How Covid Shifted the Job Market

Early in quarantine, many citizens lost their jobs. According to AARP, many service workers and small business owners were out of jobs.  However, many job opportunities were emerging with delivery companies. With the danger of going outside, delivery services like Amazon have been growing more and more popular which means a need for additional employees.

As seen from Digital Commerce, Q2 and Q3 of 2020 have been far more profitable for Amazon than every other year since 2018 .As delivery services become increasingly popular,  Amazon has hired about 96,700 new employees in 3 months, where such a jump is only matched by the time Amazon bought out Whole Foods. Similarly with Uber Eats, according to the table from Business of Apps, the gross bookings has jumped from 14.5 billion in 2019 to a projected 25 billion for 2020, where the previous increase has been a couple billion.

From a chart from NYTimes, it can be seen that the trend doesn't just apply to Amazon and Uber Eats. From May to July, there was a significant jump in job creation. However, unlike Amazon, the job creation rate has started to slow down to the point where if this trend continues, it will take a long time before the job market can recover from the devastating blows dealt by the pandemic. All the new job opportunities only make up 55% of the 22 million jobs lost since the beginning of the Covid outbreak and the rate at which we are recovering has been flattening out since August. Seeing how another huge spike in Covid-19 cases has occurred, it is possible that we will go through a similar surge in job losses, but smaller in size. In order to try to recover from this recession, there will likely be many professions that will become impractical, and those former job owners will need to find something new until the pandemic completely blows over. 

It's Trump's final days of rage

 

Image above from the Human Rights Campaign.

    As we approach January 20th 2021, Biden has been more adamant about his COVID-19 reliefs and plans as the 46th president. However, Trump still isn't believing that he lost the 2020 election. He has been demanding a major defense bill, yet some Republican supporters have been ignoring those demands and instead chosen to create new drafts that disregard his polite requests. David Marchick, an American attorney, said (quoted from the Washington Post), "The country looks to the new, but the old is still in office until January 20th." His statement, while true, doesn't seem to apply to President-elect Joe Biden. Across his many platforms, Biden has been exhorting Americans to follow safety protocols. This includes proper social distancing guidelines and the use of face masks. He has even been announcing his Cabinet members. While the power will soon transfer to Biden, it hasn't nonetheless. Trump is still eager to take charge and withdraw troops from overseas, as well as fire government officials. 

    While Biden has been spreading COVID-19 relief and safety protocols on his social media, Trump has been using Twitter to lash out about an election he has lost. Interesting enough, recent tweets from the user @realDonaldTrump have included retweets of his own posts, specifically one captioned, "SO TRUE. NO WAY WE LOST THIS ELECTION!" from December 6th. Similar claims have also been made by Trump during his first major public appearance since the election, such as "You know we won Georgia, just so you understand," when in fact he did not, and lost by 12,000 votes. Some have called his outcrys "classic Act V behavior" and "part tragedy, part farce, full of sound and fury," mimicking a Shakespearean play.

    What else will Trump do within these next 44 days? Only time (and the media) will tell.

More than half of NYC firefighters would choose not to get the coronavirus vaccine

  

 

   As two coronavirus vaccines are underway to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration very soon, the questions now are: will Americans be required to take the vaccine and will they be willing to take it?

    The answer to whether or not the vaccine will be mandated is quite complicated. It is highly unlikely that the federal government will make vaccinations mandatory. Public health powers belong to the states and that includes the mandating of vaccinations. Biden already announced that he will not mandate vaccines, but he will “do everything in [his] power as president to encourage people” to get vaccinated. How he will do this is still unclear, but it seems like the only thing he can do is appeal to governors and officials to enact mandates. Whether this will be effective or not, we’ll just have to see.

    However, it is much more likely that private organization or companies will require their employees to get the vaccine. Over the years, health care facilities have increasingly required workers to get vaccinations. 24 of the states in the US have some requirements for flu vaccines for health care facility workers. The vaccine may also eventually be required for students, daycares, and some health care workers but it may take years for that to happen. Although the FDA and CDC have said that employers cannot mandate vaccines under the EUA (emergency use authorization), they can establish consequences for refusing it. Generally speaking, however, it is unlikely that the general public will be required to take it, and as Dr. Fauci says, “you cannot force someone to take a vaccine” since people reserve the right to refuse it.

