A brief summary of my model reform sans #'s, problems, & other specifics
y
The Unites States has always been a progressive, model country. But even model countries keep capital on the forefront. It only makes sense that money is the number one setback to making much needed changes toward sustainability that have been available for decades. While American citizens are eagerly doing their part, the Federal government is needed to make the big plans. These plans should include highly developed untapped resources, utilization and reform of what is already in place, and a little humility. Substantial sustainability problems in the United States can be addressed by looking at three main areas: energy, agriculture, and trade. Using this model, it just so happens that many ancillary problems fall in line. In other words, proactive and conscientious movement towards sustainability is a win-win situation.
According to the Department of Energy, 82% of American greenhouse gases are discharged-in the form of carbon dioxide (CO2) from burning coal, oil, and natural gas. Methane, nitrous oxide, and miscellaneous CO2 make up the final 18% (CarbonTax.org). Evident environmental issues aside, there is an obvious swell in recent energy prices; primarily in natural gas as well as in fuel. Of the 80 million barrels of the world’s oil produced on a daily basis, the United States is responsible for utilizing 25% (“Oil”). With most American oil resources having peaked in the 1970’s, the U.S. direly seeks its oil elsewhere. Unfortunately, this “elsewhere” lies in the unstable Middle East-containing about 77% of the world’s resources (“Oil”). This shortage, controversial government ownership, price surges, higher global demand, and a rocky history lend to a legitimate governmental fear of investing in foreign oil for very much longer. Fortunately, there are many environmental options available to reduce this dependency.
Private entities, as well as government-funded scientific research, heed some palpable results that are both economically and environmental friendly. The use of solar and wind power as an alternative energy have been buzzed about for many decades. However, not until recently have these resources been so economical and effective. Over the last 3 decades, the price of wind power has been reduced to equal that of coal but with 0 emissions (Fenton 74). Solar power has been seen as expensive-based on the availability of silicon-and ineffective because the solar cells translate only 17% of the energy that they gather (Fenton 73). More recently however, the Department of Energy reported that if only .5% of the United States was covered in cells, they would create all of the electricity the country needs (Fenton 73). As far as vehicles go, the ideal solution would be an electric plug-in (utilizing wind and/or solar power). The significance of these resources is that they are emissions-free, affordable, available now, and they require no foreign-dependence. The federal government must re-allocate heavy funding to these ventures that will no doubt prove very successful in the near future. The money saved is the money earned.
“Virtually every food you buy has been altered by traditional breeding and is not as nature intended it,” according to Eric Flamm, senior policy advisor to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) (as qtd in Fenton). Food safety has become a viable concern to the public, especially upon learning about engineered foods-down to basic produce-modified by pesticides and even viruses. Most of the bio-engineered foods grown are by farmers under large contracts with huge corporations. This essentially means, bigger machines and less manual labor, leaving small farmers and help out in the dust. The government has long subsidized farmers for hard times with bad crops or inclement conditions. However, these farmers most grow a “program crop”. “Only farmers who grow a so-called program crop-primarily grains, rice, and cotton-are eligible for commodity subsidies… Nationally, only about 40% of the country’s 2 million farmers receive the payments,” (Hansen).
The government’s response to these issues will follow after the consumers. Consumers are opting towards organically grown crops and humanely raised livestock. Organic farms have strict rules regulating the use of pesticides (if used, have a less than 48 hour lifespan), using manure, beneficial pests, crop rotation, and runoff (Koch). These are all methods of farming that not only benefit the customer-leaving growth virtually unscathed-but the environment as well. If the government provides even small subsidies to the independent growers, there would be a boom in quality, economy, and trust in American food again. The organic farmers also provide a hike in local business and employment, which in turn, slows urban growth (result of lack of employment in rural areas). Initial funding for these programs could come from cutting unnecessary programs or reforming them. There is a Department of Agriculture office in almost every county in the United States. Only about 10% of these counties have farms at this point (Macionis 133).
