#thirdandlong
  • Articles
  • Contact

Why You Should Care About Intellectual Property Rights

3/29/2014

3 Comments

 
Picture
by John Hirschauer
As a student, the seemingly arbitrary notion of citing the image in your PowerPoint presentation built up a degree of resentment toward the mass media syndicates that could well afford to admit a high school student to save a bit of sleep. Intellectual property rights frustrated me in other ways- avoiding drawing copyrighted images for any sort of public display, not posting copyrighted music on YouTube when it seemed everyone else was doing it, and trying be prudent by not engaging in the endless abyss of unlicensed posts of copyrighted video on the internet. The proverbial man was denying me the opportunity to engage in the seemingly new age of media capabilities. After years of thoughtful reflection, it’s clear IP law is the glue of this media-centric society that would otherwise crumble.

Big names in the music industry cracking down on unsolicited plays of their songs- a common cry from the frustrated public-seems unwarranted given the revenue streams they haul in each year. Many, however, do not realize that this precedent is absolutely necessary in a society that threatens to make art a profitless industry. The colloquial “starving artist”- an unfortunate archetypal suppressor of some of the world’s fine young artists from pursuing their talents- could ironically become a fond fact of the past if art becomes an absolutely fruitless venture. If you remove the strict IP levels, you may end up eliminating any extrinsic motivation for artists to create for a culture passionate about getting a senseless amounts of quality media-on the cheap.

As a fellow student Eric Carlson noted to me once, it would be fantastic if, as a society, we could eliminate money as the centric goal of secular life and base everything off of intrinsic fancy. But this, at least at this juncture in the American capitalist system- is a distant reality. If we so value the talents and passion of our nation’s great painters, illustrators, filmmakers, musicians and authors, we must respect their need for a reliable source of income. Rather than an annoying nuisance, citing your sources and avoiding piracy protects the livelihoods of society’s artists.



Learn more about the trouble with the music industry here.

 








3 Comments
 

Income Inequality

3/26/2014

0 Comments

 
Chart was made by User:RoyBoy, using data initially published as Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez (2003), Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 2003, 1-39. Data (and updates) available here and shown here:
  • http://inequality.org/income-inequality
Picture
The City Political Economy Research Centre, an economic research group based in London, England, wrote in its Working Paper Series no. 2013/04 that its study came to three statistically evaluated points:                  
               



                    "Result 1: There is [no] statistical difference on the individual that different political 
                    parties represent once in power, although in some regressions this difference is large. 
                    Result 2: Politicians have maximized the happiness of richer individuals during the 
                    period of study. 
                    Result 3: Increases in the percentage of rents paid as wages and salaries, and the 
                    level of affiliation to labor unions are correlated with governments that maximize the 
                    happiness of poorer individuals" (CITYPERC 13)".

These three points elicit three very natural retorts/questions:
I. Is Result 1 (above) a cause of essentially comparable politics in practice or the result of pressure from members of the opposing party? Put another way, is this statistically negligible difference caused by the parties neutralizing their policy to appease the ardent of the antonymous political conviction?
II. In response to Result 2, though the answer is likely obvious, what has this trend done for society's poor in the same period?
III.  Is Result 3 evidence that the notion of unionization disturbing employers to the point of sacrificing job opportunities false?
The answer to these questions and the validity of the CITYPERC's results have major implications on the functionality of today's income inequality.

The graph at the top of the page illustrates the annual income share of the American 1% over time. As of 2008, our country has hit the highest quotient of economic top-heaviness since the Great Depression. While the allusions are all too obvious, we do indeed live in a much different time than our forefathers in the barren world of early 20th century depression economics. As the CITYPERC paper notes, in good statistical faith,  
"Even if the paper is able to show the huge democratic deficits of developed 
countries, it fails in explaining the circumstances that have provoked this situation. It is true 
that the coefficients of the regression COMP-4 are compatible with the theses of some 
authors, but unfortunately, the coefficients just show correlation between y* and macro 
variables, not the direction of the causality" (15).
However, there are many clear parallels between the Rockefellers and Carnegies of the 1930s and some of the  tycoons that rule the 21st century marketplace. To economist Paul Krugman, he would have a hard time labeling such capitalists  as "captains of industry":
Krugman argues against the idea that the very rich make a special contribution to the economy as "job creators." Few are new economy innovators like Steve Jobs, a recent analysis found that 43% of the top 0.1 percent to be executives at nonfinancial companies, 18% in finance, and another 12% are lawyers or in real estate. Commenting on the ongoing economic crisis he writes, "[the] seemingly high returns before the crisis simply reflected increased risk-taking — risk that was mostly borne not by the wheeler-dealers themselves but either by naïve investors or by taxpayers, who ended up holding the bag when it all went wrong".[33] In general, empirical researches have shown the accuracy of this slogan [We are the 99% {?}].[75] (Source).
Krugman seems to find the wealth of an absolute innovator such as Jobs to be more, for lack of better phrasing, deserved than the "risk-takers" who have successfully navigated the capitalist system. Moreover, for one to become a risk-taker, there must be something to risk.  14.7 percent of the total wealth of the 1 percent (source article here) is the result of inherited wealth. However, as Dylan Matthews of the Washington Post referenceed, Robert Frank's piece notes that "does not increase wealth inequality"(qtd. Matthews).
The gaping gap in American wages is, frankly, unethical, and it speaks to a growing disdain for society's  moral litmus impoverished population.
To conclude, here are Wikipedia's listed suggested solutions to inequality by various socioeconomic figures:

