Wednesday, October 30, 2013

The Debt Ceiling Dilemma

By Elli Ramlow

            The debt ceiling is one of the many economic reasons the government shut down a few weeks ago. While the government is now reopened and the debt ceiling has been raised it is still a pertinent and significant issue. The government’s debt ceiling is the amount the government is allowed to be in debt—the total amount of money they owe other countries. Because the government is very close to reaching the ceiling price, a solution must be derived. As of now the solution has been to raise the debt ceiling, allowing the government to continue spending money they don’t have, however this is a short run solution and does virtually no benefit in the long run economy. A common misconception is that if the price ceiling is not raised, our government will be forced to declare bankruptcy. However, “the U.S. Constitution forbids defaulting on the debt” (2) per the 14th amendment section 4. This means that once the government reaches the debt ceiling price they will have to budget their money, or find funds elsewhere to continue spending at the rate they are. However we now that the solution has already been decided and that it is to raise the price ceiling.
            While both sides are at blame for this issue, the Republican Party has been the recipient of the majority of blame by the American people as “an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found a 22-point difference between those inclined to blame Republicans in Congress for their handling of budget negotiations and those blaming the president” (2). The blame, however, should be placed on the entire government system and their coherent inability to properly budget. Each year the government spends ridiculous amounts of money frivolously, that they simply do not have. The fact that they are raising a debt ceiling that is already in the trillions of dollars is preposterous. Furthermore, they are blind to the fact that this will not solve the problem in the long run. It is a short run economics solution that is not sustainable. It is not reasonable to continuously raise a ceiling because that obliterates the purpose of the original ceiling and its function.  Instead of spiraling further into debt the government should look to “reform entitlements because that is where about three-quarters of the spending goes; principally to social security, Medicare, and Medicaid” (1).  This would be a long run solution because it increases the income of the government indirectly by reducing spending therefore allotting more funds to be spent elsewhere. It is a sustainable and realistic long run solution unlike raising the price ceiling.
            To put things into perspective let us take a look at the amount of money the government is currently spending; “before the debt ceiling was raised this month, it stood at $16.69 trillion” (3). A country that is over $16 trillion in debt should be looking to alleviate this debt through budgeting, not increase it. Another key issue is the fact that “the current US debt to GDP ratio is roughly 106.8 percent, meaning that the amount the federal government owes to its creditors exceeds its GDP” (3). This is extremely concerning because it means that although we have a thriving economy, our debt still outweighs it. 
            In turn, our debt hurts the global economy because the money we owe is mostly owed to other countries. Therefore allowing our debt to grow has negative consequences on not only the American economy but also the global economy.  Therefore it is the government’s duty to lessen their current debt instead of raising the debt ceiling because of its overall effect. While raising the ceiling is an effective solution in the short run it proves to become a negative consequence to the long run. The government must reevaluate their spending and create a realistic budget that can provide relief from this immense debt. 

The Debt Limit Explained:

Works Cited:

Nike Dominates the Athletic Market

By Emma Jansen
The athletic industry is a very competitive and mature market. The leaders of this industry are very well established; leaders like Nike have made the industry what it is today, but long-time competitors like K-Swiss have struggled to keep their brands alive. This cutthroat environment has hindered the entry of new competitors and has benefited those that remain.
                Founded in 1971, Nike Inc. has sure come a long way dominating the athletic market consisting of over 15 major brands. Its brand reputation is the reason for its success and progress. Not only is it growing at a strong pace in the U.S., but its popularity has spread to multiple foreign countries as well, thus increasing its reputation even more.
It has sponsored many high-profile athletes, sports teams, and events all over the world such as the Olympics, and has become one of the most recognized global symbols. Because it has this access to international opportunities, it gives room for greater revenue expansion, thus increasing its total revenue.
                To get a better sense of just how far Nike has come over the years, below is a chart that emphasizes its total revenue over the past decade and you can see its steady increase reaching close to 25,000 [million or 25 billion] this year.

