Causal Argument- Alpacaqueen

I’d like to propose a simple task. Completely redefine the food labeling industry so that it is more adaptive and accepting of today’s genetically and technologically enhanced foods. We, as people, crave options. We crave truthfulness. We crave knowledge. Yet for some reason, supermarkets continue to display food in a very black and white fashion. You can choose organically labeled food, whose description can still be vague,  or non-organically labeled food, which could be anything from fresh produce that just fell short of the “organic” standards or a box of pop-tarts. With the hundreds of breakthroughs in food technology, there is no reason that there aren’t more options between this left or right side standard we’ve come to condone. The adoption of these “new foods” that have been genetically and/or technologically enhanced not only accomplish this task, but positively affect the producer, consumer, and the environment too.

As stated above, one major category that advancements in food biotechnology affect are the producer, or in this case, the farmers and researchers. In many ways, these new inventions and methods for farming are dramatically changing the game, and for the better. With the adoption of such technologies, farmers’ jobs become less time consuming and more productive. Instead of having to weed through thousands upon thousands of crops, many fruits and vegetables are being genetically modified to build up resistance to soils with toxins or poor fertility, saving farmers time and money. In a piece by Purdue University, the paper explains how crops are being developed that “utilize nitrogen or water more efficiently, which allows them to produce food and fiber with less applied fertilizer and irrigation – an advance that could not only reduce production costs, but could also improve water quality.” These enhanced crops would not only save farmers funds by conserving fertilizer use, but also improve the environment and water purity as a result of the decreased fertilizer use. Speaking of saving farmers money, the paper continues with the statement,

“Abdalla et al. (2003) predict the full global adoption of biotech crops would result in income gains of $210 billion per year for farmers – and that some of the greatest gains are expected to occur in developing countries.”

This is a substantial amount of savings. We aren’t talking a few tens of millions, we’re estimating $210 billion dollars PER YEAR. If more of the world were to adopt these biologically enhanced crops, it would reduce costs dramatically, not only for its producers in our own country, but also developing nations who struggle with coming up with the funds to sustain a sufficient yield.

Endorsement of these biotech crops and technology certainly have a positive effect on the consumers as well. Many companies are utilizing 3-D printing to produce food like never before. One company, Modern Meadow, has already used a type of bioprinting to form leather from taking a small portion of the product in its final state, forming samples of collagen from the animal, and using technology to assist the collagen in growing into a state of hide. CEO of Modern Meadow, Andras Forgacs and his team were able to form “skin models” of fully functioning organs such as livers and kidneys through 3-D biotech printing. Forgacs is working towards using this technology to create produce, which could completely revolutionize the meat industry. Even NASA is utilizing printing technology to produce foods, such as pizza, for astronauts to make during space exploration. Food biotechnology is being used to reduce health risks among humans as well. Many plants and vegetables are being engineered to give its consumers greater nutritional value and decreased disease risks. As author Theresa Phillips explains in her article, “5 Ways Food Biotechnology Has Changed the World,”  “…the (once lowly) soybean has been developed to produce more stearic acid, thus improving the heat stability of the oil, to match the properties of trans-hydrogenated fatty acids.” Reduction of these fatty acids prevent less risk in clogging the arteries. Or perhaps you’d prefer tomatoes that can be “bred to produce higher amounts of lycopene, a compound that has been linked to lower blood cholesterol levels ​and has been shown to lower the risk of breast cancer and prostate cancers.” In developing nations that struggle with sourcing fresh water, engineers are introducing technologies to test its purity. Philips explains this as well in her article as it states, “Cryptosporidium parvum (Crypto), is a water-borne pathogen that produces spores, making it difficult to remove by boiling or chemical treatments.” Fortunately, scientists are currently working to introduce certain antibodies that help to detect these impurities.

It doesn’t stop there. Food biotechnology has a great effect on our environment as well. With so much of our planet’s land being used up more and more each day, one farm in London formed a new solution by producing crops from a farm built in abandoned underground tunnels, called a hydroponic farm. These types of farms grow food without soil and instead use a water solution packed with nutrients. Additionally, Exxon Mobil recently engineered a strain of algae that is able to produce massive amounts of oil. What does this mean for the environment? A new and promising (and sustainable) source of biofuel. As the article from Exxon Mobil explains, “Algae has other advantages over traditional biofuels because it can grow in salt water and thrive in harsh environmental conditions, therefore limiting stress on food and fresh water supplies.” While many jump to assume genetically engineered food and food technologies are set to destroy the planet, it may just be one of the last approaches in saving it.

