Food Stamps for Fast Food

I am not too sure if I am correct when it comes to answering the issue about food stamps and whether or not they should be allowed to be used to purchase fast food meals. My understanding about food stamps is that they are issued to people who cannot sustain themselves (or their family) because they work low paying jobs or are unemployed.

I went online to a site called Social Security Online (found at www.socialsecurity.gov) and I found that food stamps are part of a program here in America (I do not know if other countries do this also or have something similar) that is suppose to help people with low-incomes. This site was very helpful to me. It was helpful in a sense that I now understand exactly what food stamps are used for and the procedures in being qualified for them.

I checked out another online site called Food Stamp Outreach Project (located at www.foodstampshelp.org) and I was able to what all can be bought with food stamps.

• Any food or food product except for ready-to-eat hot foods
• Baby formula, goat's milk, Pedialyte and Pediasure
• Seeds and plants used to grow foods including fruit trees
• Fresh produce items from authorized vendors
• Meals prepared and delivered by a meal delivery service such as Meals on Wheels
• Meals at congregate meal sites such as soup kitchens
• Nutritional supplements such as Ensure, Isomil, Boost and Sustacal
• Weight loss products such as Dynatrim, Slim Fast, Cambridge Diet and Nutrisystem
• Artificial Sweeteners
• Distilled Water
• Ice
• Lactaid caplets and Lactaid milk
• Cooking Sprays, such as Never Stik and Pam
• Prepared cold sandwiches or salads that will not be eaten in the store

When I read this list, I was wondering if there is any reason to allow people pay for fast food meals with food stamps. I would say no. A person or family living off of food stamps is able to get by with buying food from a market and cooking it at their home. They are also able to have the option of buying already made meals from soup kitchens and Meals on Wheels people.

But the more I think about this issue, the more I start to feel like I was too quick in my decision in saying no. Maybe food stamps should be able to purchase fast food, but it has to be regulated. Like the regulation has to be that only two restaurants per month can be paid with food stamps, and the restaurants have to be places that are either family run or not a big time eating place (As long as there are some kind of regulations placed on this topic I would be fine with it).

My Dinner Party

My list of guests (supposing that I am allowed to bring people back from the dead)-

1. Steve Jobs
1. He is a genius when it comes to taking something that has already been invented and make it better.
2. MLK Jr.
1. Do I need to explain why I would invite this man?
3. Dr. Von
1. She will make people think about what they are talking about and if she thinks that someone is talking stupid, she will let them know.
4. Gandhi
1. He is all for non-violence. There are so many great quotes from this man.
5. Kurt (from Glee)
1. He drops knowledge on the show.
6. Hung-Lo
1. He is very influencail, yet quiet. He is an expert of underseas problems.

My dinner party will take place at Dave and Busters, because it's a nice relaxed place. They serve a lot of good food. Also, if we needed to take a break with what we are talking about we can play arcade games, bowl, or drink.
I would serve some multi-cultural dishes, to make everyone comfortable with what they are eating.

Marketing Overlord

Wal-mart, and other companies that are like Wal-mart, disgusts me. I feel like I have seen this documentary before in my high school economy class. Even if I had or not, this flim left me feeling angry about everything that Wal-mart has been doing to American nationwide.
In Wal-mart's defense, the documentary did little to none to show their side on this issue, though I doubt that even if there was one put into the film it would not help. The clear contrast between the Wal-mart commercial vs the interviews with their employees is just incredible. I cannot believe how poorly cared for the employees are at Wal-mart (or any other big box company). When thinking about this, I could not help but think about my fall break. Yesterday, I went to Walgreen with my dad to get our flu shots and my dad's company gave him (and other employees) a letter that made his shot free. Wal-mart is a very rich and successful company. Why can't they give their employees the proper health care (and what ever else they have been keeping from their workers) and stop being selfish by making the government support them.
I can't remember where this blog was suppose to go with the Wal-mart documentary, so I will leave this youtube video for your enjoyment.

The Battle of the T's

I do not think that Carly LeBlanc should have to quite her internship and drop her class just because she is faced with this tough decision. She is obviously conflicted with the choice of quality over quantity and her want to fulfill her own personal ambitions over making the ethical choice.

If I was in Carly’s shoes, I would go to my boss and present the situation to him. She has over exceeded his challenge and signed on 200 more college students than what was required of her. This is not a bad thing because the purpose of this challenge was to get the company’s name out to the campus community through students at Carly’s university. So, I really do not see her boss getting angry with her if she asked him to extend her timeline. Of course, if they were to continue something like this in the future, they will need to revise how they approach the student body. Like, for the first 100 sorority members to sign up with the company will get the free t-shirts. This way, there is a purpose for these students to want to sign up.

As for the situation at hand, it would all depend on whether she was given time by her boss to investigate where to order her shirts from. If she was given the okay for an extension, then she needs to see what her best options are. If she did not get an extension (which I really do not would happen) she could use what time she has to do research on the two companies. Clearly she is assuming that the Chinese company has a “destitute environment”, which is unfair because she is basing this on one experience and stereotyping this company.