According to Forbes Magazine, Nike’s apparel sales grew 12.3% during 2010 to 2012, which was higher than the growth rate seen for Adidas, Puma or even Asics. It is expected that Nike’s market share in the global sports apparel market will grow from 4.9% in 2012 to 6.5% in 2019. This further supports how nothing and no one can hold Nike back from success.
The question is how has Nike really been so successful? According to an analysis of the Nike Inc., economies of scale contributes to this because in order to be above the top competitors, companies must be able to compete at all levels such as reasonable pricing, efficient production, and high product quality. Though Nike’s prices are not cheap and their sale items compare to other brands’ regular price items, it is the quality of the products, the style of the products, and the name on the products that reel the customers in. Because the demand for its products is so high, Nike has reason to up their prices and supply. Besides, if people are willing to pay a higher price for their products, then there isn’t any need to lower them because the more money they can bring in the better it is for the future success of their corporation; they then have the ability to put more money into developing new and innovative products that will capture the audiences’ attention time and time again.  
Advertising has increased demand for Nike products as well. By incorporating popular athletes and role models, they are able to grab a lot of attention. That’s the thing, Nike does not discriminate, but they rather expose their availability of products and services to all citizens, thus not putting a limit on their consumers.  
Nike continues to satisfy clients and customers wants and needs as well as go above and beyond other brands so that they can be at the top of the market. Nike has exceeded the break-even point and has succeeded in reaching their profit maximum. Despite a slight decline from prior years, Nike continues to have the greatest market share in the U.S. branded athletic market. While Nike’s market share is still in the lead, it is expected to increase with new products.

YouTube Links
Works Cited
"How Nike Will Dominate Emerging Markets." How Nike Will Dominate Emerging Markets. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. <>.
"Social Media Sport Brands: Nike versus Adidas." quintly. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. <>.
Speculations, Great. "Why Nike Will Outpace The Sports Apparel Market's Growth." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 13 May 2013. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. <>.
"Strategic Analysis of Nike, Inc." Strategic Analysis of Nike, Inc. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2013. <>.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

The Demands for Television

By: Megan Rolfson

      Within the last 100 years America and other countries have spent a vast amount of money on televisions. When the TV first came out, it was a privilege for homes to have and now it’s practically a necessity. Due to this “necessity” even with economic drops America has had in the last decade the demand for TV’s have gone up.

Television companies such as Toshiba, Vizio, LG, and many other well known brands, have redesigned their television models. With the newly developed models they have become higher quality and more efficient, which makes the price go up. Even with a rise in price people of America still are purchasing the product because it’s a social norm to have this piece of technology in homes.

The acting industry has also helped this rise in the demand for televisions. With channels, shows, and movies people have become in essence dependent on them and they form a habitual attachment to that specific program.

Other technologies of this era help create a desire and need for a television such as Xboxes, PS2’s and PS3’S, and the Wii. With kids now a day’s, these game systems cannot be used without a TV and what better way to play video games than on a 70 inch LCD flat screen?

Lastly, the people of America are a bit more egoistical than perhaps other areas of the world or America in the past. It’s important to some people be modern with all belongings including the one thing that is in almost every home. 

The American Dream

By: Katlyn Gahan

What is the American Dream? Many have defined it, each a little bit different than the last. James Truslow Adams defines it as living in “ a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement”, or otherwise, having a better life than their parents. Since the beginning of America, many have come here to have a better life, to succeed, and that holds true today. But is this possible for everyone anymore?
Now, with this having been said, is the American dream really still possible. Many in fact, have argued that it is no longer attainable.That no matter how hard we try, everyone cannot achieve the American dream. That class mobility is becoming more and more rigid, and one cannot always reach their full potential. According to New York Times writer, Bob Herbert argues that wherever you choose to look -- at the economy and jobs, the public schools, the budget deficits, the nonstop warfare overseas -- you'll see a country in sad shape” that the “standards of living are declining.” This shows that the outlook for many is in fact more grim than that of their parents. More people are feeling the gripes of poverty, and resorting to inferior goods. Competition is becoming so extreme between certain companies, that it is making it harder and harder for people to get rich, and live a life of greater prosperity.
In the article “The American Dream, RIP?”, the difficulty to make a large amount of money in life is shown  by the statistic “ An elite 10-15% of Americans will have the brains and self-discipline to master tomorrow’s technology and extract profit from it”. This leaves the rest 85-90% of Americans behind, unable to attain their American dream. The United States are technologically moving so fast that many are unable to keep up. Lets take for example the Ipod, made by Apple. The first Ipod was made only in 2001, and has adapted and changed a countless amount of times since. It has evolved from a bulky rectangle only available to play music, to the current Ipod, which has a touch screen and has many other functions such as apps and games. This shows how fast Apple has changed its products in such a fast paced world. This rate of change is one of the major reasons that the American dream cannot be achieved by many, always a step behind.
With the possibility to succeed, and prosper in life shrinking, its is important that we do something to preserve this dream, which has been around for centuries. One thing that could be done to help this, would be tax cuts for small buisnesses, trying to stay afloat, and less regulation to help the private companies succeed.  Where this may not be the entire answer, it is undoubtable that something needs to be done to give the future generations brighter futures, in the land of opportunity.