The world of food biotechnology isn’t here to hurt us. It isn’t here to shove hundreds of toxic chemicals into our produce. It’s here to transform the food industry as we know it for the better, and keep up with the ever-evolving and ever-growing demands of the world, and positively reshape the needs of its producers, consumers, and environment.

References

Gilpin, L. (2014, May 13). 10 ways technology is changing our food. Retrieved from https://www.techrepublic.com/article/10-ways-technology-is-changing-our-food/

Shontell, A. (2016, June 28). A Brooklyn startup that’s armed with $40 million is growing real leather in a lab without hurting a single animal. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/modern-meadow-lab-grown-leather-2016-6

Phillips, T. (2018, August 26). How Has Food Biotechnology Changed What We Eat? Retrieved from https://www.thebalance.com/food-biotechnology-375627

Chapter 4 Breakthroughs in Agricultural Biotechnology. (n.d.). Perdue University. doi:http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/media/users/lvollmer/pdf/biotech chapter 3.pdf
Breakthrough in algae biofuel research reported. (2017, June 20). Retrieved from https://phys.org/news/2017-06-breakthrough-algae-biofuel.html?xid=PS_smithsonian

Causal Argument – Ivonid12

Credit where Credit is Due

The MVP trophy in any sport always goes to who is considered the best player in the league that year, and on their team. It is a measure of the players great accomplishments in comparison to the rest of the best in their league as well, as every year a player is voted who is the best. In the NFL, the league is disgustingly biased towards quarterbacks in their voting, as in the league’s history, exactly one defensive player player won the MVP award, with a few cases of running backs able to win the award as well. The absolute dismissal of the defensive player in recognition is disrespectful, and must end as soon as possible. Without a defense with great players, the quarterback wouldn’t nearly have the same success as he would with a bad defense. A great defensive player creates opportunities for that great quarterback and team, as without those opportunities by that great defensive player, the  quarterback cannot make his great plays possible.

The objective of any defense in the NFL is easy in concept. Get the opposing team’s offense off the field so the offense go and put points on the board. The best way to do that is to force a turnover. Whether it is a sack, fumble recovery, interception, or touchdown, the defense forcing turnovers is what provides an offense with the best chance to succeed. If we look at past history, a majority of MVP quarterbacks are those with defenses that force a good amount of turnovers. For example, in 2010, Tom Brady was the  first unanimously voted MVP in NFL history, and had an amazing season leading the Patriots to the Super Bowl. Brady was undoubtedly great, but his defense gave him plenty of opportunities, as the 2010 New England Patriots were second in turnovers on defense that year. The 2010 New England Patriots had many great defensive players on that team, however as with most great defenses, the defensive got a significant boost from their best player that season. That year, Devin McCourty, a defensive back, on his own forced nine of the 38 turnovers the Patriots forced as a team, as he had seven interceptions, and two forced fumbles. McCourty forced just a hair under a quarter of his team’s turnovers by himself, yet he wasn’t even considered as an MVP candidate that season.

Another prime example of a quarterback’s great offensive production overshadowing an even better and more valuable performance by a defensive player is the 2011 Green Bay Packers, and their MVP winning quarterback Aaron Rodgers. The great defensive performance that season was by future hall of fame defensive back Charles Woodson who, in comparison to McCourty mentioned before, had an even better year. In 2011, Woodson led the league in interceptions with seven, had two sacks, forced a fumble, and even scored a touchdown for the defense, all at the age of 35. Woodson had an absolutely outstanding season at the very old age of 35 as a defensive back, yet he received no consideration for MVP that year. Also, due to the performance of the defense and Woodson the Packers were also third in starting field position as a team. Woodson undeniably impacted his team the most that year, and was easily the best and most valuable player on the filed for his team that season. Yet despite his efforts, was never considered for MVP. In correlation with MVP awards is also the amount of turnovers the defenses force for a team. In fact, for 75% of the teams in which the NFL MVP came from since the 2000 season, the team was in the upper half of the league for turnovers.