    Since the government cannot mandate vaccines, getting people to feel comfortable with it is the most important thing to do now. Unfortunately, a Gallup Panel survey "found that 58% of American would be willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine, a decrease from July, when 66% said they would." According to ABC News, a survey finds that 55% of NYC firefighters would refuse the vaccine. This growing reluctance is surprising considering that 200 members of the NYC fire department are out sick with the coronavirus. Even though Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccine both claim to have efficacy rates of over 90%, there is a great hesitation among the public to get is since it is a new vaccine. This increase in reluctance is generally attributed to the lack of information about the vaccine. We don’t know the long term side effects and considering that this vaccine was approved much quicker than most, it makes sense that many people are hesitant to take it.

    Dr. Fauci has said that if 75-85% of people in the US get vaccinated, the coronavirus would be over before the end of 2021. However, given the public’s hesitation, I think it may take even longer. Personally, I think people and employees should retain the right to choose whether to get vaccinated or not. However given the high efficacy rates, I do think that people should get it and I believe there are more benefits than drawbacks. Should one risk the possible side effects of taking the vaccine? Is the coronavirus vaccine just another flu vaccine which only 50% of people get? The decision is ultimately yours to make and depends on your personal circumstances. But remember that taking the vaccination means not only means immunity for yourself but for others as well. 

ABC news

CBS news

USA today

Questions: 

1. Should the federal government be allowed to mandate covid-19 vaccinations? Should our school district mandate the vaccine if they had the authority to do so? Would you feel more comfortable going back to school knowing that everyone has gotten the vaccine?

2. Why do you think that so many people are hesitant about getting vaccinated? What are some drawbacks of getting vaccinated?

Former Zappos CEO, Tony Hsieh, Died in House Fire

Tony Hsieh was the former CEO of Zappos, the major online shoe retailer that was purchased by Amazon in 2009. He was a tech visionary, who built up the business with one thing in mind: customer satisfaction. After graduating from Harvard with a degree in computer science, he started working with close friends on entrepreneurial endeavors. He created Link Exchange, a digital advertising network that he eventually sold to Microsoft. He created a startup incubator with investment from his own ventures capital fund, and he eventually created Zappos. Zappos came to define Hsieh's career as he became the CEO and Zappos exploded in popularity. Fast forward, 20 years, Hsieh was a multi milionaire, and just another victim of the coronavirus/ US Opioid epidemic.

 

Hsieh was always a big partier and avid alcohol drinker. He always worked to make others happy, but he could never find a way to become happy himself. After retiring from his position as CEO of Zappos, how moved to Las Vegas where he worked to turn a seedy part of town in to a hub for tech and art. He publish his own book " Delivering Happiness" while secretly suffering from issues of mental health and addiction. He started to take a dramatic turn south over the past year, especially as COVID - 19 put in social distancing restrictions and lockdowns. Tony struggled when he was alone, and the isolation was not good for his mental health. He started disconnecting with friends and family, and went on a starvation diet and veered into frequent drug use. Notably, he used nitrous oxide, which would deprive him of oxygen that he needed, and he became increasingly interested in fire. 

In the early morning of the day after Thanksgiving, Tony Hsieh was staying at a co-workers house in Connecticut, where he died from a house fire. While several escaped the burning house, Tony supposedly locked himself in, either on purpose or by accident. He died 9 days later from smoke inhalation. As Forbes describes it, "In some ways, count him as another Covid-19 victim, except that instead of succumbing to the disease itself, the virus appears to have accelerated some wrenching internal battles and a series of terrible external decisions."

My questions for discussion are as follows:

Do you believe that money can by happiness? If so, in what way? If not, how do you believe one can achieve happiness?

How do you you think the Corona Virus lockdown has impacted people at home? Has it led to worsening mental health issues? What are your personal experiences?

**Before commenting, I encourage you to read the Forbes article on Tony Hsieh. They go into much more detail than I do, and will give you a better understanding of his story.**

Forbes

WSJ

Biden hires all-female senior communications team: re-shaping representation

 

Biden and Harris name all-female communications team with 'experience' and 'credibility'

    Over the past week, President-elect Joe Biden has been announcing the teams that will support him during his soon-to-be presidency. One remarkable announcement was of his senior communications team. An all-female group. For the first time in history, women will have the opportunity to weigh in on any important decision, as well as be a voice for the administration. 

