The article from my classmate, “Freedom to Blog,” made me realize how unsafe the world we live in really is. I agree that the United States has procrastinated on the removable of plutonium, but I also think that the U.S. is not doing wrong by keeping some quantity of this element. If other countries have this kind of danger, it is unreasonable for the United States to lack this strong defense in case it is needed.
The world is not and has never been a safe place. I wish to believe that we can trust everyone, but the sad reality is different. Keeping plutonium is very dangerous to everyone regardless who has the control over it. However not having this element in the United States is not going to solve the problem nor keep us safe from other countries using it against us. It is true what my class mate said about the U.S. feeling insecure without its nuclear weapons, like a soldier with out his gun, but not having a gun is only going to make you vulnerable to everyone else who is holding one.
Making peace is extremely difficult, this is the reason why I think the United States should hold on to some plutonium. I also agree with my classmate that we should not only stop the production, but also remove some of the surplus we have stored. The perfect ideology for me would be that the whole world will agree in eliminating nuclear weapons.

Giving money to GM

2009 was a difficult year for the United States’ economy. It all seemed gray for my class: ’09. In fact my teacher used to say, “Class of 2009 will be standing in line.” In other words we will be standing in the line of unemployment like many did in 1929. Luckily the government is taking action so we don’t have to go through the same fate our grand-grand fathers did. Unfortunately the government doesn’t always make the right decisions: For example, giving millions of tax dollars to General Motors.
The taxpayers’ money saved a private cooperation, and now about 60 percent of GM belongs to the United States government. Should the government be interfering with the economy so much? When the national bank was created there was disagreement whether it was constitutional or not. The government should do whatever is necessary to protect it citizen but, in this case I believe giving GM so much money was not essential. The money being use for GM could have been used for other things our society needs, for example, money for Social Security, Medicare, and welfare. The government could have also used the money to create new job. With new jobs the unemployment rate will be less and the country can grow faster.
The phrase “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer” come to my mind when I think of how much money was given to GM. In the past General Motors closed factories in the city where the cooperation was born to open new factories in Mexico, where it gained more profit. At that time the cooperation was not losing profit, but by opening factories in Mexico profit rose because of cheap labor. As a result, more than half of the population of Flint, Michigan lost their jobs. People were force to evacuate their homes and others were obligated to take extreme measures in order to survive. Other people decided to leave the city because it was impossible to survive in the city were generation after generation have work in a GM factory.
About forty decades later we are giving our tax money to the same cooperation that took our grandfathers’ jobs.