One issue needing reform that is being debated in this year’s Presidential campaigning holds arguably the greatest concern by voters due to its possible drastic impact on America’s future financial stability. This subject of trepidation is our nation’s struggling economy, and the measures that need to be taken in order to promote fiscal bolstering and economic prosperity. Both party candidates are ensuring the voters that they will enact policies to reform and reestablish our free market system. From the point of view of college students, the authors of this blog have determined which components of the country’s monetary hardship we deem most influential to our current state, and wish to discuss why these problems have arisen as well as the differing ideas proposed by John McCain and Barrack Obama to fix them. Our established areas of apprehension are; seemingly unrestricted gas taxation, minimum wage and its affect on inflation and consumer spending, the availability of student loans and financial aid, and initiative being taken to establish cleaner energy sources and to reduce harmful effects on the environment.
The collapse of financial institutions such as Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, and the buying out of banks like Wachovia, due in part to the rapidly increasing foreclosure and bankruptcy rates that have come with the housing crisis leave us asking; What can be done by America’s leaders to guarantee loan availability and reliability?
· Obama and Biden present the possibility of an “American Opportunity Tax Credit”. This refundable credit will cover the first $4,000 of college education costs for most Americans, as well as up to two-thirds of additional tuition costs at a average public college or university. Recipients of this credit would be required to conduct 100 hours of community service. This policy seems almost too good to be true. What are some underlying effects of this plan, and where is the funding for this credit coming from?
· The Democratic ticket is also proposing a “streamlined” approach to financial aid by adding a box that can be checked on tax forms that will enable families to automatically apply for financial aid. This would seem to increase efficiency of the federal aid application process, but would complex new government programs be needed to make this possible? If so, where is the funding for increased federal institutions come from with promised tax breaks for the middle class?
· McCain and Palin offer different reform possibilities to help the funding of those pursuing a higher education. They have proposed the further development of lender of last resort capability, intending to increase the ability to fund of the federal student loan system, and state that they will demand the highest standard of integrity for participating private lenders. All of these intentions are great, but the detail of what else must be done to allow for restrictions is not developed enough for analysis of side effects.
· McCain is also suggesting that there are far too many tax benefits not being claimed by eligible families due to complexity. Greater efforts to reduce the tax burdens of families sending children to college by reducing the effort needed to obtain the benefits would certainly increase consumer spending abilities. In addition to increased ability to obtain tax benefits, the GOP also proposes a student loan continuity plan. They suggest that recent credit crunch will impede sustainable loans from one semester to the next, and is enlisting the help of all state governors who would anticipate loan availability problems and in turn ask for an expansion of lender capabilities. Once again the information concerning how this will be achieved is not presented. Please feel free to shed any light on this subject if possible.
Another part of each of the candidates plans involves proposals about labor and wages. As college students that often work low paying jobs where minimum wage is important, this is certainly an issue that concerns us.
Obama's approachObama's proposes to raise the minimum wage to match inflation and to ensure that full time workers can support their families.
Some things to consider about this proposal:
While we certainly find this proposal beneficial to us as college students working jobs were minimum wage often determines our pay, we have to consider, if Obama raises the minimum wage will it be profitable for the average American? What, if any, is the causal relationship between raising the minimum wage and more jobs going overseas?
McCain's approach
McCain's economic plan focuses less on wages and low paying jobs, and more on job flexibility. McCain supports the Family Friendly Workplace Act which works to make schedules more flexible for people so that can more easily balance time between job and family. He is also working to make it possible for men and women to take leave to care for a newborn.
Some things to consider:
While McCain's proposals about the workplace have less of a direct effect on us as college students, will it be beneficial to American families? Is there a possibility that companies could be burdened by these schedule changes?
Another issue involved in the future economic plan is the issue of clean energy. As young adults, we are the future of America and a future of clean energy is important to us. Energy will have a greater impact on our lives then the many elderly citizens voting and it is important for us to consider this aspect of the economy carefully.
Obama's approach
Obama's plan is to work with industries and large companies to find more environmentally friendly ways to manufacture. He also proposes creating commercial scale renewable energy which will open up new job opportunities for Americans. There will be programs to train Americans for jobs with clean technology.
