And Now the Richest .01 Percent

              Research by Emmanuel Saez of UC Berkley and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics shows that the richest one hundredth of one percent of Americans now hold over 11 percent of the nations total wealth. How do these super rich people spend their money? If you said politics you are correct. Of the spending of the .01 percent, political spending is the fastest growing. It is even growing faster than their wealth. A way to show how rich the .01 percent are, is that in 1978 the .01 percent was 220 times richer than the average American. In 2012 the .01 percent were 1120 times richer than the average American. Along with the rich getting richer, the bottom 90 percent are getting poorer. In the mid 1980s the bottom 90 percent held 36 percent of the nation's wealth. Now they hold less than 23 percent. Meanwhile, the .01 percent account for much of campaign donations. In the 2012 election the .01 percent accounted for 40 percent of all campaign contributions. The author of this article wanted to bring attention to this inequality in the distribution of income and representation in politics.

-            Does this inequality in the distribution of income show that the US/economy is going in the wrong direction?

-      Should such a small percent of the population be able to to influence politics so much?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/and-now-the-richest-01-pe_b_6177200.html

Obama Condemns Islamic State’s Killing of Peter Kassig

On Sunday the Islamic terrorist group ISIS released a horrifying video showing they had beheaded a fifth Western hostage, and threatened to kill more in retaliation for US airstrikes. President Obama confirmed the death of Mr. Kassig who went missing in Syria more than a year ago at a checkpoint while delivering medical supplies. While on Air Force One President Obama released a statement saying how Mr. Kassig “was taken from us in an act of pure evil by a terrorist group…” The video seemed to show the same executioner as before, a man with a British accent. One glaring difference between this video and the rest was the quality and nature of the video. No beheading actually occurred on video and the video looked amateur and not choreographed. This could be a sign of US surveillance and drone strike making a difference, by making it so ISIS militants can’t stay out too long without fear of being detected.

-            Are US airstrikes in Syria and Iraq making a difference? If so how much of a difference?

-      Should the US do more to try and stop ISIS?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/world/middleeast/peter-kassig-isis-video-execution.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

The Homeless Question

While homelessness in America is no new phenomenon, it's persistence begs the question; what is to be done about the homeless?
In New York City, home to over 57,000 homeless people, parks have been "taken over" by homeless people not living in shelters.
And this is a common solution both for homeless people, and the residents that they seem to be disturbing.  Yet this has been employed in New York City, and while it is used by many homeless people, most find the system to be less than desirable.
Similar problems in Fort Lauderdale Florida have led to an ordinance prohibiting feeding homeless people.  At least one person however finds this unfair, and continues to feed homeless people in spite of two prior arrests for doing so.

This inevitably poses the question, what extent should the government be able to restrict what we as citizens can do?
That is, should they be able to prevent people from feeding homeless people?
Additionally, is this method a practical tactic against homelessness?  Is it morally right?
What is it about our current political climate that makes most Americans less sympathetic to homeless people, and less inclined to give government more power?
(E.g. under FDR the government imposed rationing on many goods as a result of the Great Depression)
Are shelters an apt solution to the homeless question?

Obama Plan May Allow Millions of Immigrants to Stay and Work in U.S.

President Obama is planning to ignore Republican protest and in the next week reveal an immigration enforcement order that will protect up to 5 million illegal immigrants by providing them with work permits. A key component of the mandate is that it will allow parents of children who are legal residents to obtain legal work permits, thus keeping families together. The order make it clear though that deportations will still proceed for convicted criminals, immigrants that pose a national security risk, and recent border crossers. President Obama said he wanted to do whatever possible to improve the immigration system before the end of the year. However this order by President Obama is not going to bode well with Republicans and will most likely effect negotiations about the nations budget. It is feared that if the President executes a mandate like this it will thwart all future bipartisanship.

-           Will this change in immigration policy be good for the US?

-           How will this order affect future negotiations in Congress?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/us/obama-immigration.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news