I feel like if I had to choose between the Chinese company and the fair trade company, I would probably choose the fair trade one. For starters, the students would be impressed that their shirts were made from fine quality and be more willing to show it off to other students. They will also have more trust in the company and the products that they offer if their free t-shirt was nice. The company as a whole will get a positive reputation because they bought the shirts from an American owned t-shit company. The only down side is that the cost would be pretty high up, but I believe that the pros of choosing the fair trade company out weights the high costs.  

Invention vs. Innovation

When it comes to invention vs. innovation, the first thought that comes to mind is that invention is more valuable than the latter. As a society, we could not have the things that we take for granted or want without first having someone come up with the idea and create it. That is just how it works. Thomas Edison invented the light bulb and Karl Benz came up with the first modern automobile. Their inventions helped advance civilization greatly (though they are not the only inventors to do this. There are many others that I cannot name on the top of my head) and it is because of these creators that we are able to utilize these inventions.

            Now taking a second look at invention vs. innovation, my line of thinking is different now that I have had time to really think about it. I do not think that invention is any less important than innovation; it is just that innovation does more on a long run than invention does. I believe that invention is just the starting block for innovation to take over. People are always going to come up with new ideas but it is going to be innovation that is going to take those ideas and make new ways to go about that idea. Look at computers from when they were first invented to what they are now, that is all innovation’s doing.

            To what particular area(s) of invention and innovation would I like to make a contribution in my life? That is a hard question. I do not know really how I would go about contributing. (It would be funny though if I have already been doing this without knowing that I am.) I know that there are penny stocks that you can buy on the internet and you can help invest in someone and their product. I do not know if this actually answers the question. I remember in my freshman history class when the teacher was talking about the stock market crash, she kind of got off topic and talked about how an acquaintance of hers asked if she would invest some money in his invention (or something). She did not, but a couple of years later it turned out that his invention became pretty popular. That was where I got the whole penny stocks idea.

Globalization

           I did not know much about the globalization issue before taking this class; it was not something that I had to ever do research for. I know that in my European Issues class last year, the professor talked about it on the last class day before finals week, but it was only for a little bit. Actually it was more like, “There’s a thing called globalization and you don’t need to know it for the final”. When looking over the information provided by The Globalization Website, it kind of opened my eyes that this is a kind of issue that should be made more aware of, especially since the world is more connected than ever before.

On the website there were six main debates listed: Meaning, Interpretation, Evaluation, Explanation, Political, and Cultural. Through these main debates, the reader is able to see both opposing sides. The main debate that caught my eye was Cultural: Sameness vs. Difference. I do not know why this debate caught my eye. I just know that after I finished reading the description for that debate it got me thinking. Since the world is so interconnected, it seems likely that different cultures are going to clash with each other and intermix. This does not seem like a huge deal. Maybe cultural intermixing is what the world needs. If we are more alike than different, then there will be more tolerance. Or it could cause more conflicts. The conflicts that I can see in globalization intermixing cultures is that the more dominate culture is going to absorb or annihilate the recessive ones. This could be a great thing, unite the world under one culture. I do not see it as such though. A country’s culture is what makes it unique.

On the website it gives reasons why globalization will diminish or foster cultural diversity. I was a little concern about a point for the foster cultural diversity side which says, “… diversity has itself become a global value, promoted through international organizations and movements”. Whenever I think about something having a value in the world, I cannot help but imagine that there are corporate business men putting price tags on it.   

Two quotes that I want to also want to discuss are from Jared Diamond and Larry Elder.

"Globalization makes it impossible for modern societies to collapse in isolation, as did Easter Island and the Greenland Norse in the past. Any society in turmoil today, no matter how remote ... can cause trouble for prosperous societies on other continents and is also subject to their influence (whether helpful or destabilizing). For the first time in history, we face the risk of a global decline. But we also are the first to enjoy the opportunity of learning quickly from developments in societies anywhere else in the world today, and from what has unfolded in societies at any time in the past."

Jared Diamond (Scientist, author of Guns, Germs, and Steel and Collapse:How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed)

      I agree with Mr. Diamond when he says that a country can no longer succeed or fail without effecting other countries, in today's world that is impossible. A country cannot isolate itself from the world anymore like they were able to in years past. I do not know if this relates much to what Mr. Diamond is saying, but revolutions in Northern Africa can be an example of what he is saying in the second sentence. When these revolutions started popping up, they became a priority to countries around the world because it was affecting them economically.

"Outsourcing and globalization of manufacturing allows companies to reduce costs, benefits consumers with lower cost goods and services, causes economic expansion that reduces unemployment, and increases productivity and job creation."

 
Larry Elder (Talk radio host)

       I chose Larry Elder's quote because I outright disagree with it. I do not think that globalization is reducing unemployment, especially not in America. It is more like globalization is creating a bigger pool of competition for us to compete in.  Also, when he says "Outsourcing and globalization of manufacturing" brings me back to A Story of Stuff. The author talked about how companies would take resources from other countries in order to produce cheaper materials, it does not really do much of anything else.