#article six

[wonkette]

Texas County Wanted To Hire Only Bible-Believing Baptists, Is That Wrong?

READ MOAR!

[amandas-world-issues-scrapb-blog]

Issue Overview: North and South Korea are trying to reunify as whole country but they are trying to sort out their economic issues. They estimate it will take 500 billion dollars to raise North Korea’s per capita income to 10 thousand dollars in 20 years time. The governments are working on the plan to raise the fund for their reunification.

  Course Connections: This relates to the core and periphery definitions and discussion we had in class because of Korea’s plans to develop economically, they are now being considered near core. Korea, as one country, could be economically stable and could succeed in the world today. This also makes it a good example of sustainability.

  Key Stakeholders: The two Korean governments both obviously play in the role of balancing out the economy so that there is not a large burden on North Korea’s economy, as it is weaker. The OECD will be aiding them with the funds and balancing the inequality in the economy. This will also affect citizens as it does change their income and cost of things in their country.

  Contributing factors and Implications: This is an economic issue and North Korea does not have enough money currently to sustain itself in the unification of North and South Korea. Factors that play a role in this a the food and money rations in North Korea and the amount they are spending on food to keep the country fed.

Bias: The news seems slightly bias as they do have a positive view towards the idea and believe it will be successful. They may have this view because they are a English-Asian news station.

[group4nw]

The responsibility of companies towards climate changes

More and more firms are announcing they are concerned about environment, and promoting the way they protect it. Yet, their reasons to act for the environment preservation are by far more complex and less altruistic or disinterested than what they want to make you believe.

  With time, pollution has evolved. Besides the pollution related to transports, companies added their own pollution to households’ pollution. All this has an impact on the climate and changes many of its aspects, especially the temperature. Nowadays three types of industries exist: traditional industries, service companies and digital companies.

Traditional industries are industries of the primary and the secondary sectors. The primary sector regroups industries from farming, fishing, logging and mining. The secondary sector regroups companies which transforms raw materials from primary sector. The new industries include service companies and digital companies. Each year in France for example, traditional companies produce approximately 100 million tons of wastes. These wastes ferment and emit methane, which is one of the most dangerous greenhouse gases for the planet. Moreover, in order to transform raw materials, companies need resources such as coal or oil, producing carbon dioxide while being consumed, another greenhouse gas. Service companies, mostly transport companies, also produce greenhouse gases. In France, they are responsible for more than a quarter of greenhouse production according to official statistics. The specificity of these companies is that they don’t pollute directly but involve many suppliers and actors who work for them.

  Thanks to new technologies and the ones coming on the 2050 horizon, scientists begin to know more about the impact of human activities on the environment. The debate is now part of the public domain.

The environment concerns are treated more efficiently when internationally addressed, for example during the Rio Summit or the signature of the Kyoto protocol, initiated by the United Nation Conference on Earth and Development (UNCED). But those two international events were very criticized because the countries that pollute the most (the U.S and the republic of China) did not agree to those treaties.

In order to reduce greenhouse gases emission, the government can take two measures: carbon tax and energy tax. Those measures can help to reduce climate change by raising the price of carbon-rich fuels. So the companies would really pay attention to their transport costs and might even use more renewable energies.

  There is something that we tend to forget as consumers. Companies' actions regarding the environment tend to benefit them as well. Indeed, taking care of our planet improves their public image; they might even reduce their costs in transportation and production, although it is obvious that investments will be needed.

Many companies choose to use certification, in order to push themselves to combine all the aspects mentioned above. We are here talking about the ISO14001, which brings the staff of a company to act more environment-responsible. According to Dennis Rodinelli and Gyula Vastag in their Panacea, common sense, or just a label?: The value of ISO14001 environmental management systems, the ISO14001 is more like a guideline to follow rather than an obligation. Indeed companies do not have to follow the criteria after they have been granted the certification, although all that comes out of the efforts they provided might encourage them to keep following the ISO14001 guidelines.

    All in all, personal interests seem to play a bigger part in the decision-making process of the companies to go green, rather than the greater good of humankind. Still their purpose does not really matter as long as the result is the same: less pollution and less global warming. We plan that more than 50% of the companies from western countries will be involved in the climate change issue in 2050. The environmental system will be a major part of the research & development process too.

[dynamisch]

My two favorite features in the March/April 2013 issue of K9 Cop Magazine. I absolutely loved the lengthy text on e-collars, it was an interesting read all the way through and kept me wanting more! An awesome insight into the unlimited uses of this precise training tool. On the bites? Very in depth, but not dry in the least! A well written article worth more than a quick glance.

[portula-blog]

RESPONSE: PIKE: Teachers Unions Standing up for Us All

    The article I have chosen to look at next was an opinion piece by Deirdre Pike. In this article, Pike discusses his outlook on the current Ontario teachers’ strike. He addresses issues such as the union, the public opinion on the strike, the governmental aspect of it all, the removal of extra curricular activities and so on. Thankfully, Pike chose to view these issues in a supportive manner towards the teachers at hand, which other opinion pieces I had found throughout my endeavors failed to do. I very much agree with his opinions on the aforementioned issues, such as how he thinks “it’s a very dangerous message to send our youth that the cancellation of these programs is more important than the cancellation of the democratic process and the rights of workers’ to bargain with their employers.” Unlike many others who view the battle between teachers and bill 115 from a standpoint outside of a union-backed job, Pike lends his full support to the teachers which I find very reassuring and a pleasant change from those who are the opposite. I find myself asking questions such as what future Pike sees for the issues and what he believes it will all come down to. I, personally, can only hope that more people will release supportive pieces such as this and help back the teachers in their battle.

[portula-blog]