Undeniably, in a majority of cases, the NFL MVP must’ve had a defense providing plenty of opportunities for his offense, further cementing the fact that defenses and its stars deserve more credit, and are more valuable. If the defense provides more opportunities for the offense, the offense succeeds as a whole. Along with turnovers comes the field position that they provide. Usually when defenses give up points, the kickoff sets the offense on the 25 yard-line to start their next drive due to a touchback, unless the returner decides to make a return in which it could be more or less field position. However, if a turnover is made, a majority of the time you get great field position. With great field position, not only can you demoralize your opponent after a turnover, your ability to score is so much easier. The less field you have to drive down, the easier it is to score, all caused by a great play made in the defense. The quarterback cannot make plays and put up stats if never given enough opportunities. Additionally the quarterback can make more plays and given a better chance to put up numbers if given great field position.

However, undoubtedly the most biased and disrespectful case for a defensive player not winning MVP was for J.J Watt of the Houston Texans in 2014. J.J Watt was literally the whole Houston Texan’s team in 2014, and was easily the main cause for their winning record. Watt had an unbelievable season in 2014, as he notched twenty and a half sacks, four forced fumbles, recovered five fumbles, lead the league in tackles for a loss with 29, scored a touchdown with an interception as a defensive lineman, and to top it all off, scored three more touchdowns playing offense. When do you ever see an NFL quarterback produce on both sides of the ball, dominating on one, and being quite productive on the other? J.J Watt was easily the most valuable player on any field in 2014,  and while he did receive votes for MVP, he still ultimately lost out to Aaron Rodgers in 2014.

Defensive stars are undoubtedly the best players on the field, and deserve more recognition for MVP. Not only due their defensive efforts cause more opportunities for the offense, defenses have the ability to score and put up points as well. It is time we recognize those truly great defensive seasons for what they are, a representation of the most valuable player on the field that season.

References

“2010 New England Patriots Statistics & Players.” Pro-Football-Reference.com, http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/2010.htm.

“2011 Green Bay Packers Statistics & Players.” Pro-Football-Reference.com, http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/gnb/2011.htm.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/awards/ap-nfl-mvp-award.htm

“J.J. Watt Stats.” Pro-Football-Reference.com, http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WattJ.00.htm.

 

Causal—Marvel

Overuse and misuse of antibiotics leads to increased occurrences of antibiotic resistant bacteria. We have an infestation of some mutant bug, a spider-cockroach hybrid that isn’t afraid to charge at us when we try to kill it. So, we call a professional to exterminate the hybrid monster bugs. The exterminator uses a substance that kills 95% of the spider-cockroach mutants but leaves 5% not killed. Now imagine, not only are these hybrid bugs not dead but they are now stronger. They have been exposed to the substance that killed the other 95% and have evolved to defend against that lethal substance. In addition, they are multiplying and passing their enhanced defense against the killing substance to their young.   Antibiotics are designed to treat bacterial infection. Not unlike the substance used by the exterminator. They attack bacteria within the body by either killing the bacteria or stopping the bacteria from multiplying. Antibiotics are meant to be used as a last line of defense. The human body can usually stop an excess of harmful bacteria from multiplying without the use of antibiotics however, there are instances when the bacteria becomes too great for a healthy immune system, this is when antibiotics are effective.

Antibiotics are only effective when prescriptions are followed through. A doctor will prescribe a specific number of pills to rid the body of the infection. If we fail to follow though and take all the pills, then the above analogy proves true. We will have exposed some bacteria to the drug meant to destroy them but not enough to kill them. Now exposed, those bacteria grow stronger. They will no longer be killed by the antibiotic first prescribed. Thus, this misuse of antibiotics increases the likelihood of an antibiotic resistant bacteria.

The use of antibiotics in animal agriculture is also contributing to resistant bacteria. Most of the meat found at the local grocer is contaminated with antibiotics. The farmers we buy our meat from are using these antibiotics to increase their profits. Antibiotics both aid in weight gain of their livestock, giving them more inventory, and keeps their livestock healthier, giving them more inventory. The situation: animals take antibiotics, whether needed or not, increasing the likelihood of developing resistant bacteria, we eat the animals containing resistant bacteria resulting in the introduction of that resistant bacteria to our system. The microbial ecosystem of the animals we eat is interwoven in such a way that it is unable to be separated from our own. This makes this passing of resistant bacteria impossible to negate unless we were to not feed livestock antibiotics.

