CityBlogz Design Studio / Blog

I just finished reading a very interesting news article on the BBC News website entitled “Facing up to the US electorate“.

One thing I have noticed with the majority of Americans is that image is everything. The reason Gore lost the last election to Bush was that he did not seem like the average American. He seemed to speak down on people. Kind of like, I am so much smarter than everyone. Bush seemed so sincere and simple minded that he appealed to the more simple folk. It seems that a good portion of Americans are not well informed when it comes to politics and need the media and baby-kissing to sway their vote. Unfortunately, I see that same trend happening in this election.  I’m wondering if image was not a factor in the polls, how close would this race really be?

If you really want to know why, just pick up a copy of Michael Moore’s Farenheit 911 film documentary. The only thing that I agree with Bush on is his stance on anti-abortion. Bush has a large following in the Christian community because of Bush’s stance on anti-abortion. Many church leaders are urging their church members to vote for Bush. However, this is a wrong reason to vote for somebody. If you have kept up with Bush’s other records, you would find that Bush has done a lot of immoral things.  

His adminstration has been largely anti-environmentalist. Just look at how Bush pulled the United States out of the Kyoto Protocol. He has largely ignored minorities in America. Even the U.S. Comission on Civil Rights has assailed the Bush administration’s record on civil rights. Asian Americans should be afraid of internment camps should the US ever go to war with N. Korea according to the 80-20 Initiative. Kerry & Edwards condemned in writing Congressman Howard Coble, Chairman of House Subcommittee on Homeland Security who publicly justified on 2/3/2003 WWII internment of Japanese Americans. Bush & Cheney were SILENT, in the face of a huge protest from every component of the Asian American community. The Patriot Act, signed by Bush, has given the US government dictator-like powers over the American people. Is America becoming the new Hitler-led Germany? Who knows, but the environment suggests it. We must learn from history or history will repeat itself.

Make an informed vote. Do not vote solely with your religious beliefs and looks alone. If you did, you’d probably have the tendency to vote for Bush. But you guys are smarter than that, right?

I’m not a normally interested in politics, but here’s an article I found on the internet that raised my eye brows. It basically talks about how the Bush campaign on terror never really worked and in fact has created more terror attacks world wide than before September 11, 2001. An interesting excerpt from the article reads.

As nihilistic as it may be, al-Qaeda, from a business point of view, is a major success: three years after September 11, it is a global brand and a global movement. The Middle East, in this scenario, is just a regional base station. This global brand does not have much to do with Islam. But it has everything to do with the globalization of anti-imperialism. And the empire, whatever its definition, has its center in Washington. Bin Laden is laughing: Bush’s crusade has legitimized an obscure sect as a worldwide symbol of political revolt. How could bin Laden not vote for Bush?

Reference: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FI11Ak03.html

As I was looking around the internet for economic news, I ran across this interesting article and report from the Congressional Budget Office that says the tax burden fell for those making $1M, but increased for lower levels. If you read the article, it would explain why I (as a part of the middle class) was paying more in taxes each of the last two years. Now, how is President Bush going to explain that come November?  

Reference: http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/13/news/economy/election_taxes.reut/  

I’ve just finshed reading a discussion at lndcentral.com that focuses on the merits of offshore outsourcing.  Can you just imagine the heat this topic generates?  Anyway, this is what I had to say about it…

Offshoring to me is an ethical issue buried inside an economical issue. I believe that offshoring for the purpose of replacing current workers for cheaper workers is an unethical practice. I’ve taken business law classes and the class discussed this issue in depth. Although from an macro-economical point of view, offshoring has a positive effect for the global economy, the micro-economics view is definitely undesireable for the near term. As far as future benefits, I am a little pessemistic that it will achieve what the pro-offshoring people are saying. It may benefit the world economy only if all nations are at the same socio-economic level. In reality, I believe that it will end up bringing the standard of living down a few notches for all countries that engage in this practice. I like to think of it as a game of snakes and ladders. We offshore to India. They benefit and climb up the socio-economic ladder. The US immediately lands on a snake and goes down a few spots in the socio-economic ladder. Eventually, India catches up to the US and the cost to do business in their country gets too expensive and they offshore back to the US (which coincidentally has become a cheaper source of labor). We then climb back up, but not as high as we were before. They climb down a few notches and the spiral trend continues. Unless I am forgetting to consider other important factors, this trend just seems unhealthy. – Entire thread

The other point that I want to make is… looking to other countries for workers with skillsets that you cannot find in your own country is perfectly valid. However, replacing an entire workforce skillset that you already have in your country to another country’s workforce who is willing to work for 10 times less, seems unethical. Nevermind the scope of country to country. If this practice was done within this country, it would probably violate anti-trust laws.