The argument for much needed reform surrounding income inequality in the US, as well as the rest of the world, is stronger than ever. With 1% of people in the world having 35.6% of all of the private wealth, it is abundantly clear that there is a growing dilemma, and many people have proposed solutions. This is all well and good in telling us what we can do to curb inequality and what works best, but solely answering the questions of what and how, does not capture the entire picture.
Why should we be concerned with battling the rise of income inequality? Why becomes ones kryptonite in an argument for the disadvantaged in the world. This is because we are often only able to fall back on the moral argument. The argument that says that its just not right. That people don't deserve to live in poverty, that people deserve enough food on the table and a house over their head.
Unfortunately, in politics, the moral or ethical argument does not always carry the weight it should. Now one can complain about this, or one can find the answer to why. Why should the rich and the poor, the well off and the disadvantaged, strive for more income equality?
On the contrary to popular thought, more equal societies tend to generate better lives. Depression rates are higher among developed countries, such as the U.S. The developed world uproots the very reality from which we came. Society was founded off of community, off of a TRIBE. The Native Americans understood that together we are stronger than any one could ever be alone. The Native Americans grasped the true nature of what it means to be vulnerable, to depend on others, and the strength that living like this creates. The developed world has created a bourgeoisie where white picket fences part the very ground we live on, isolating us from our neighbors, our community. The rich and the well off do not need other people because there is nothing too much for them to handle. In other words, when everything is laid in front of you, no collective community effort is needed to deal with adversity. The developed world does not need a tribe. In the end, this alienates them from the rest of society and raises depression rates, creates a dysfunctional society, and social exclusion. Do you think it is a coincidence that the increased gap in income inequality positively correlates to the rise in terrorist activity, and possibly the most powerful terrorist cell we have yet to see in ISIS? This increase in terrorist participation is because society continues to socially exclude people from society. Or how about the fact that cop killings look like the ones from Compton that were first televised? Cops used to patrol and protect their neighbor hoods. Now the destroy and ravage our communities. What about the inflamed racism in the U.S, deemed as backlash against the Obama administration? The division in this country due to the growing disparity in income inequality is destroying and dividing our social beings and the social structures we understand as community and society. This growing gap is negatively affecting everyone rich and poor, because it is eroding our TRIBE.
Addressing income inequality then becomes about mental health and social adhesion to create a better, happier and safer place to live in. It is not just morally right, but beneficial to everyone. The rich, the poor and everyone in between.
Hillary Clinton. A women, a mother, a wife, a politician, a fighter. So many qualities define a women who has been in the trenches fighting for equality, making grass root change from before she met Bill and is now running for president to continue her movement. Her diligent, incremental, pragmatic effects on the world, on this country haven't gone unnoticed. In fact, the Republican's incessant attacks on her only show the envy and fear have for her, women that can create so much change. Her efforts have been blindsided by what is becoming quite the uphill battle with all the attacks she is facing. So this piece is to defend her. To defend a women who's progressive acts are undeniable.
It all begins with Benghazi. We can start out here by explaining that Republican house majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, has come out and said that the republican party directly created a committee to take down Hillary by inflating Benghazi rumors and creating ongoing investigations. What began as original discontent with Obama as president and the republican's belief that he is soft when it comes to foreign policy has lead to an attack on Clinton that has been and will continue to be proven wrong.
Next, the email scandal was derived from the Benghazi attacks to pull Hillary down in the media. It is important to understand that John Kerry is actually the first Secretary of State to NOT have a private email used for political matters. So why expose all of Hillary's emails? Because they want to take her down. By they I mean the republican party and the elites that the Bernie or Bust groups seem to think she is cuddled up tight with. Yes Hillary was not as careful as she should have been, yes she has put herself in a situation where she can be attacked, but by no means is she corrupt.
Lastly, the DNC wikileaks were not her fault. She already saw to it that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was released from the convention and that she would step down heading the DNC, and there is nothing showing her looking for help in the nomination process or abusing the system.
Hillary has an unprecedented track record, standing up for children by: being a Staff attorney for Children's Defense Fund, Co-founding Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, and led a task force that reformed Arkansas's education system.