 

https://mmbr.asm.org/content/74/3/417.full#sec-16

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/10278.php

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/279/5353/996?casa_token=XZ6XzYGphfMAAAAA:Zr9QXecTaTl7JVta3KLeMcOHUMZoeZyB6cQRVpXniwcIMvl3nySaFq4JXAz32dVLfNe93YPaXRSgZw

 

Causal Argument- beachgirl6

Consequences of Living a Double Life

 

We are very fortunate to live in an advanced technological era. The adolescents of generation z get to have all the information they want at the tip of their fingertips due to the endless possibilities the internet has to offer. To engage with others, kids now have the opportunity to use social media to not only connect with others, but to create their own identity. However, these kids may take the time to create a false persona of themselves, especially if they use social media as a way to escape their real-world problems. Some of the most vulnerable kids that will create a misleading identity are those who have experienced childhood emotional abuse and physical and emotional neglect.

This type of childhood maltreatment has affected young adults as they grow up. A study done by J. D. Worsley at Psychiatry Research did a study at a university in North West New England. The 1,029 students who participated in the research were random college kids aged 17-25 who found out about this study through their university’s mass email. These students were just like any college kids, coming from different backgrounds and facing different hardships. A survey was using the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale measured if childhood maltreatment caused problematic social media use because of the cause of attachment anxiety (Worsley, 90). A personal health questionnaire was also used that screens for depression. The results came to that 31.8%, which is 327 students, experienced some sort of maltreatment as a kid. Of those 327 students, 84.4%, which is 276 students, had insecure attachment anxiety. Results showed that the insecure attachment and depression symptoms affected problematic social media use.

If these students suffered attachment anxiety, then their fear of trusting others negatively affected the way the form relationships in their real life. Worsley described that social media acted as a place to escape their hardships, as, “People who suffer childhood maltreatment may therefore overuse social media in order to cope with this difficult life experience” (Worsley 92). Without a trusted person they could look up to help cope with their problems as their family was abusing them, these adolescents didn’t develop appropriate coping strategies (Worsley 92). Those who suffered attachment anxiety also used social media to find a sense of belonging as they felt as if they didn’t belong in their own families.

The internet is a part of everyday life for everyone. Specifically, adolescents between the ages of 11 and 18 have spent up to, at the most, 11 hours on digital media (Spies Shapiro 1). This results in daily lives being interrupted by the use of any media and significantly impacts the individual’s development. An important factor in the growth of adolescents is how they define themselves and what people that associate with, meaning how their friends impact their daily lives. These kids are bouncing back and forth between the concepts of trying to conform to others while also trying to express their individuality (Spies Shapiro, 2). Kids are constantly comparing themselves to one another, and the use of social media doesn’t help improve their self-esteem. Spies Shapiro points out that “The hyper personal model for computer-mediated communication, for example, posits that adolescents engage in selective self-presentations online; moreover, the feedback from these presentations may, in turn, alter individuals’ self-perceptions” (Spies Shapiro, 4). Along with this, a research study in 2010 wanted to show how online interactions help self -disclosure rather than face to face interactions (Spies Shapiro, 9). Results showed that when close friends reported on the individual’s personality, the individual’s personality was different from their own report. This study showed that adolescents portrayed a false persona of themselves so they would seem more extroverted (Spies Shapiro, 9). They alter their personalities online to show a different side of themselves.

Adolescents are growing up in a digital world where it can be easier to share their own opinions without fear of judgment in face to face interactions. Social media can be harmful as kids who are already dealing with problems like ADHD or depression can be more predisposed to dealing with internet addiction, which is similar to substance abuse (Spies Shapiro, 3). However, if kids are suffering from social anxiety, social media acts as a way to express their feelings without having to deal with face to face conversations, and they “may start to prefer the multiplicity of the virtual world as their ‘reality of choice’.” (Harley, 36). This makes sense as texting has become the preferred mode of communication between others as adolescents can create a false persona of themselves as a way to be more extroverted. Social media networks helps to create one’s identity as kids will constantly post pictures and fit in with different social groups or cliques to conform to others, as the “power of likes” controls their mindset (Harley, 36).

One may think social media’s main use is to simply connect others, but the bigger picture shows that social media can be harmful for the next generation. Adolescents use social media as a way to escape their hardships in the offline lives, yet essentially create a whole new life as if they are living in a fantasy. This doesn’t change their actual lives though, as they still need to come to terms with what they are dealing with and what type of person they want to be when dealing with their problems. Creating a false identity may seem like great idea to become who they want to be, but these adolescents still need to come to terms with their offline lives, and that their problematic social media use affects them. By ignoring their problems, they are just creating a new one by overusing social media.