Proposed policy responses[edit]Further information: Welfare's effect on poverty
Proposed public policy responses addressing causes and deleterious effects of income inequality include: progressive tax incidence adjustments, strengthening social safety net provisions such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, welfare, the food stamp program, Social Security,Medicare, and Medicaid, increasing and reforming higher education subsidies, increasing infrastructure spending, and placing limits on and taxing rent-seeking.[321]

Increase public spending and expand welfare state[edit]The OECD asserts that public spending is vital in reducing the ever expanding wealth gap.[59]

Lane Kenworthy advocates incremental reforms to the U.S. welfare state in the direction of the Nordic social democratic model, thereby increasing economic security and equal opportunity.[322] Currently, the U.S. has the weakest social safety net of all developed nations.[323][324]

Raise taxes on the wealthy[edit]CBO reported that less progressive tax and transfer policies contributed to an increase in after-tax income inequality between 1979 and 2007.[113] This indicates that more progressive income tax policies (e.g., higher income taxes on the wealthy and a higher earned-income tax credit) would reduce after-tax income inequality.

The economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty recommend much higher top marginal tax rates on the wealthy, up to 50 percent, or 70 percent or even 90 percent.[325] Ralph Nader, Jeffrey Sachs, the United Front Against Austerity, among others, call for a financial transactions tax(also known as the Robin Hood tax) to bolster the social safety net and the public sector.[326][327][328]

The Pew Center reported in January 2014 that 54% of Americans supported raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations to expand aid to the poor. By party, 29% of Republicans and 75% of Democrats supported this action.[277]

Raise the minimum wage[edit]In his 2013 State of the Union address, Barack Obama highlighted the need to raise the federal minimum wage. The progressive economic think tank the Economic Policy Institute agrees with this position, stating: "Raising the minimum wage would help reverse the ongoing erosion of wages that has contributed significantly to growing income inequality."[329] In response to the fast-food worker strikes of 2013, Labor Secretary Thomas Perez said that it was another sign of the need to raise the minimum wage for all workers: "It's important to hear that voice... For all too many people working minimum wage jobs, the rungs on the ladder of opportunity are feeling further and further apart."[330]

The Economist wrote in December 2013: "A minimum wage, providing it is not set too high, could thus boost pay with no ill effects on jobs....America's federal minimum wage, at 38% of median income, is one of the rich world's lowest. Some studies find no harm to employment from federal of state minimum wages, others see a small one, but none finds any serious damage."[331]

The U.S. minimum wage was last raised to $7.25 per hour in July 2009.[332] As of December 2013, there were 21 states with minimum wages above the Federal minimum, with the State of Washington the highest at $9.32. Ten states index their minimum wage to inflation.[333]

The Pew Center reported in January 2014 that 73% of Americans supported raising the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 per hour. By party, 53% of Republicans and 90% of Democrats favored this action.[277] Also in January 2014, six hundred economists sent the President and Congress a letter urging for a minimum wage hike to $10.10 an hour by 2016.[334]

Implement a maximum wage[edit]Amalgamated Transit Union international president Lawrence J. Hanley has called for a maximum wage law, which "would limit the amount of compensation an employer could receive to a specified multiple of the wage earned by his or her lowest paid employees."[335] CEO pay at the largest 350 U.S. companies was 20 times the average worker pay in 1965; 58 times in 1989 and 273 times in 2012.[336]

Subsidies and income guarantees[edit]Others argue for a Basic income guarantee, ranging from civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr.[337] to libertarians such as Milton Friedman (in the form of negative income tax),[338] Robert Anton Wilson,[339] Gary Johnson (In the form of the fair tax "prebate") and Charles Murray[340] to theGreen Party.[341]