    Not only does this group of women make history for being all-female, but additionally it is a diverse group of women as well. Biden is successfully representing America as a diverse population by hiring people from many different ethnicities. 

    Apart from the communications team, Biden has also nominated Neera Tanden as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. His choice to nominate this individual has spurred some online gossip and controversy, and in an article published by the Guardian, they quoted Tanden from an incident where she assaulted a journalist during Hillary Clinton's first presidential campaign: "'I didn’t slug him, I pushed him,'" in an apology to the New York Times last year. The Guardian responded, "As if that somehow makes things better."

    Representation in America has always highlighted men. But recently, movements such as "Me Too" and "Black Lives Matter" have brought to light the unappreciated people in this country who represent so much. Gender roles have begun to transform from what the normal used to be, and with Biden's recent female additions to his cabinet, the younger generations will be inspired to pursue stereotypical male jobs. The representation of females in America has never looked better.

Homelessness still a relevant issue amidst Covid-19's "second wave"

As cases being to surge and coronavirus hits its second wave, homeless shelters begin to face concerning issues. Homeless shelters around the world must start shorting the number of homeless people to limit the severity of virus exposures.

This is an impossible system to fight; this exists as a cyclical nature where the pandemic causes major economic regression as citizens restrict their spending, and as business goes down corporations are forced to law off employees, and this lack of employment, in turn, leads to even more frugality. A study done by Columbia University indicates that the number of people without permanent housing will increase by a margin of 45% by the end of the year all due to mass unemployment.

Local and State governments have been doing their part in curbing the infection rate as the state of California has pledged $150 million dollars to help combat Covid-19 in homeless populations. Yet the monetary expenditure hit even harder for the federal government, where 2020's fiscal year increased $2.105 trillion from last year with that budget entirely made up of coronavirus aid programs, stimulus checks, and unemployment aid compensation.

"As the numbers climb, shelters have transformed their spaces to meet Covid-19 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention," said Donald Whitehead, an executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless. The stricter requirements imposed by the CDC compromises the majority unaccounted for: the homeless. And although some cities such as Los Angles and Denver helped secure hotels for the homeless, the spikes in Covid-19 outbreaks within these allocated hotels and shelters have devastated the local population.

We still see no light in this dark tunnel as infection rates and death tolls are record-breaking every other day. The conditions are incredibly dire for those without residence as shelters fill up and cities are locking down. I believe the best we can do now as citizens to help is to mitigate the spread of infections by obeying CDC's set requirements and district set curfews. How should governments tackle this issue?

CDC loosens quarantine guidelines

On Dec. 2, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced it allows self-quarantine for those who have had exposure to COVID-19 to be seven to 10 days instead of the traditional 14-day period. 

For those who received a negative diagnostic test and have no symptoms, post-exposure quarantine can be as low as seven days. For those without a test, 10 days without symptoms is sufficient for a self-quarantine. In both cases, people who have been exposed are expected to monitor for symptoms throughout the remainder of the 14 days. The CDC still recommends a full 14-day quarantine, however if “local circumstances and resources” are not conducive to a two week quarantine, a shorter period is acceptable. 

“We believe that if we can reduce the burden a little bit, accepting that it comes at a small cost, we may get a greater compliance overall with people completing a full quarantine," said Dr. John Brooks, the chief medical officer for CDC's COVID-19 response. 

Concerns regarding inability to take 14 days off of work or school, especially for those with economic hardships primarily led to this change. There is a slight increase in risk of transmission, but according to the CDC, it’s acceptable with the expectation that more people will adhere to the quarantine period if it’s shorter. An additional reason: some who have tested positive for the coronavirus may choose to share contacts for fear those they had seen recently will have to quarantine for the full 14 days. Contact tracing may see its full ability if the quarantine period is made shorter.

The initial 14-day period was based upon the upper bounds of the coronavirus’s incubation period. Asymptomatic carriers, likely between 20% and 40%, can still transmit the virus, just as those in the incubation period who have yet to develop symptoms can.

For the holiday season, the CDC retains the same recommendation it had before Thanksgiving: stay home. If people don’t adhere, though, perhaps quarantining post holiday get-together will be a little easier and a little more successful.