 

References

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165178117318668

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10567-013-0135-1

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-59200-2_2

 

Causal Argument- muggastackz

Society thinks if one than the other, which is not the case between these two. They are two entirely different sections. As stated before, crime rates are each crime per population that is recorded. Crime is the illegal act that someone does. Can police help reduce the crime rates? What ways are people in society affected by crime? How can we get lessen the amount of violent crime along with a reduction in non-violent crimes? If crime is happening so frequently, how can crime rates decrease, while crime increases?

Most crime occurs in the most popular cites or towns in that country. Because the crime will be prevalent in those cities, it all continue to happen. Let’s take a look at the crime rates in different regions of the country; to justify why crime rates are going down. Many areas will have different crime rates. In 2016, there were more than 600 violent crimes per 100,000 residents in Alaska, Nevada, New Mexico, and Tennessee. By contrast, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont had rates below 200 violent crimes per 100,000 residents. (Pew Research) Crime rates are dropping because the actual criminals that committed the homicide are incarcerated. Because they are locked up, the perpetrators aren’t going to commit the murder or severe crime. When previous crime commiters are locked up, the crime rates will go down. The Brennan Center report estimates that incarceration played even less of a role than that: up to 12 percent of the drop in property crime during the 1990s was due to the rise in incarceration, but it was probably more like 6 percent. And it contributed to 1 percent, at most, of the continued property crime decline in the 2000s. (Lind &Lopez) Murders are more likely to be reported to the police because they are easier to detect what happened. Not only is murder better recorded than other crimes, but there is less reason to think that the police have changed the way in which they record murders (Jencks). Reported crimes are what makes statistics go down each year. Several opinion-based surveys show that people in the nation think crime rates increase when it is actually going down.

Along with the fact that incarceration is a reason on why crime rates decrease; technology and the media plays a key role as well. If a child in an urban community is inside on their phones or playing games systems, they are less likely to be influenced by their neighborhoods friends. If technology weren’t around, they would be introduced to drugs, gangs, and other crimes at a young age; which reflects on how their life would be when they are seventeen or eighteen. Many people may think that this idea on technology helping children stay away from negative influences will help and won’t help at the same time. This idea could be a start to helping fix why crime rates are going down. Youth in society may also use technology to help with crime. They play violent video games with guns, drugs, and robbery. These games will introduce them, and they will go out in the world and rob and steal. When young kids pick up that robbery or theft trait, this allows them to commit crimes. When they are taught at a young age about non-violent crimes, crime will continue to increase each year.

The government and the police work together to try to reduce crime and how crime rates could drop. Knowing the fact that police and the social media platform play hand and hand, more people are trying to stay away from police or potentially committing an offense. Social media shows what happens to people who experience police brutality or discrimination. When people in society see the things that happen in the world, and they either will continue to do crime or stay away from crime. Social media can stretch a story out and make it bigger than what it is. They want us to perceive our expectations of crime. In an article talking about social media and crime, it states The study also indicates that although most of the individuals surveyed in the study felt individual criminal events were well reported by the news, most other facets of crime reporting were not.

These areas included risk factors for victimization, underlying causes of crime, overall crime tends, and police/community efforts to reduce crime (Brown). The criminal justice systems are starting to crack down on laws and enforcing the law which keeps people from getting killed. The police are finding new ways to help urban communities reduce the amount of crime and crime rates. Police and the government see that crime will increase each and every day so what can they do to fix everything. If police are brought on the street to help communities, less crime will happen. Lind and Lopez, writers for Vox. com writes, “while the number of police can affect crime rates, crime rates also affect the number of police. When crime rises, cities hire more police in response” (Lind & Lopez). It may be hard to find that many cops to help reduce crime but it is very possible that it can help as time goes on.  Police systems are trying to stay away from models that were used decades ago because these models didn’t help as much as the government thought they would. Lind and Lopez also state that Research on specific areas, as well as the US as a whole, found that hiring more police helped decrease crime (Lind & Lopez). Crime, in general, was worst decades ago then what it is now and those models didn’t affect anyway in society. Crime, drugs, and gangs were more so a problem in the 80’s, and 90’s then in the 00’s and present day.