12.6 percent of the American population is now made up of immigrants, legal or otherwise (Greenblatt). When President Bill Clinton passed NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) in 1993, he passed over 1 million American jobs as well (Prah). With the continual record growth of immigrants and cheaper labor, come many problems. Two primary problems include unfair and illegal hiring practices, as well as the loss of American jobs-on country soil, over the borders, and abroad. While the standing program to hire Mexican farm workers seasonally is ideal, it does not play out that way. “Instead, growers turn to the black market for undocumented workers. At least half of the nation’s 1.6 million farm workers-and as many as 70% by some estimates-are immigrants lacking documentation,” (Greenblatt). There is no viable document checking service available at the moment anyway, making it easier to get the labor for nearly free. On the other side of the fence, there is the tightening of border patrol, which is leading some farmers to skip planting certain crops at all, out of fear of losing cheap labor. Have we become that dependent on illegal aid?
If jobs aren’t being lost at home or over the border, we are losing them primarily to China. “In the past, we had people in the factory who were working 48-50 hour weeks, and they could provide a single-family home and educate their kids…Nowadays, that is impossible,” reported an Illinois manufacturer (as qtd in “Emerging”). China is not only saving $659 billion but they are the largest producer of coal, second largest consumer of energy, and the third largest importer of oil (“Emerging”). China has quietly and quickly become a world giant. This is possible because of unfair trade practices, sub par treatment of workers, unethical business, and the United States playing a part in all of it. American business imports of Chinese “goods” went up 400 percent from 1994-2004 to $196.7 billion (“Emerging”). With that trade deficit, China simply invests in the U.S. Treasury and gets all of that money and business right back, keeping the U.S. in a debt cycle. Aside from the help from the American side, China invests with countries that Westerners won’t (for human rights purposes) such as Venezuela and Sudan. These countries exploit their workers for the betterment of the upper few. China’s recent economic boom has proven fruitful for some but still leaves 300 million of its citizens poor (“Emerging”).
What does the United States do in the wake of these employment, immigration, and trade problems? Bring it all home. In the future, American jobs cannot be forfeited at the current rate. Fortunately, there will be a substantial increase of green jobs. So the factory workers that were once displaced, will now be needed to manufacture biofuels, new cars, LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) buildings, wind turbines, and mass production of solar systems-amongst others (Doyle). Of course, some trading and exporting of labor must be done, so the U.S. should keep it primarily south of the border. NAFTA needs a bit of tweaking, however the framework is there. Immigrants can stay home and make the money that they try to make illegally in the United States. Currently, free trade is the most commonly utilized trade model. However, fair trade is emerging as well. Fair trade is the most ideal model for all involved. Fair trade ensures fair wages for poor farmers, provides education for workers, and promotes green production. Fair trade is somewhat new so governments need to agree on widespread standards and enact those together. This way, not only is China’s disregard for ethics chastised, their poor quality is kept out as well. The only way to change China (and it’s cohorts) is to deny American money. The price of goods will rise, however shipping will go down (as well as emissions). Besides, Western consumers are more than willing to pay more for fair trade products. “Total U.S. sales of fair trade-certified products grew by 350 percent between 2001 and 2005 and by 60 percent between 2004 and 2005,” (Doyle).
As with most governmental affairs, the programs affect each other. Taking these sustainability measures creates a cycle upon which problems are answered by various solutions. The money saved from these enactments trickle down to create investments elsewhere in the different fields. There is a creation of a more stable and self-sufficient economy. In order for all of these proposals to work cohesively, they must be adopted fairly universally. This means that the government must instill not only on a state level, but in its own institutional reform; the call for humility and admittance of inadequacy. These measures are best applied now, than later, in order to ease our carbon footprint; also to reduce the chance of putting our proverbial foot in our mouth in regards to foreign tensions that are currently building. Swiftness is just as important as intention. We are on the cusp of a post-industrial apex. There are many opportunities out there for the U.S. to create positive change and promote the welfare not only for citizens of the country, but as a model for the world-especially in regards to the environment, social ethics, and humanity in general.