In this video, the relation between the movie “The Great Gatsby” are shown, like the desire for material goods, and then shows the change over time of the American dream, and later a contradictory opinion to the American dream.

Gender gap?

By Garrett Shilbilski

Have you ever been treated unfairly or not wanted? Well men don’t feel left out; women on the other hand, you are left out at least in America. America may seem like the place of opportunity for all but it’s not, women are left out in America. The U.S. has a larger gender gap than 22 other countries including Germany, Ireland, Nicaragua and Cuba, according to a World.  The land of opportunity, not so much for women. Only 18 percent of women make up the house of representatives. This is because people favor men over women in the United States, that’s also why we haven’t had a female president.  In Iceland scores the highest in the world for political empowerment of women. Female heads of state led the country for 20 out of the last 50 years. Women also make up about 40% of the country's parliament. When you think about it Men have a greater opportunity to advance in the business world that is because women have to fight a glass ceiling. Sure there are women CEO’s but there are more men CEO’s than women because it of the glass ceiling. Places like Cuba and Nicaragua also have a far greater percentage of women serving in their legislatures than in the United States which is shocking. Well women in America have kids and need to stay home take of the children so this is why the United States it lower in each category. Which also affects the reason why there is a glass ceiling in the workforce. The United States does give some workers the right to 12 weeks off from work after the birth of a child, but pay is not guaranteed.
        People would disagree with this article, women are given the same opportunities.  According to Census 2000, 281.4 million people were counted in the United States — 143.4 million of whom were female and 138.1 million male. So why wasn't the U.S. even close to the top? While the country scores high on economic opportunity and education for women, it scores poorly on political empowerment. This shows that there are more women than males in the country, it’s just that people prefer a male in charge, to make big decisions so that women don’t have to take the blame if something goes wrong. Also because women have kids they don’t go into the workforce like men do. If they wait on having kids Women can become CEO just look at the women from Yahoo she is successful because she waited to have kids which we are seeing more today.
The United States have come a long way from where we were from allowing women to vote in the US, women received the right to vote with the passing of the 19th amendment on August 18, 1920. They first voted in National Elections in 1923. If we keep it up women will might become president one day. Gender equality will keep increasing if we stay on track and keep giving women opportunities.

Work Cited

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Obama Care

By Tyler Burke

          Imagine when you were a kid, outside playing, when you fall and break your arm.  Now most of our parents would end up taking us to the doctor right away, but for some going to the doctor or any place medically related is not such a luxury. For people without health insurance, which happens to be about 44 million Americans, they would be paying the medical bill all out of pocket. And for those with inadequate medical insurance, which is about 38 million Americans, they would be paying most of that bill out of pocket. As most know, a broken arm, torn ligament, kidney transplant are all extremely expensive. Circumstances like this are what fueled the creation of Obama Care or Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). So, despite common opinion, Obama Care is the best thing for America.

          Obama Care is the government’s attempt to help provide affordable health insurance in order to reduce growth of health care spending in the U.S. The reason Obama pushed to pass this policy is the amount of money the U.S. was spending on Health Care expenditures. As seen in the graph, the percent of the GDP spent on health care in the U.S. has increased linearly since 1960. Obama Care is designed to
cost more right now, but decrease health care costs in the future.

          Despite the government attempting to give health care to all, many people still do not want Obama Care. One of the concerns that plague Americans minds is the raising of taxes. But, in fact, many won’t pay a dime more in taxes. The higher earners and large employers will be responsible for majority of the taxes. Actually, Obama Care includes the biggest middle class tax cut to health insurance in the history of the U.S.

Though there are cons to Obama Care, there are also many benefits. For example, it eliminates discrimination from the Health Care system. A woman cannot be charged more just because she is a woman anymore. Plus, a person cannot be dropped because they become ill. It also allows people to stay on their parents insurance plans until age 26, and 82% of uninsured adults will qualify for free or low
cost insurance. On top of that it gives small businesses tax credits for up to 50% of their employees’ health insurance premium costs.

