Chaniiz Baeza

Professor Hamman
October 8, 2017

Social Insurance

Social Security has proven to greatly benefit many different Americans, including el-
derly, people with disabilities, and widows and orphans. Initially, it was created for the elderly to
provide income to them during the Great Depression. Now, almost all employed Americans are
covered by Social Security. The current problem with the program is the increasing number of
Americans who are retiring or will be retiring in the near future. Whats concerning is that in-
creasing number means there will be less people working, which is where the funds come from,
payroll taxes that come from the working population.
When all the Baby Boomers will be retiring and collecting their share of Social Security,
there will be a lot less people working because of the size of that generation. It wont last for-
ever, however, because its an issue that will inherently self-correct itself when those retirees
pass away. Unfortunately, there are a lot people who cant seem to grasps this logic. George W.
Bush is infamous for attacking Social Security during his term as President. He proposed the idea
to introduce Personal Saving Accounts (PSAs), where the accounts of workers are invested in the
stock market, but one of the problems with investing in stocks would be that the managers of
Wall Street are likely to charge the accounts to reimburse the funds for interest lost. Another ma-
jor concern with PSAs is the risk of losing the investments in the case of emergencies, workers
may or may not be forced to cash in their accounts, which ultimately undermines the whole pur-
pose of Social Security. If we stay optimistic to issues regarding Social Security, surely there
will be other ways to address the problem, without putting the retirement plans of the future at
risk. Perhaps changing the estate taxes, or removing the income cap on funding from general rev-
enues through revival of progressive taxation. At the end of the day, there is still plenty of time
to predict and build the opposite outcome that mainstream economists have projected.

Works Cited

Laibman, David. "SOCIAL SECURITY." Science & Society 69, no. 4 (10, 2005): 521-528.
https://login.ezp.pasa-
dena.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/216124586?accountid=28371.

Foreign Policy
 The United States plays a big role in the world single-market and production system,
called globalization, in which markets, production, and communications increase worldwide
across national boundaries. After World War II, systems of trade were established to eliminate
tariffs on traded goods and to remove restrictions on non-tariff trade, efforts to create more mar-
kets in agriculture, and product and services.
Generally speaking, international trade ideally benefits all countries involved whether
they are wealthy or not. Some Americans disagree, however, they believe that the North Ameri-
can Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada and Mexico, is responsible for the loss of jobs
like manufacturing but most economist will say that advances in technology and rises in produc-
tivity are the cause for losses in manufacturing.
Donald Trump is posing a major threat to this policy, which has been recognized for it
benefits to the U.S., Mexico and Canada for over 30 years. Trump says he will be making big
changes, or simply get rid of NAFTA all together. He continues to insult Mexico with his plans
for a wall, claiming that will put an end to illegal immigration. Instead of pushing Mexico aside,
the U.S. should cooperate with Mexico to defend our countries from illegal immigration that is
coming primarily from Central America. If Mexico becomes hostile, they may ignore all the drug
traffickers, criminals, and terrorist making there way to the U.S. Also, if news policies weaken
Mexicos economy, they will have more of a reason to migrate into the U.S. themselves.
If Trump removes the U.S. from NAFTA it will cost more and it will weaken the global
competitiveness of the U.S. auto industry. On top of that, it will hurt the U.S. economy because
poor Mexican-Americans will consume less, which result in sales dropping. Also, there are about
6 million jobs that will be lost because they depend on exports to Mexico. Such sanctions should
only be use to protect human rights, environmental standards, not to promote hostile nationalism.

Works Cited

Zoellick, Robert B. "By Trashing Mexico, Trump Hurts the U.S." Wall Street Journal,Apr 24,
2017,
Eastern edition. https://login.ezp.pasa-
dena.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1890965920?accountid=28371.