Trump is Discussing Preemptive Presidential Pardons for his Children and Rudy Giuliani

 Donald Trump has been an unconventional president to say the least. This pattern has not stopped since he lost the election. This week, preemptive pardons for Ivanka, Don Jr., and Eric Trump, as well as Jared Kushner and Rudy Giuliani are being discussed. According to The New York Times, the sitting president is worried that Biden's justice department will seek retribution by targeting his children. This is very interesting in that a preemptive pardon suggests that his children, as well as Mr Giuliani who made a special appearance in Borat's latest movie, are guilty of something. One can only speculate what the trust funded children of a trust funded tax evading draft dodging nearly ex-president could be guilty of. 

According to CNN, Donald Trump Jr. was under investigation for his Russian contacts, but was never charged. Jared Kushner provided false information about his foreign contacts when applying for his security clearance, but was pardoned by Trump. The president thinks he is being, or at least going to be unfairly targeted by his victorious opponent. This is somewhat ironic coming from the person who during the election was slandering Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden for his business dealings in Ukraine. 

Personally, I think this is some sort of an admission of guilt. You don't need to be pardoned if you haven't done anything wrong. What do you think? What do you think Trump is guilty of? What do you think his children are guilty of? Do you think this is constitutional? Do you think this is morally correct? Please, leave your thoughts in the comments. 

Governor Gavin Newsom has to pick a new senator to replace Vice President elect Kamala Harris

 

San Francisco Chronicle: Who should fill Kamala Harris' Senate seat if she becomes VP?

    Now that Election Day has finally halted, buzz is going around about who the next Senator of California could be. Kamala Harris will be leaving her seat empty starting Inauguration Day in January, and only one vote will determine who will sit in it and fill the spot as part of the U.S. Senate. Gavin Newsom, Governor of California, is currently deciding who is valuable enough to partake in the Senate and to represent California. His vote is the only one to count, so many have been influencing him with numerous names and colleagues to possibly choose from. For instance, many friends, lawmakers, and other advisers keep spreading Alex Padilla's name. California's secretary of state and Latino, Padilla has emerged as a favorable candidate. However, some active campaigns also argue to replace Harris with another woman. Representative Karen Bass from Los Angeles has been mentioned as well as Representative Barbara Lee from Oakland, two very well educated Black females. 

    California, a state with a high population of Latinos, would do well with a Latino representative in the Senate. The Latino Victory Fund agrees with the statement, and has been promoting the #PickPadilla hashtag on their website to lean Newsom to choose Padilla as the next Senator. 

    Polls across the internet have been created to see who the rest of the public believes should be the next Senator. Yet, while the public is consumed with this new contest between a wide variety of diverse candidates, only Gavin Newsom has the final say. And because of the next election in 2022, Newsom would want to elect someone who would therefore support him as he runs for re-election.

    Who do you believe will be chosen? Who would you want to represent California?

California COVID Cases Surge And Reach An All Time High

(Image Above) Californian citizens wear masks while walking in Del Mar, California

    During this previous weekend after Thanksgiving, COVID 19 cases and hospitalizations surged. On Sunday the 29th of November, California saw over 8,000 people hospitalized with COVID 19, and during the week of Thanksgiving there were nearly 3,000 new cases across the state, which is a 109% increase compared to a month ago. The virus is disproportionally affecting African-American and Hispanic residents, as they have been found to be more likely to die from the virus(according to the LA Times). 

    The new surge in cases has led Governor Gavin Newsom and other county and state leaders to enact new restrictions in order to keep the public safe. The new restrictions are not only just a response to the new surge in cases, but also because medical professionals in California project that the cases could exceed statewide hospital capacity if nothing is done by mid December, which is only a couple weeks away. 

    Due to the amount of family gatherings that took place during Thanksgiving, and the closure of some hospital functions due to the holiday, it is predicted that the current case count for California is higher than it is currently. Los Angeles, along with many other California cities, went into lockdown today in response to the rise in cases. In Los Angeles, residents are prohibited from gathering with people besides those who live with them for any reason except for political protests and religious services. 

    With the new surge in cases, it is important that we follow CDC guidelines. This includes wearing a mask in public at all times, maintaining social distancing, not gathering in large groups, and making sure to wash your hands frequently. Its important that we follow these closely especially now, as there is a much higher chance of contracting COVID since there are more cases present. 

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

San Mateos Curfew and How it will Affect us.

