Infinite Versus Equal

P1. An infinite amount of one-dollar bills is equal to an infinite amount of one-hundred dollar bills. In today’s society, the human race has been made to believe that a small piece of paper with a number on it is enough to give us what we need. Someone could have two one-dollar bills and not be looked at twice, because unfortunately money is something most people value more than a personality or brain. Meanwhile if one has the same piece of paper with a 100 on it instead of a 1, they are looked at with more dignity, even if they are just a kid who’s grandmother thought they could use the extra cash. Nothing changed on the bill except a number, and even a small number can make all the difference in how much wealth a person in this world has. The amount of the bills changes by one small number in the four corners of the bill, which decide a person’s entire life.

P2. Located in the westerly group of the Caroline Islands, in Micronesia is the Island of Yap. In his paper, “The Island of Stone Money,” Milton Friedman tells about American anthropologist, William Henry Furness III’s experience on the Island of Yap. During his visit, he found the way the people of Yap used currency to be of interest. Described as “large, solid, thick, stone wheels, ranging in diameter from a foot to twelve feet,” Furness found the Yap’s money to be intriguing, wanting to figure out how this form of money came about for them. Due to the lack of silver and gold on the island, the Yap resorted to stone once they realized they needed a form of currency on their island so they could buy and sell. Not only is their money based on rock instead of the conventional currency used by most of the world, their money is also based on trust. A piece of rock, or money, fell to the bottom of the ocean years ago, though the islanders have never seen the money, the ones who do not own the money still respect that it belongs to someone and that that person who lost the stone have that money. Much more trust in this society than most in the world.

P3. In countries such as the United States, a citizen would almost believe that money is something sacred, the way people appear to treat it. For example, someone could sell someone a house without either of them seeing the house before the purchase and they trust that they own the house, but only because they gave the money and the people who sold the house see the money. In the United States, there are people who treat money like it is their child, so it seems very unlikely that the citizens in the US are very trustworthy with their money in the hands of someone else. In the podcast, “The Island of Stone Money,” Jacob Goldstein and David Kestenbaum discuss how economists love the island called Yap “because it helps answer this really basic question: What is money?” They also explain how on Yap; money doesn’t need to be physically transferred from one person to another to change its ownership. All it takes is one verbal transaction. They say, “One person gives it to another person. But the stone doesn’t move. It’s just that everybody in the village knows the stone now has a new owner.” In what way does this sound like money is even something more than a concept created to make sure chaos does not break out between people in this world?

P4. Sometimes though, trusting people with money is not something that everyone can rely on. In Brazil, the government was able to trick 150,000,000 people into believing that their money had value. Inflation in Brazil, at 80% a month is through the roof, causing something as simple as a pair of sunglasses to be brought from $80 to $340 in a matter of six months. They could not find a way to stop the inflation. That brings this to a very intriguing point. Why is inflation even a concept? From the first paragraph where it is alluded that an infinite amount of one bill and an infinite amount of another are equal, it brings up the question: Is money real?

P5. Who is there to even trust if there is nothing to be trusted with? Like time, money can be seen as an illusion. A physical, tangible illusion, but an illusion nonetheless. We possess paper, coins, or in the Yap’s case, stones, that are worth everything, but if there’s too much of it, it is somehow worth nothing. Money is a social construct that everyone has agreed to make worth something for convenience. Such as back in the day, bartering was something used, but once currency was brought on everything ran more smoothly. The Federal Reserve of the United States is responsible for creating money whenever they want, yet the country is still fourteen billion dollars in debt. So why not print more? They do not print more because more money equals the value of it decreasing, yet the less we have, the more it goes up. So why do we not just print the fourteen billion we need to climb our way out of debt? No one really seems to have an answer for that.