CarbonTax.org. 2007. Carbon Tax Center. 28 Mar. 2008. .
Doyle, Kevin. “Good Jobs, Green Jobs: Part One: What Happened and Who was There?”
Grist. 19 Mar. 2008. Grist Magazine. Accessed 23 Mar. 2008.
story/2008/3/18/151955/884>.
Fenton, Matthew McCann, et al. “Power Plays: Searching for Clean Energy.” Time. 31 July
2007: 73, 74
Glazer, Sarah. “Fair Trade Labeling: Is it Helping Small Farmers in Developing Countries?”
CQ Researcher. 18 May 2007. Accessed 28 Mar. 2008.
.
Greenblatt, Alan. “Immigration Debate: Can Politicians Find a Way to Curb Illegal
Immigration?” CQ Researcher. 1 Feb. 2008.
document.php?id=cqresrre2008020100&PHPSESSID=m41kce8h91avfvfk3si7rufi54>.
Hansen, Brian. “Crisis on the Plains: Can Dying Rural Communities be Saved?” CQ Researcher.
9 May 2003. Accessed 25 Mar. 2008.
document.php?id=cqresrre2003050900>.
Katel, Peter. “Emerging China: Can the United States Successfully Compete?” CQ Researcher.
11 Nov. 2005. Accessed 28 Mar. 2008.
.
--- “Oil Jitters: Are the days of cheap oil gone forever?” CQ Researcher. 4 Jan. 2008.
Accessed 25 Mar. 2008.
cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2008010400&type=hitlist&num=4>.
Koch, Kathy. “Food Safety Battle: Organic Vs. Biotech.” CQ Researcher. 4 Sept. 1998.
Accessed 25 Mar. 2008.
cqreasearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1998090400>.
Macionis, John J. Society: The Basics. 9th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2007.
Prah, Pamela M. “Labor Unions’ Future: Can They Survive the Age of Globalization?”
CQ Researcher. 2 Sept. 2005. Accessed 23 Mar. 2008.
.
The Unites States has always been a progressive, model country. But even model countries keep capital on the forefront. It only makes sense that money is the number one setback to making much needed changes toward sustainability that have been available for decades. While American citizens are eagerly doing their part, the Federal government is needed to make the big plans. These plans should include highly developed untapped resources, utilization and reform of what is already in place, and a little humility. Substantial sustainability problems in the United States can be addressed by looking at three main areas: energy, agriculture, and trade. Using this model, it just so happens that many ancillary problems fall in line. In other words, proactive and conscientious movement towards sustainability is a win-win situation.
According to the Department of Energy, 82% of American greenhouse gases are discharged-in the form of carbon dioxide (CO2) from burning coal, oil, and natural gas. Methane, nitrous oxide, and miscellaneous CO2 make up the final 18% (CarbonTax.org). Evident environmental issues aside, there is an obvious swell in recent energy prices; primarily in natural gas as well as in fuel. Of the 80 million barrels of the world’s oil produced on a daily basis, the United States is responsible for utilizing 25% (“Oil”). With most American oil resources having peaked in the 1970’s, the U.S. direly seeks its oil elsewhere. Unfortunately, this “elsewhere” lies in the unstable Middle East-containing about 77% of the world’s resources (“Oil”). This shortage, controversial government ownership, price surges, higher global demand, and a rocky history lend to a legitimate governmental fear of investing in foreign oil for very much longer. Fortunately, there are many environmental options available to reduce this dependency.
Private entities, as well as government-funded scientific research, heed some palpable results that are both economically and environmental friendly. The use of solar and wind power as an alternative energy have been buzzed about for many decades. However, not until recently have these resources been so economical and effective. Over the last 3 decades, the price of wind power has been reduced to equal that of coal but with 0 emissions (Fenton 74). Solar power has been seen as expensive-based on the availability of silicon-and ineffective because the solar cells translate only 17% of the energy that they gather (Fenton 73). More recently however, the Department of Energy reported that if only .5% of the United States was covered in cells, they would create all of the electricity the country needs (Fenton 73). As far as vehicles go, the ideal solution would be an electric plug-in (utilizing wind and/or solar power). The significance of these resources is that they are emissions-free, affordable, available now, and they require no foreign-dependence. The federal government must re-allocate heavy funding to these ventures that will no doubt prove very successful in the near future. The money saved is the money earned.