 San Mateo went into the Purple Tier on November 28th which means that we will have a curfew until our Covid-19 situation improves. What does this mean for us? We now have a curfew from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. as a means of lowering the amount of unnecessary activities that raise the number of cases.

Things that are still allowed outdoors are gyms, entertainment centers like museums and movie theaters, and places to eat. From what I’ve seen the outdoor eating in San Mateo has been very successful from a business standpoint but safety is another story. As the weather is getting cooler, more and more restaurants are adding additional walls to their eating areas to get rid of the breeze. This might seem nice but by adding walls they essentially are creating indoor eating outside which spreads covid very easily. Keeping the virus inside a room is a big issue and I think it should be added to the Purple Tier of Covid.

Activities that are allowed indoors are retail, salons, and personal care services. Personally I do not believe that nail salons are a super necessary service that needs to occur during a massive pandemic such as Covid. Barber shops are definitely more necessary than nail salons, but if we are to get rid of the virus then I think barber shops should close as well. Hopefully in the next few months we can get rid of the virus and go back to our past lives.

link 1

President-elect Biden has started selecting cabinet members

 As Joe Biden prepares to enter the White House, he has had to choose who will help him in his Presidency. So far he has chosen Antony Blinken as Secretary of State, Alejandro Mayorkas as Secretary of Homeland Security, and obviously Kamala Harris as his Vice President. Over the next few months we will see the completion of President-Elect Biden’s cabinet. 

Biden has announced that he will have an all female communications team in the White House. Leading this team will be Jennifer Psaki as press secretary who is a veteran of the Obama administration. Biden believes that “communicating directly and truthfully to the American people is one of the most important duties of a president,” which contrasts significantly with Trump's administration where 7 are criminally charged. Biden plans to advocate for women during his presidency as seen by his White House communications team choices. Psaki sees her job as a way to rebuild the trust of the American People and that she plans to make the agenda of Biden and Harris more accessible to the public.

Each of Biden’s picks has great experience in government and many of his choices worked in Obama’s cabinet as well. Experience is what is important when holding government positions because you need to be trained in practice if you are to succeed.

Do you approve of Biden's cabinet decisions?

link 1

link 2

Trump pardons Michael Flynn

 On Wednesday, President Trump pardoned Michael Flynn from lying to the FBI. As controversial as this may be, it will not be the last of Trump's pardons. He plans to pardon Rick Gates as well as George Papadopoulos who were both convicted of lying about the Russia Investigation of the last election.

Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI twice and was pardoned regardless. Trump hinted that he would pardon Flynn back in March but has not mentioned it until he finalized the pardon this week. According to the Justice Department they concluded that Trump’s pardon was an appropriate use of the pardon power but they were not told ahead of time. This is definitely a little strange and displays how the president was not sure that his pardon would be approved if he had run it through the Justice Department beforehand. One of the department's officials announced that they would have rathered the pardon be done in court which may have been why he pardoned Flynn with no recent warning.

Personally I am not a fan of the presidential pardon being used in this way. I think that the pardon should be reserved for lesser known people or people that have been charged with drug charges. I do not think that someone should be let off the hook for the lying to the FBI

How do you feel about President Trump pardoning Flynn and potentially other criminally charged members of his cabinet?

Do you think that this kind of pardoning should be allowed?

link 1

link 2

Supreme Court temporarily blocks New York from limiting attendance in religious gatherings