          The Obama Care plan is circulated around a supply and demand system. Before the Obama Care, Health Insurance companies were setting equilibrium price fairly high. The prices were so high that many people could not afford health insurance. With Obama Care, everyone will be required to have a health insurance plan. With this plan, the supply curve will shift to the right because now the supply of policies that cost less money has increased from this act. While the demand curve remains the same because people still want the same amount of insurance. These shifts the supply curve results in a lower equilibrium price.

          In the end, though highly criticized, Obama Care is better for the majority of America, America just doesn’t know it yet. The problem is America is afraid of change, without knowing what the change is. They here about the myths of Obama Care without taking the time to research it. I used to believe Obama Care was going to hurt the middle class but instead it helps the entire country except the extremely wealthy. But
they can afford it. Overall, Obama Care is the best thing for America.

Video Link:

"AEIdeas." AEIdeas. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.

 "Health Care Crisis." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.

"Health Reform Explained Video: "Health Reform Hits Main Street"" YouTube. YouTube,
17 Sept. 2010. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.

"ObamaCare Facts: Affordable Care Act, Health Insurance Marketplace." ObamaCare
Facts: Affordable Care Act, Health Insurance Marketplace. N.p., n.d. Web. 22
Oct. 2013.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Helium Shortage

By Jesse Beutler

Do you remember when you were little and you use to take in the helium out of your birthday balloons? Well it happens to be that your grandchildren may not be able to manipulate their voice the way you use to. Consequently the helium on planet Earth is evaporating through our atmosphere as well as our government not being able to produce any from the reserves we have now so we are on a shortage, although Russia seems to have plenty of it as of now, we still have little remaining in American helium reservoirs.

You might be asking “is helium really that important?” In all actuality it is! We use helium on a regular basis to weld fiber optic technology, to make superconducting magnets for MRI scanners, manufacture electronics like TV’s and cell phones. So to answer your question, yes, helium really is that important.

It is because of this importance that there is a heavy demand for the product, but with a dwindling supply prices will rise due to a shortage. However the situation could be worse; during the space race and the development of nuclear technologies helium was being used a great deal and less was available to businesses.

However here in the now with the government being shutdown helium may be overlooked with the federal budget and the reserves that America does have may not be running much longer. If they do continue to run though that does mean more jobs for citizens and by 2019 when the reserve is empty it will have gained an estimated revenue of 6.1 billion dollars.

If America does not refund these reserves then the only access the world will have for helium is in Russia.

Truth be told I find it troublesome that we may become dependent on Russia one of our greatest national enemies if not our greatest; for Helium, which America would be in trouble without. Especially with a growing demand of 5% since the year 2000 Russia could definitely benefit from their reserves. So who’s to say that Russia will even comply with providing the necessary materials for American health care? Truth is they probably won’t; considering they’ve even supplied [Syria] help against America. This is why in the mean time America must take advantage of the reservoirs available now so that there is revenue to be earned and jobs to be given while there’s still a chance.

In the next decade Helium demand will have only grown 2.5% and with supplies dwindling prices will rise drastically so the world is in search of substitutes. The substitute will allow for the same process or job to be accomplished with another material that for America’s sake will be cheaper. Just from the research alone there will be jobs growing to find the replacement for helium once it’s gone. Once America has the material then the world will be dependent on the material as well and the American economy will benefit.

For now though the American government needs to decide whether or not they’re going to refund the reserves. Do you think it would be beneficial for America to refund the reserves?