References

https://www.vox.com/2015/2/13/8032231/crime-drop

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/30/5-facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/

http://prospect.org/article/violent-crime-increasing

https://intpolicydigest.org/2015/03/11/is-the-media-altering-our-perceptions-of-crime/

Causal Argument- Flowers3399

Pharmaceuticals and Anxiety

Mental illnesses can have an impact on the lives of those who suffer from it. The illnesses can make it hard to do the simplest of things. One of the many mental illnesses that people can suffer from is anxiety. Those with anxiety tend to have a feeling of unease and nervousness about certain events like presentations, relationships, jobs, school, and so on. Having anxiety can make it hard to do the events just listed and even just daily activities. However, there are ways to reduce anxiety and some of those ways are therapy or pharmaceuticals. An unconventional way is smoking weed however, pharmaceuticals are more effective at reducing anxiety.

There are different forms of anxiety but the most common is generalized
anxiety. This can be caused by stress or a traumatic event and it sometimes can be genetic. Having anxiety can cause those with it to feel overwhelmed among other things. In the article Causes and Effects of anxiety, it states: “He or she fears the worst outcome in every situation, even if it is illogical… person may even admit or know logically that such fears are irrational, he or she will be unable to stop the persistent worry.” Those who suffer from anxiety experience what is stated above. The constant worrying can cause difficulties in their everyday lives. The effects of suffering from anxiety are difficulty sleeping, trouble interacting with others, no motivation, and disruption in other daily activities. Those who suffer from it can find ways to better cope or even reduce it.

Marijuana is used by many people. It can be smoked, an edible, or can even be a supplement. Prescriptions for weed can be filled out for medical reasons but for the most part, it is smoked recreationally. Some people with anxiety smoke weed to get high because the high is what helps reduces it. However, smoking marijuana does not help reduce anxiety. Smoking it, in fact, can cause more anxiety instead of reducing it. This can happen if it is smoked in high doses. In the article, “Marijuana and Anxiety | Does Marijuana Help Anxiety or Cause it?”, it says “… marijuana can bring symptoms of anxiety or can heighten their existing anxiety.” For some, it can even bring about anxiety. There are long-term effects that come along with smoking it. Some of those effects are heightened anxiety, short-term memory, and paranoia. It is possible to build up a tolerance to weed thus, resulting in lack of reducing anxiety. When it comes down to it marijuana does not help reduce anxiety instead it causes or heightens it.

Pharmaceuticals can be used to help those who are suffering from anxiety. They are a more effective way of reducing and relieving it. There are more positive effects of using pharmaceuticals rather than weed. There are many medications that can help with anxiety and the most common are Benzodiazepines. Benzodiazepines have many different types of medication that can help with anxiety. The cause of using Benzos is to reduce anxiety and to be able to daily activities with more ease. Using these medicines can significantly help relieve anxiety. In the article “Benzodiazepines(BZs),” the author states: “Studies suggest that they are effective in reducing symptoms of anxiety in approximately 70-80% of patients.” These medications have helped more people compared to marijuana. Those who use these medications do not tend to build a tolerance to them, therefore, making it more reliable in helping with anxiety. Pharmaceuticals are more effective at reducing anxiety rather than smoking marijuana.

Marijuana is not necessarily the way to go when reducing and relieving anxiety. When it comes down to it pharmaceuticals are more effective for helping those suffering with it. The medications are more reliable in reducing and relieving anxiety. Having anxiety can make it hard to do daily activities and cause those with it to be worried during situation and events. By taking pharmaceuticals it can help reduce the feeling of being worried and can make it easier to do everyday events.

References

“Anxiety Causes & Effects | Covington Behavioral Health Hospital.” Covington, www.covingtonbh.com/anxiety/signs-symptoms/.

Bowden, Ellie. “Marijuana and Anxiety | Does Marijuana Help Anxiety or Cause It?” The Recovery Village, 17 Oct. 2017, www.therecoveryvillage.com/marijuana-addiction/marijuana-anxiety-marijuana-help-anxiety-cause/#gref.

“Benzodiazepines (BZs).”Anxieties.com, www.anxieties.com/157/benzodiazepines-bzs#.W9EljRNKhAY.

Causal Argument – eaglessb52

The effects of tariffs on the United States

We live in a society where everything is moving faster and faster. We are accomplishing feats in technology never thought possible 20 or 30 years ago. For some people, that can’t be said about our political system. Some people believe that it takes too long for politicians to make decisions that could ultimately benefit society. Politics are changing every day the only issue is that these policies for changes might also bring negatives that can last for a long time.