Some things to consider:
As the future generation this will help to open up new jobs for our growing population and support companies that are striving to keep our environment intact. However, who will run and organize these job training programs? Will the benefits to the environment outweigh the costs? Will the jobs produced by this proposal be worth the possible growth in government debt?
McCain's approach
McCain plans to put a large sum of money towards advancing nuclear power, clean coal technologies, and renewable energy sources such as wind and solar energy.
Some things to consider
These advancements will certainly help the future of America which is important to our young generation. However, we must once again consider whether the benefits of possible improvements outweigh the economic costs. Will these ever be able to be produced on a commercial scale so that they can have real effects?
These proposals hit on some key parts of McCain's and Obama's economic plan that specifically relate to us as a young generation of college students. We find that some people strongly agree or disagree with and can sometimes become closed minded about. It's important that we raise questions like these for both candidates in order to determine who really has the better plan for our economy. Feel free to comment on any of these ideas that we have brought up and to try to find answers to these questions as we will be doing the same. If there are any other questions you would like to raise about the presidential candidates' plans for the economy then feel free to ask them and we can all explore the answer together.
3 comments:
You have the right idea by focusing on the issues instead of all of the negative talk in this campaign. For more information on what the candidates really want to do about the economy and many other issues, go to their websites where they lay out a lot of information...much more than you'll hear in soundbites on TV. I'm adding a quick synopsis on some differences between Republican and Democratic policies. Republicans basically believe in a trickle down theory where the people at the top of the economic scale pay less taxes so they have more to invest and have the benefits trickle down to the people lower on the economic scale. Another republican theory is that deregulation and privitization is a good thing. Deregulation is having less rules and oversight by government allowing businesses to run things as they like. Privitization is taking or keeping the government out of things like social security and healthcare and allowing individuals to make their own decisions. Democrats tend to want to give tax cuts to the middle and lower class and feel this will fuel the economy through purchasing. They also are opposed to deregulation because they feel it allows companies too much freedom as in the situation we have with the finance industry right now. Finally democrats are less interested in privitization, especially in areas such as social security and healthcare. Here's my opinion. Although all of these ideas sound good on paper and have even been somewhat successful in situations in the past, I have to lean toward the Democratic views at this time and in our economy's current situation. The Republican trickle down theory is obviously not helping the middle and lower class at this time. It is allowing large tax loopholes for the wealthiest while the rest of the population is paying a larger percentage of their income in taxes. On deregulation, I think we have all seen how our current banking industry has run amok without any form of regulation. The opportunity to get greedy can be too great in that environment. Finally, when it comes to privitization, I am completely opposed to the Republican ideas. To privitize Social Security would be a disaster for the many millions of Americans who have no savings plan for their future. Even those who do, have it invested in 401K's, etc., in the Stock Market which leaves you at risk should the stock market fall dramatically as it recently has. I once had a boss who said if you vote with your head you vote Republican and if you vote with your heart, you vote Democratic. I think this year it's safe to say that you can vote with both your heart and head and choose the Democratic ticket.
I agree with what you are saying about the higher education. I am concerned about how these candidates are going to go about accomplishing their campaign promises without raising taxes, since they both promise tax breaks. I also wondered what does the minimum wage have to do with the outsourcing of jobs. It seems that if the minimum wage went up more people in America would go to the lower jobs if they got paid more. Overall, I am completely interested in your topic because it is one that affects my friends, family, and I.
It could potentially affect those in the higher income range if companies became outsourced. I question Obama's plan of raising the minimum wage in that the casual relationship between that and sending jobs overseas is that of which more jobs will be outsourced because companies will be under even more monetary strain trying to pay more in wages and less in production which keeps a company competitive. As a result, by sending companies overseas, they will be able to produce at an even cheaper rate, which will benefit them more providing them with an incentive to take this route. Although, with McCain he would offer tax breaks to companies who didn't outsource their jobs. This could potentailly work if whoever takes office put the ideas together but it is unsure that that would actually happen.
Post a Comment