New York Times: Easter service in Brooklyn last April 

    A day before Thanksgiving, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that New York City could not impose limits on the number of attendees of religious gatherings, setting a precedent for mayors and governors across the states. This ruling came after Governor Cuomo’s decision to place attendance caps on religious gatherings in areas of the city where infection rates were climbing, such as Queens and Brooklyn. In areas classified as "red" zones, no more than 10 people were allowed to physically attend gatherings, and in less infected “organe” zones, this number increased to 25. 
As COVID-19 surges with the commencement of the holiday season, the nation’s leadership is acting on steep measures to contain the spread. Some call into question whether or not such decisions impede on inalienable rights and freedoms that this country grants. In their process of judicial review, The Supreme Court decision deduced that some efforts to taper COVID-19, such as caps on religious gatherings, have sacrificed protected freedoms on the altar of protecting public health. In a statement about the ruling, Judge Gorsuch criticized Cuomo for limiting religious gatherings while placing no regulations on seemingly less essential activities like acupuncture. The Court’s statement also cited the first amendment, the basis on which they drew their conclusion about the decision’s constitutionality, stating "Even in a pandemic, the constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.” 
The decision brings attention to the new ideological balance of the court given the passing of Ruth Bader-Ginsburg and the installment of Coney-Barrett. Earlier in the year, a similar case involving California and Nevada was deliberated while Ginsburg was still on the Court, and the ruling upheld the governors' right to protect public safety.  
Gov. Cuomo accused the court of not acting independently and letting their partisan biases shroup their decision making. He went on to say that the decision “doesn’t have any practical effect” because the restrictions on religious services were relaxed after decreased positive test rates in part due to the overturned measure itself. This is best evidenced by the fact that the decision only directly impacted two places of worship.
However, the decision may have larger implications if religious groups in other states call upon this precedent to ease regulations on their own gatherings.

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/11/26/939264852/supreme-court-says-new-york-cant-limit-attendance-in-houses-of-worship-due-to-co

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/nyregion/supreme-court-churches-religious-gatherings.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-court/u-s-supreme-court-backs-religious-groups-over-new-york-virus-curbs-idUSKBN2860CK

Joe Biden Expands COVID-19 Task Force

(Image Above) Joe Biden giving his Thanksgiving Speech," the US is at war with the virus, not each other"

     On Saturday November 28th, President-Elect Joe Biden announced that he will be adding new members to his COVID-19 Advisory Board/Task Force. The new additions to the task force will include Dr. Jill Jim who is the executive director of the Navajo Nation's department of health, Jane Hopkins, who is a Sierra Leone immigrant, a bedside nurse for 20 years, and a long time union worker, and Dr. David Michaels, who is a epidemiologist(basically a medical expert) at George Washington University. Their main job in the task force is to help contain and control the virus, as well as save as many American lives as possible. 

    Biden deciding to chose these three individuals for his COVID task force demonstrates his immediate desire to prevent the spread of the pandemic while bringing more diversity into the government workforce. Biden has been clear that one of his main goals as president would be to help save American lives by assembling a team to control the deadly virus that has held us in lockdown for nearly a year now. 

    This task force plans to tackle the pandemic by providing more testing availability and preparing to quickly distribute a vaccine once it is released. This task force has been expanded in part due to the rapid increase in cases that began in early November. Biden has been assembling this COVID task force since earlier this month, when he was announced as the President-Elect by most of the media outlets. 

    It is too early to say whether this task force will be successful or not, however the task force shows promise as it includes many top medical workers who seem dedicated to the job. This task force still has a few months before it can really start to make an impact, so as the cases of COVID continue to rise, it is important that we wear masks and keep a distance from others, as well as follow all health guidelines as directed by the CDC. 

Sources:

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

(image credit)

Elon Musks becomes 2nd Richest Person

    A couple of days ago, the surge in Tesla's stock price made Elon Musk the second-richest person in the world, with a net-worth of $128 billion dollars. According to Bloomberg, $100 billion of these dollars was gained in 2020 alone, as Tesla's stock has sky rocketed during the pandemic. This can be attributed to the success of his electric cars, specifically the model 3, which is now the best selling luxury car in America. In addition, investors feel optimistic about the future of electric cars and renewable energy, especially with Biden's stance on working to combat climate change.

    $128 billions dollars is a large sum of money, and someone could be a real force for good in the world if they choose to put the money to positive use. Bill Gates has done a lot with philanthropy, but as of now Elon's #1 commitment seems to be rockets. Space X, which he has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in, aims to create a Plan B for human life on Mars, rather than work to improve human life on Earth. I know many people have strong opinions about the rich, and I would like to hear what you have to say about Elon Musk. Is a he a greedy billionaire who has an obligation to give away his money to create positive change in this world? Or is he a prime example of the American dream, someone who is making incredible strides to help our world combat global warming, and who has a right to invest his money as he wishes.

    I support the latter argument. I think it is amazing that he had a vision to create a better, cleaner world and that he is now making that happen. It's crazy that just several years ago he was on the verge of bankruptcy, but with passion and confidence, he kept his faith in SpaceX and Tesla, and made them massively successful companies. I want to hear your opinions, feel free to disagree with others, and converse in the comments section respectfully.

Source