P6. There’s a form of e-currency out there called Bitcoins whose value drastically jumps from the two-hundreds to the fifties. In the article, “The bubble bursts on e-currency bitcoin,” by Anne Renaut, she goes on to describe the digital currency as something “which was created in 2009 in the wake of the global financial crisis by an anonymous programmer who wanted a currency independent of any central bank or financial institution.” Someone decided that they did not like the way their money was being handled, therefore they just created a new one. The way money is used here, the drops, the raises, the way it is handled is almost fictitious. It seems that if someone is not satisfied by the way their money is being handled, they change the value, or create something new. Yes, it has value, but only on demand. If we demanded something as trivial as apples they would have a lot more value than they actually do.

P7. Back to the Island of Yap, they do not have debt, because how can there be a shortage of rock? Money on Yap is less physical and more transactional, based on trust where one can just say “this is yours now” and it will belong to them with no questions. Yap is a place built on trust, rather than America, where people need to see their money to believe that it’s there and valuable. There’s that classic phrase in movies and TV shows: “Show me the money.” The character in whatever situation they have found themselves in won’t do what they are being told to do until they see their reward. There are other instances in which someone is offered a scholarship, where they do not see the money or reward, but the feeling they have when offered that scholarship is a big accomplishment and they feel on top of the world. They know they are getting their reward, because they see it on the piece of paper in which it was offered on. They saw it. When Americans hear about how the Yap deal with their money, it sounds absurd.

P8. Money is nothing but a concept. Each place in the world handles it different, yet we all seem to think it is one of the most important possessions one can own, when in reality, if one thinks about it, money is an illusion. Tactile, but still, money is not real in the long run. It has value, and the idea of money, the value that it brings to the table is very important, though we could easily switch that ideal system and just start exchanging fish if we wanted to.

Works Cited

Blumberg, Alex, and Dave Kestenbaum. “Weekend At Bernanke’s.” Audio blog post. www.thisisamericanlife.org. N.p., 7 Jan. 2011. Web. 18 Jan. 2017.

Friedman, Milton. The Island of Stone Money. Feb. 1991. Working Papers in Economics E-91-3. The Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

Goldstein, Jacob, and David Kestenbaum. “The Island of Stone Money.” Audio blog post. N.p., 10 Dec. 2010. Web. 18 Jan. 2017.

Joffe-Walt, Chana. “The Lie That Saved Brazil.” Audio blog post. www.thisisamericanlife.org. N.p., 7 Jan. 2011. Web. 18 Jan. 2017.

Renaut, Anne. “The Bubble Bursts on E-currency Bitcoin.” Yahoo! News. Yahoo!, 13 Apr. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2017.

Weeks, Linton. “The Trouble With Trillions.” NPR. NPR, 22 Aug. 2011. Web. 22 Jan. 2017. http://www.npr.org/2011/08/22/139846133/the-trouble-with-trillions

Draft Proposal

Racism in America should not exist and expanding on the main topic of this class i find it to be very counterintuitive. It is counterintuitive because we are all a mix from different parts of the world and our DNA can prove it, so to believe one race is superior to another knowing that a person could very well be mixed with the very race they feel superior to. America is a country for immigrants built by immigrants. Most people in this world have a very extensive family tree. I don’t believe anyone is fully one nationality because we all are a mix of nationalities.  With enough research i believe I can come up with a more  than valid argument to discuss why racism in America should not exist.

Housing the Homeless

p1. Being Homeless is a title given to those that have struggled to the point that living on the street is the only place they feel they can go. Many obstacles come with being homeless, the biggest obstacle being, without a home. But homeless people face a variety of other challenges too, such as being fined for being homeless, or not getting the proper care medically. One surprising, common struggle was stated by David Borestein. He discovered that one of the leading characteristics of homelessness was a head trauma. A simple blow to the head could cause a chain reaction that could lead to homelessness. Do these things mean that homeless people should not have a right to proper housing or the ability to a job? No, it means that they are more entitled to a right to these things. People should not be shunned or turned away for struggling to the point of homelessness, they should be given assistance, and aided to the point in which they feel they can come back into society. Helping Homeless people get back on their feet is not a useless and wasteful task, helping the homeless is a worthy cause.