By Kenzie Plehn
        A couple times recently, the lottery has been very high. When this happens, more people buy tickets, trying to win some amount of the lottery. When nobody wins for a certain time, it keeps building and building up until someone finally wins the jackpot Powerball. When more people begin to buy tickets, the amount that someone could win increases, and people’s chances of actually winning decrease.
        Nearly 20% of the American population purchases lottery tickets. The majority of people that continue to buy and try to win are poor and uneducated. The poor people buy tickets in hopes of winning. Their hopelessness is covered by hope because they spend money to have a very slim chance of winning money. In 2012, $65.5 billion worth of lottery tickets were purchased by Americans in 2012. That is 10% more than 2011.
        What happens with all that money? Yes, someone wins it, but after the government deducts some. Nearly 25% of that money goes to state governments for schools, construction, and, ironically, helping people that have gambling problems. And the rest of the money? Whoever ends up winning the lottery will most likely need a lawyer, accountant, financial planner, and a new phone number. The people’s name and town will go public but people should not share much more. People will constantly call for business investments, loans, and ridiculously unrealistic charges that don’t really cost that much.
        One of the Powerball winners won $220 million in 2005. They seemed to have blown some of their money. He spent $63,000 on a vacation for himself and 17 friends. Did he even have 17 friends he would consider taking before he won the lottery? Everything besides that seems like something a lottery winner would spend money on maybe just not that much on it. People who win the lottery should not just blow it all right away.
        The odd of matching all 5 numbers and the Powerball number (Grand prize) is 1 in 175,223,510. To even make $4 the odds are still 1 in 55 by matching the Powerball and 1 in 111 for the Powerball and a number.
        The more tickets that are sold, the higher the chance that someone wins, obviously. The chart below shows the probability of a winner with the total amount of tickets sold. Chances of you winning even $4 which would only be $1.75 with only one ticket purchased after it’s all said and done? Still very very very slim. Spending more money on more tickets doesn’t improve your chances of winning more money; it just improves your chances of losing. So if you like losing, buying lottery tickets is for you. Who knows, you might win (but lose) someday. If you really wanted to be (un)successful at the lottery, you could go out and buy 35 tickets with a different Powerball number for each that would guarantee you win $4 but really lose money even though you won some. May the odds be rarely in your favor.

Microfinance Loans: A Risky Business?

By Tanner Schoenike

            Everyone knows the age-old concept of a loan, someone (usually a bank) will give somebody else some money, in order to buy something, or invest in something that will increase their income or enjoyment over the long run, and the banks will do this because of interest rates, the concept that the longer the money takes to repay, the more that the person will end up having to repay. One of these normal loans could have an interest rate anywhere from around 2% to upwards of 6% or 7% compounded interest, per year. 1
            But, other than these normal, everyday loans, comes the idea of microfinance loans, incredibly small loans, with incredibly high interest rates. These loans are used primarily in poorer countries, like those in Africa or the Middle East. And, the purpose of these can be used for small investments (by our standards) to buy something like an ox, a pig, a cart, a solar panel, or a seed press. The idea is very similar to that of marginal utility, the first of a product will provide a lot of extra utility to a person; and for a very poor person, a single ox could provide milk, the ability to plow a field, and the ability to pull a cart of goods to market. 2
            The essential idea is that for very poor people, a small loan could potentially drastically increase their income. But, the idea of microloans requires the bank to spread out a fair amount of money over a lot of people, and the more people they service, the harder it is to keep track of the people, the harder it is to collect debts and such. And, by the fact that they are very poor, if they buy an ox with a loan in order to increase their income, but then the ox dies a week after they get it; they are left with no way to pay back the loan, so it becomes a very risky business for bankers. So, in order to compensate for the risks they take, they drastically increase the interest rates on loans, as high as 70% interest per year, and with an average interest rate of above 30%.3

           However solid this thought train works in concept, the truth remains quite different, as through several studies, it has been shown that microloans are repaid in much higher rates, and much more consistently than loans in the US, despite the higher interest rates. The microloans issued from one of the largest microcredit institutions, Grameen Bank, were examined for their delinquency rates – what is essentially the rate at which the loans are repaid properly – and found to be anywhere from less than 1% delinquency to nearly 3.5% delinquency, while the US loans – ranging in areas from residential to credit cards to agricultural loans – were found to have delinquency rates as low as 1%, but also having rates over 10%. 45
            The consistency with which the rates are repaid in poorer countries, by poorer people is still far superior to that of people in the US; even though they have much higher interest rates. So, the reasoning for which microloans are compounding interest at a much higher rate is not sound, in fact, the reasoning should point to higher interest rates for normal, US-bound loans. Microcredit is not a risky business; it is a safer business than US credit.

Obamacare- Good or bad?