“Virtually every food you buy has been altered by traditional breeding and is not as nature intended it,” according to Eric Flamm, senior policy advisor to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) (as qtd in Fenton). Food safety has become a viable concern to the public, especially upon learning about engineered foods-down to basic produce-modified by pesticides and even viruses. Most of the bio-engineered foods grown are by farmers under large contracts with huge corporations. This essentially means, bigger machines and less manual labor, leaving small farmers and help out in the dust. The government has long subsidized farmers for hard times with bad crops or inclement conditions. However, these farmers most grow a “program crop”. “Only farmers who grow a so-called program crop-primarily grains, rice, and cotton-are eligible for commodity subsidies… Nationally, only about 40% of the country’s 2 million farmers receive the payments,” (Hansen).
The government’s response to these issues will follow after the consumers. Consumers are opting towards organically grown crops and humanely raised livestock. Organic farms have strict rules regulating the use of pesticides (if used, have a less than 48 hour lifespan), using manure, beneficial pests, crop rotation, and runoff (Koch). These are all methods of farming that not only benefit the customer-leaving growth virtually unscathed-but the environment as well. If the government provides even small subsidies to the independent growers, there would be a boom in quality, economy, and trust in American food again. The organic farmers also provide a hike in local business and employment, which in turn, slows urban growth (result of lack of employment in rural areas). Initial funding for these programs could come from cutting unnecessary programs or reforming them. There is a Department of Agriculture office in almost every county in the United States. Only about 10% of these counties have farms at this point (Macionis 133).
12.6 percent of the American population is now made up of immigrants, legal or otherwise (Greenblatt). When President Bill Clinton passed NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) in 1993, he passed over 1 million American jobs as well (Prah). With the continual record growth of immigrants and cheaper labor, come many problems. Two primary problems include unfair and illegal hiring practices, as well as the loss of American jobs-on country soil, over the borders, and abroad. While the standing program to hire Mexican farm workers seasonally is ideal, it does not play out that way. “Instead, growers turn to the black market for undocumented workers. At least half of the nation’s 1.6 million farm workers-and as many as 70% by some estimates-are immigrants lacking documentation,” (Greenblatt). There is no viable document checking service available at the moment anyway, making it easier to get the labor for nearly free. On the other side of the fence, there is the tightening of border patrol, which is leading some farmers to skip planting certain crops at all, out of fear of losing cheap labor. Have we become that dependent on illegal aid?
If jobs aren’t being lost at home or over the border, we are losing them primarily to China. “In the past, we had people in the factory who were working 48-50 hour weeks, and they could provide a single-family home and educate their kids…Nowadays, that is impossible,” reported an Illinois manufacturer (as qtd in “Emerging”). China is not only saving $659 billion but they are the largest producer of coal, second largest consumer of energy, and the third largest importer of oil (“Emerging”). China has quietly and quickly become a world giant. This is possible because of unfair trade practices, sub par treatment of workers, unethical business, and the United States playing a part in all of it. American business imports of Chinese “goods” went up 400 percent from 1994-2004 to $196.7 billion (“Emerging”). With that trade deficit, China simply invests in the U.S. Treasury and gets all of that money and business right back, keeping the U.S. in a debt cycle. Aside from the help from the American side, China invests with countries that Westerners won’t (for human rights purposes) such as Venezuela and Sudan. These countries exploit their workers for the betterment of the upper few. China’s recent economic boom has proven fruitful for some but still leaves 300 million of its citizens poor (“Emerging”).
