Minimum Wage Increase, Necessity or Economic Mistake?

  The debate over minimum wage has been an on-going one for years.  People argue that with so many Americans living under the poverty line, it is inevitable to bring the average salary up to meet the rising cost of living, while others believe that this would only put more American citizens out of work.  This controversial issue, caught my attention because of its impact not only on the people, and businesses affected, but also government spending.

  The author argues that "higher wages translate to higher spending, and less need for government subsidies" this is good for us as a whole as it will cause less of our citizens to demand as much from the government, which allows for more to be spent on education, to create a well based country.  The downside of this from the perspective of the other side is that labor costs are approximately two-thirds of the product costs.  This majority spending on employees would have to be decreased in some way if labor wages went up.  But as the author states, the costs are down compared to the corporate profits.  This means that businesses wouldn't be losing to much profit if the wages were raised slightly, and the increase would be more spending of their employees spreading the wealth, that eventually comes back to them.

  The author’s comments on McDonald's attempt to make suggestions for living on their minimum wage salary show how laughable it is to try to get by on this payment.  There is no room for food, gas, or other necessities to survive, even accounting for having a second job after your 40 hour work week there.  His comparison to the country with the lowest unemployment rate in the developed world, show a direct comparison to our inability to survive by ourselves on minimum wage and their ability to thrive even dealing with the new labor costs.

  This comparison using the different studies of the living arrangements for both our current minimum wage, and a raised one, show the authors credibility behind his argument while he explains concisely the absence of cons to raising the price.  The main argument of those opposing his idea has been diminished.  This shows the voters who can make this change, a valid reason to try and raise minimum wage, regardless of their own income level, as it is beneficial to a multitude of levels.  The minimum wage workers, business owners, and middle class employees all benefit from the increase in spending and buying.

Abortion Rights in the United States, Controversial but Compromisable?

  This article is written for well-educated citizens who are choosing their side of the argument, is abortion a justifiable action, this is a current controversial argument in the United States..  Polls are taken of men and women, who have been surveyed on very specific considerations, trimester restrictions, exceptions of health, rape, or incest, and economic options.  The author’s researched statistics on the subject lead to her credibility, and effectively enforce the idea of combining the two most passionately debated ideas.

  The author validates the idea that there is more support for Pro-Choice, than Anti-abortion support, while offering a third option, a restricted abortion policy, which in theory will satisfy both opinions.  This would mean that in cases the majority of voters feel should be an exception, like in cases of rape, incest, and health concerns, should be allowed.  Additionally, abortions would be restricted after the first trimester.

  This would not satisfy those who believe that a child is a human being deserving of life the moment it is conceived, but it would satisfy all of the voters in the middle grounds who wish to give choice in extreme circumstances, and those who wish to give choice to all income levels, and life situations before the cost of aborting a child is too high.  This seems to be a fair combination as it includes the majority of voter’s opinions from the polls, with the minority choosing to decide for everyone that there should be no choice.

  What the article lacks is a major belief that is often ignored when discussing abortion.  There is mention of rights to privacy, and right of the state to protect the "potentiality of human life", but there is no mention of a right to practice your religion of your choosing.  Those who believe strongly in the idea of reincarnation, or that the soul, or entity of the unborn child will be born somewhere else, into a better, more responsible home, are ignored.  The argument that is debated so heavily for these polices is the idea that a child is either conceived at birth, or it is conceived at conception.

  This may not seem pressing to most people who follow the most prominent of religions in the United States, but they are in no way the only religions.  Mostly it is too controversial to even mention, on an already highly controversial debate, but its relevance to though who decide whether or not to abort their child, for any reason, be it income, consequences, abusive life situations, age, rape, incest, or any other variable that would make someone consider this option, would find it relevant to them.

Supreme Court Ruling on Case Debating DNA Sampling

The Supreme Court has another case debating our rights, with the Maryland v. King Case; the justices had to decide whether collecting DNA without a warrant could be admissible with the Fourth Amendment.  Ultimately the court ruled that the taking of DNA samples is no different from any other "legitimate and routine police procedures".  Any person arrested of a serious crime, regardless of their guilt, shall be unable to hold on to their right to the privacy of their DNA.

This article was worth reading, because the court didn't decide the way that is expected.  My assumption was a vote in favor of privacy, as in other cases where evidence is obtained by invading rights, such as the article about thermal imaging devices, or tracking without a warrant.  Instead, allowing those wrongly convicted to be taken advantage of.  Those wrongly convicted will have been invaded in a way that could never be rectified.

This infringement on the people’s rights to a fair trial first will affect the lives of the innocent falsely targeted.  This article opens eyes to the changing rights you are facing, especially as few people have considered the possibility of having DNA taken as an American Citizen.

My Limited Political Experience

As a high school student, I haven't been exposed to much political chaos yet.  I have seen political sides pitted against each other, Obama vs. McCain in middle school, abortion being discussed at the Texas Capital, and various other instances throughout my life.  Choosing to attend these debates, listening to independent men and women talk freely about their intrinsic rights, and their social rights, have been eye opening at the least.  I have found base for my own ideals of equality, citizenship, and the inherent responsibility of those who lead us to listen to the people.  These elected few need to be held up to proper standards, the only way to do so is to have the people become a voice of their own, to not falter.
I want to be a voice; I have marched for women’s equality, participated in actively stopping the victimization of those of different sexual orientations, and volunteered at shelters for domestic abuse victims.   I do this of my own morality; I am taking this class not as a requirement, but to influence how I view life.  I want what I choose to stand for to be an informed decision.