By Olivia Hinkle

Currently, America is going through some major changes when it comes to healthcare. Starting this winter, Obamacare is said to make it easier for millions of Americans without health insurance to receive it. Although this may be the case for some Americans, Obamacare also has several downfalls that many people seem to be looking past. With this new healthcare plan, workers are going to figure that if it is so easy to receive Obamacare, they won’t need to be concerned with changing jobs and leaving the workforce while worrying about losing their access to health insurance.
Obamacare has the potential to decrease the amount of people in the workforce which could severely hurt the economy. As the Congressional Budget Office noted in a report months before Obamacare had been passed, “Increasing the availability of health insurance that is not related to employment could lead more people to retire before age 65 or choose not to work at younger ages.”  Workers stay in bad jobs for fear of losing insurance, and with the new insurance plan, workers will no longer have this worry which will lead them to leave where they are currently employed. As stated on, “freed from the search for health insurance, people might do better and more productive work. Economists call the current phenomenon “job lock”. People decline to take more appropriate job opportunities or start their own businesses because they do not wish to lose their current health coverage. “
The cost of the Affordable Care Act- this cost will become most apparent when it begins to reduce middle and low-income families wages, as well as an increase in income tax. Although Obama promised not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year, these taxes are surely to break the promise. According to, “Taxes will be raised in 2013 on one million individuals on incomes exceeding $200,000 and four million couples filing jointly on incomes exceeding $250,000. They would pay a total of 2.35% (up from 1.45%) Medicare taxes on income above the threshold. They will also pay an additional 3.8% Medicare taxes.”

In the video below, Frank Newport shares that 50% of Americans would like to see Congress scaled back or repeal the Affordable Care Act, compared to the 38% that would like to see Congress either expand or keep the Affordable Care Act as it is.


With all of the tax increases, American’s will be spending more money on tax, and less money on anything else that could potentially help to improve our economy. Overall, Obamacare’s negatives seem to highly outweigh the positives. The tax hikes are surely to slow economic growth, reduce overall employment and suppress wages.


"LIVE: Apple Reveals New iPads."Business Insider. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. <>.

"Americans More Likely to Feel Negative Than Positive Toward the Affordable Care Act." Americans More Likely to Feel Negative Than Positive Toward the Affordable Care Act. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. <>.

Those Relying on the Government, Wake Up!

By: Alex Mueller

Money money money. It’s the trendy thing these days, but when isn’t it? It supports our wants, our needs, and it pays for our clothes, food, drinks, fun, and some might even say it pays for their happiness. Psychologically, much of society may need a reality check. A couple weeks ago, it was announced that several sectors of the government have officially shut down due to a disagreement in congress, and the further debt we are falling into. In other words, the government has a goal that is failing to be met. Conversation within the congress room were to come to a consensus regarding the raise of the federal debt ceiling. However, failure to do so resulted in the shutdown. So what does that mean, and what happens if we don’t make a decision? Here is a short video to increase the understanding of how this all fell apart over the years, and what’s in it for us now.

<iframe width="480" height="290" scrolling="no" src="" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The Now
This month, the government is to come to a consensus and a final decision as to whether the federal debt ceiling will be raised or not. If not, many benefits may stop. The result of that will put many low-income and unemployed individuals into a crisis, as they will have to start paying their bills. Furthermore, many benefits that these people are receiving will be delayed, or even omitted for a period of time.

The Future
Those who are receiving unemployment checks, expecting food stamps to be distributed, or receiving a Social Security check, who knows how long that will last anymore? So far, it is expected that these benefits will be delayed due to the fact that the government has shut down, as Social Security checks and food stamps have already been postponed four days out from their initial distribution dates this month.  Bipartisan Policy Center, who does a lot of detailed analysis of finances, say that veterans benefits are due November 1st, but may be pushed back about two weeks. However, the situation will only get worse from there if the government doesn’t make the decision in the matter of a couple of days. Obama’s administration has yet to decide how bad it is going to get. Not only that, it has also been announced that a couple major parts of the government that are still open, may not be able to operate too much longer due to insufficient funds.

Some questions are answered about the potential future of our economy, but there are still some left. How much risk are unemployed individuals facing? There isn’t much time to take advantage of this sort of thing anymore, as in the future it may be required to have a job in order to make it by. Money is becoming more scarce by the second and it is becoming less and less possible to sustain the population to satisfy wants and needs. Also, years and years from now when we grow older, what will the status of Social Security be? Existing or non-existing? Looking at the rate of our economy right now and the debt ceiling not being touched, its existence is at some sort of risk for our future. There isn’t much certainty at the moment; however America may end as we know it, and life-altering decisions and sacrifices will have to be made.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...