What does the United States do in the wake of these employment, immigration, and trade problems? Bring it all home. In the future, American jobs cannot be forfeited at the current rate. Fortunately, there will be a substantial increase of green jobs. So the factory workers that were once displaced, will now be needed to manufacture biofuels, new cars, LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) buildings, wind turbines, and mass production of solar systems-amongst others (Doyle). Of course, some trading and exporting of labor must be done, so the U.S. should keep it primarily south of the border. NAFTA needs a bit of tweaking, however the framework is there. Immigrants can stay home and make the money that they try to make illegally in the United States. Currently, free trade is the most commonly utilized trade model. However, fair trade is emerging as well. Fair trade is the most ideal model for all involved. Fair trade ensures fair wages for poor farmers, provides education for workers, and promotes green production. Fair trade is somewhat new so governments need to agree on widespread standards and enact those together. This way, not only is China’s disregard for ethics chastised, their poor quality is kept out as well. The only way to change China (and it’s cohorts) is to deny American money. The price of goods will rise, however shipping will go down (as well as emissions). Besides, Western consumers are more than willing to pay more for fair trade products. “Total U.S. sales of fair trade-certified products grew by 350 percent between 2001 and 2005 and by 60 percent between 2004 and 2005,” (Doyle).
As with most governmental affairs, the programs affect each other. Taking these sustainability measures creates a cycle upon which problems are answered by various solutions. The money saved from these enactments trickle down to create investments elsewhere in the different fields. There is a creation of a more stable and self-sufficient economy. In order for all of these proposals to work cohesively, they must be adopted fairly universally. This means that the government must instill not only on a state level, but in its own institutional reform; the call for humility and admittance of inadequacy. These measures are best applied now, than later, in order to ease our carbon footprint; also to reduce the chance of putting our proverbial foot in our mouth in regards to foreign tensions that are currently building. Swiftness is just as important as intention. We are on the cusp of a post-industrial apex. There are many opportunities out there for the U.S. to create positive change and promote the welfare not only for citizens of the country, but as a model for the world-especially in regards to the environment, social ethics, and humanity in general.
CarbonTax.org. 2007. Carbon Tax Center. 28 Mar. 2008. .
Doyle, Kevin. “Good Jobs, Green Jobs: Part One: What Happened and Who was There?”
Grist. 19 Mar. 2008. Grist Magazine. Accessed 23 Mar. 2008.
story/2008/3/18/151955/884>.
Fenton, Matthew McCann, et al. “Power Plays: Searching for Clean Energy.” Time. 31 July
2007: 73, 74
Glazer, Sarah. “Fair Trade Labeling: Is it Helping Small Farmers in Developing Countries?”
CQ Researcher. 18 May 2007. Accessed 28 Mar. 2008.
.
Greenblatt, Alan. “Immigration Debate: Can Politicians Find a Way to Curb Illegal
Immigration?” CQ Researcher. 1 Feb. 2008.
document.php?id=cqresrre2008020100&PHPSESSID=m41kce8h91avfvfk3si7rufi54>.
Hansen, Brian. “Crisis on the Plains: Can Dying Rural Communities be Saved?” CQ Researcher.
9 May 2003. Accessed 25 Mar. 2008.
document.php?id=cqresrre2003050900>.
Katel, Peter. “Emerging China: Can the United States Successfully Compete?” CQ Researcher.
11 Nov. 2005. Accessed 28 Mar. 2008.
.
--- “Oil Jitters: Are the days of cheap oil gone forever?” CQ Researcher. 4 Jan. 2008.
Accessed 25 Mar. 2008.
cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2008010400&type=hitlist&num=4>.
Koch, Kathy. “Food Safety Battle: Organic Vs. Biotech.” CQ Researcher. 4 Sept. 1998.
Accessed 25 Mar. 2008.
cqreasearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1998090400>.
Macionis, John J. Society: The Basics. 9th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2007.
Prah, Pamela M. “Labor Unions’ Future: Can They Survive the Age of Globalization?”
CQ Researcher. 2 Sept. 2005. Accessed 23 Mar. 2008.
.