p2. It is almost  insensitive to assume that Homeless people do not acknowledged that they have some form of mental damage, or assume that all of them do not want to work and become stable again. and excerpt from Borestein’s piece reads “But that can be misleading, even to experts. When I asked Rosanne Haggerty, the founder of Common Ground, which currently operates 2,310 units of supportive housing (with 552 more under construction), what had been her biggest surprise in this work, she replied: “Fifteen years ago, I would not have believed that people who had been so broken and entrenched in homelessness could thrive to the degree that they do in our buildings.” (Borstein, NY-Times). To simply assume homeless people will not strive to come back into society is undermining to programs like Housing First, because it makes people think that it is a waste of money, when in reality it is the exact opposite.

p3. To clarify, Housing First is a program created by Rene Zepeda, and the whole goal is to get homeless people, who are in dire situations, into housing as soon as possible. While similar to Rosanne Haggerty’s program, Housing first differs because it wants to get the medically dire homeless into housing first. Some of these homeless people are out on the streets with medical issue that are not just head injuries. Things like liver failure, cancer, and other medically challenging issues plague the homeless community.”Homeless populations suffer disproportionately high rates of chronic and infectious disease, mental illness, and substance use-related health problems.2-6 Homelessness is consistently associated with longer and repeated hospital stays 7-9 and homeless individuals are disproportionately represented among frequent users of hospital care.(“ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the USA2014 134 ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the USA Ann Arbor, MI ProQuest 2013-.” Reference Reviews 28.4 (2014): 22-24. Web.) Medically needy Homeless people should not be brushed aside when they are people who are in need.  These problems are temporarily fixed by medical respite programs, but Housing First and Haggerty’s program, which allows access to full housing, can decrease any chances of becoming seriously ill again because homeless people are not released back on the street.

p4. These housing programs are good for the homeless because it also acts as a grace period, and not just a permanent shelter. In the sense of a grace period, it allows the homeless to be reintroduced into regular society aspects, like being around and communicating with others. These skills are essential for the homeless to get back into the work force. When people say things like “why dont they just get a job?” Well the people who say that know that it is never that easy, especially for people who have not been around regular people, or those with head trauma. Once these people stabilize after a while, certain simple jobs like cashiers at 7-11, or other simple jobs like that can be given obtained by the previously homeless as a starting point for income, and that is what programs like Haggerty’s aims to do. People and programs like these are why the homeless can integrate back into society, slowly but surely. Getting homeless in permenant shelters is what provides them with a good starting point to get them back on their feet, head trauma or not, these people deserve to have a home and access to clean water and food.

p5. The real question surrounding this topic  is “is it all worth it?” Doesn’t it seem expensive to shelter all those people for free, and providing them with medical needs, food, and water. As heartless as the notion seems, the homeless are very expensive to take care of, and that’s why a majority of cities would rather fine them and leave them on the streets than take care of them. Given the evidence from these articles it seems that it is a noble and fruitful task to put time and money into. The articles are compelling, for many of reasons, but the main one is that even if these people suffer from brain damage they have a right to a safe home and clean water. Many people think that homeless people did it to themselves, or that they deserve it for  being lazy or having financial issues, but the economy is rough, and like stated previously, getting a job is hard, even for people who are not homeless. And Homeless people who have life-threatening medical conditions should not be sent back into the streets as soon as the hospitals are done with them. Solely  the argument is compelling on a human level. No one deserves to be in that situation, regardless of their past, and being homeless is not a crime, so why do people and cops view it as such. Helping out the homeless, as expensive and time extensive as it is, should be a given because they are people in need and that is really it. So the articles are compelling and thanks to the authors who went out and gathered all the information about the Housing First programs, or what being homeless is really like, these articles could help convince and inspire other people to help.

Works Cited

Borenstein, David. “A Plan to Make Homelessness History.” Opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com. N.p., 20 Dec. 2010. Web.

Borenstein, David. “The Street-Level Solution.” Opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com. N.p., 24 Dec. 2010. Web.

“ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the USA2014 134 ProQuest Statistical Abstract of the USA Ann Arbor, MI ProQuest 2013-.” Reference Reviews 28.4 (2014): 22-24. Web.