when French writer Voltaire questioned the outlook of the Scientific Revolution, which in turn triggered the expansion of deism. Breakthroughs like these were what made the French Enlightenment unique, and although in the trial I was assigned to defend that Napoleon followed these ideals, my personal opinion states otherwise. I personally feel as though he was too self absorbed and focused more on making his mark on France as opposed to influencing “the growing global awareness of its major thinkers.” (Page 485, Ways of the World textbook)