Limit rent seeking[edit]General limitations on and taxation of rent-seeking is popular with large segments of both Republicans and Democrats.[342]

Expand "economic democracy"[edit]The economists Richard D. Wolff and Gar Alperovitz claim that greater economic equality could be achieved by extending democracy into the economic sphere.[343][344] In an essay for Harper's Magazine, investigative journalist Erik Reece argues that "With the political right entrenched in its opposition to unions, worker-owned cooperatives represent a less divisive yet more radical model for returning wealth to the workers who earned it."[345]

0 Comments
 

The Year's Most Appalling News Story: Mentally Ill Homeless War Vet Bakes to Death in Prison Cell

3/20/2014

0 Comments

 
        The Huffington Post's Jake Pearson has written a fantastic piece on what must follow as one of most tragic news stories of the year. 
        Jerome Murdough, a homeless veteran who was on prescription antipsychotic and antiseizure medication to combat his ruthless bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, was "arrested for trespassing" as he "was...looking for a warm place to sleep on a chilly night.. [and] curled up in an enclosed stairwell on the roof of a Harlem public housing project" (Pearson 1).
        Murdough, in the facility's psychiatric wing, was, according to Pearson, to be checked routinely in 15 minute increments for suicide watch. This never happened as frequently as it should have, but they should have checked in for a much different purpose.
        In the tender words of an anonymous officer, "He basically baked to death".
        According to Pearson, "four city officials say [that Murdough's cell] had overheated to at least 100 degrees, apparently because of malfunctioning equipment" (qtd. Pearson 1). Jerome's psychiatric medication "may have made him more vulnerable to heat," as he was found "slumped over in his bed" as he "did not open a small vent in his cell, as other inmates did, to let in cool air" (1).
        The lack of a solemn statement of condolence by prison officials is disconcerting.
        "He wasn't just some old homeless person on the street. He was loved. He had a life. He had a family. He had feelings" said Murdough's sister Wanda (qtd. 1).
        A homeless man with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, a former Marine, seeking some shelter, was thrown in a cell in a penitentiary where he was neglected until he, as the officer so delicately stated, "baked to death".
        This is an outright tragedy that raises questions about the way we treat homeless individuals and those with mental illness. Should this man have been brought to prison for trespassing? Even if yes, why not a psychiatric hospital where they are more apt to handle the antipsychotic and antiseizure medication he was under?
        This man had inherent worth and dignity. As much as you or I or any other cohabitant of this planet. We can't take this as an unfortunate consequence of a "efficient" system for dealing with the mentally ill. 
0 Comments
 

Should the NFL Induce a 15-Yard Penalty for Using the N-Word?

3/7/2014

0 Comments

 
I am obliged to preface this by stating that I am a white kid, in a largely white area, who has little to no personal experience with racial epithets, either as a user or recipient.
I do not condone use of the N-word. It connotes too strongly to the days of barbaric racism and blatant mistreatment. The word is an unfortunate remnant of an, at least partially , bygone era of segregated society and disrespect.
For better or worse, the black community has indoctrinated the term as a part of their cultural fellowship. The word is so brashly thrown about that young people experiencing it become immune to it. 
It isn't my place as a white guy to police the cultural movements of the black community. I don't like the word. Plenty of African-Americans don't either. But the word has strangely united the young black community in a way that is a bit backwards- at least in theory. Pejorative words rarely in the history of English discourse become terms of endearment. The N-word has that ubiquitous distinction. 
And just like it's not my place, it isn't the place of the NFL to be the impetus of a definite crackdown on an ethically polarizing and puzzling topic that has no clear right or wrong answer. It's rather arrogant, to me, that the NFL, lead by fellow caucasian Roger Goodell, sees it fit to eliminate a word so integral to the fellowship of the black community- even if its a filthy word in origin and still is today.  
I hate the N-word. It's a dated (clearly), low term that harks to the emotions of a nation divided.
But the NFL unfortunately is not the ethical epicenter of the globe and the league should consult some of the leaders in the field of applied ethics and the social sciences before making such a contentious moral issue.

0 Comments
 

    John Hirschauer




    "Ray [Guy] wasn't just the best punter in the draft. He was the best punter to ever punt a football"
    -John Madden

    By Month

    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013

    RSS Feed

    Above photo is taken by Dirk and was faded and a recipient of other artistic changes. This work was used under Creative Commons.
    The Third and Long logo photograph was taken by
    Stephanie Cancino and was altered in a similar way. This work was also used under Creative Commons

    TAGS

    All
    Analytics
    Controversial Topics
    Football
    John Forbes Nash
    Pro Bowl
    Statistics


Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.