She improved healthcare in here years by: being Instrumental in the passage of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, Promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses, Successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health, and Worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War (now recognized as Gulf War Syndrome)
Furthermore, she built a political resume: Served on five Senate committees:
-Committee on Budget (2001–2002)
-Committee on Armed Services (2003–2009)
-Committee on Environment and Public Works (2001–2009)
-Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (2001–2009)
-Special Committee on Aging.
It is clear that Hillary has been a grass roots activists. So it comes down to the resume behind a lifetime dedicated towards bettering the world, and the task forces generated by the republican party to halt her efforts. What will you choose?
Make sure you take part in the poll below!
In a text message on Friday afternoon, Hillary announced Tim Kaine as VP for the White House. Looks like those who voted in the latest poles were wrong!
1. What should we look for in a VP pick?
2. What does this VP pick reflect in Hillary and her Campaign?
3. What will happen next with Warren and Sanders?
1. Vice Presidents are often inconsequential when it comes to having an actual impact. It wasn't until Joe Biden that the VP actually had much of an impact on the president and his decision making. Typically, VPs are used for the votes they would generates in swing states or in other ways. So, in assessing a VP choice we should assess where they are from, their race, and their views. Overall determining what these contribute to the nominee.
2. This is a safe VP pick for Hillary Clinton. In other words, Tim Kaine reflects Clintons desire for a solid running mate with extensive experience in both domestic and foreign affairs, as well as a successful political career after serving as mayor and governor of Virginia, which most importantly, is a key state in coming election that will help Clinton's chances. On paper, Kaine is great! However, he doesn't generate any specific buzz, exciting progressive democrats or bring in more minority votes like picking Tom Perez or Julian Castro might. That being said, this is a smart and calculated move by Hillary for two reasons: She wants to add security and trust to her ticket (something that has hurt her along the road to the white house), and she wants to use the powerful capabilities of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren in other ways.
3. Sanders and Warren's political drive, popularity, and progressive intentions will be better served in other ways. Warren will remain in the Senate so that she can work up to the Senate committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs where she has more control over legislation being passed, while Sanders will be appointed secretary of labor.
What do you think? Leave a comment below or to the right and make sure to vote in the most recent poll on the VP pick.
Above is an article looking at a discussion with Robert Greenstein and his thoughts on poverty in the US. Though the entire article is beneficial, i took a couple things away that i believe are tremendously important.
Income inequality is a disease that plagues the US. Proven, immediate remedies include raising the minimum wage and progressive taxation of the wealthy, while long term solutions includes restructuring education (Peterson, 2016). I further explanations and literature backing these arguments in my paper attached below. That being said, the article above reaches new depths, providing solutions to poverty and the growing gap in inequality within the US.
First, Universal Child Allowances. This would give money to parents who have children below the poverty threshold. I am proud to say, as a Colorado Native, that Michael Bennett (D-CO) has proposed a bill that would give many families with children close to $1,000. This acts as a sort of subsidy for families in need.
Second, something discussed by Robert Greenstein is addressing housing unaffordability. This was brought to my attention by my Grandpa after reading my inequality paper, Richard Peterson (an individual who has fought poverty and discrimination in the housing industry through real estate and currently addressing similar issues through encouraging and creating more employee owned companies). This is an important idea that is often overlooked, after-all, the way to riches is through the ownership of property. Greensteins solution for unafordable housing includes a system that adds more section 8 rental vouchers, and expands the low-income housing tax credit. While these are proposals for the future that are important, he also mentions current steps being taken by progressive leaders today, including President Obama's proposal to put $11 billion dollars towards programs to end family homelessness by 2020.
What becomes clear in this piece is that we are taking measures to close the gap between the rich and the poor, to bring back the middle class, and to end poverty. But we must, we can, and we will do more.
Whether you still #FeelTheBern or find yourself #WithHer, yesterday the healing process began between the two candidates as they take their progressive platforms to Philly in a final push for the White house. There is no doubting the importance of Sanders and his endorsement of Hillary, however, it is equally important that supporters of the two sides begin to reconcile as well. Understand that we can be united by blue and that even though Trump and other republicans will look to pit us against each other, we must be diligent in mending bridges so we can create progressive policies that represent those in need. We are in a phenomenal place as liberals. With 7 senate seats up for grabs we could see one of the biggest liberal movements we have seen in a long time after finding back to back democratic leaderships in the White House as well.