The economy is a huge factor in making political decisions these days. When bills and laws are being passed the effect on the economy is one of the key factors politicians look at. Sometimes the economy is the reason things don’t get passed. The economy of the country is much lie a business. If the country isn’t going to make money in a decision it won’t happen.

Trump’s big plan was to bring companies that have gone international with importing goods. One method that the government does is impose tariffs on these goods. When a tariff is imposed on a good like steel the price of imported steel goes up which is intended to have companies look to domestic steel for their need. This causes a boost in the domestic steel industry because there is more need for cheaper steel.  This also opens some jobs in the steel industry which allows people out of a job to get back in to the workforce. When these people are introduced into the workforce the overall economy sees a boost.

Something else that happens is that American steel industries can control the supply and demand of this steel. Since more people are coming to them they can create scarcity to drive up the prices of steel in the domestic US. This can lead to a monopoly in the steel industry.  Another downside of this is that companies who mainly import steel and are affiliated with the import of goods sees a massive hit when their customers leave for cheaper domestic steel. When these companies take a hit, people are laid off or out of work to match the demand for foreign steel.

As you can see there are benefits to the effect of tariffs in the steel industry.  The effects not only lead to changes in the industry they’re placed in, but they also trickle over into other industries as well. There are many middle men that go into running a huge industry like steel. Steel is made from taking iron ore and putting it into a furnace and smelting the impurities out of it and adding carbon to it which turns the iron into stronger and more durable steel. Equipment manufacturers also see a boost in sales for new mining equipment. Companies that make vehicles for job sites like iron mining and truckers whose job is it to transport both the unfinished iron and the finished steel see new jobs and more demand for truck drivers. also see a boost in their sales.  The factories that smelt the iron see a boost in employment to meet the demand of these new customers.

Some negative effects of tariffs on steel are best represented in the article, “Trump’s Steel Tariffs Could Hurt U.S. Coal Companies.” In the article it states that Trump’s 25 percent tariff on steel from Canada, Mexico, and the European Union would hurt demand for steel in the U.S. These countries also buy 40 percent of the U.S.’s metallurgical coal, which is the substance used in making steel. Since there’s a dip in the demand for foreign steel it would lead to a dip in the demand for metallurgical coal.

The article makes the claim that tariffs could also be put on U.S. exported to other countries. This means that many metallurgical coal producers would have to cut their prices to retain customers.

 

This leads into another effect of tariffs on things like steel. Our relationships with foreign countries could be at stake if we were to raise prices on things that we trade freely with each other. In the article it mentions that Mexico fired back with tariffs of their own. The Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, exclaimed that the tariffs were, “totally unacceptable,” and then went on to say that Canada buys more steel from our country than any other. Canada and Mexico are some of the biggest U.S. steel importers ranking first and fourth respectively.

This could cause a trade war with multiple countries. The problem is things aren’t on America’s side if this were to ever escalate this far. As of right now we are in the midst of a trade war with China. The American government has imposed strict tariffs on Chinese goods and has threatened to take these tariffs even higher. China can use this opportunity to oust us from the center of world affairs and economic globalization as we are slowly but surely pulling out of such practices. China is starting to build a reputation of free trade and build a moral high ground as our government is subverting the world order. As things unfold it may lead to a darker future for the U.S. as we destroy our reputations with the world through tariffs on imports.

Policies that imply quick fixes to strengthen our economy may not always as beneficial. In Trump’s case his strong nationalist mindset leads to him alienating our country to the rest of the world which could cause major shifts in the overall economy of the U.S. and the world. There are good intentions behind them in hopes to build some domestic economic growth. Though this doesn’t seem to be the case with this. Countries and their leaders tend to be upset with these practices. These then lead countries to not buy other goods from the U.S., so those industries are hurt due to lack of demand from foreign exports. This also could spawn a trade war much like the one between the U.S. and China currently going on. Finally, it could cause the U.S. to be shoved out as the economic center of the globalist economy.

References

Bort, R. (2018, June 25). The 4 Biggest Consequences of Trump’s Disastrous Tariff Plan. Retrieved October 24, 2018, from https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-4-biggest-consequences-of-trumps-disastrous-tariff-plan-628305/
Lee, S. (2018, May 31). Trump’s Steel Tariffs Could Hurt U.S. Coal Companies. Retrieved from https://www.bna.com/trumps-steel-tariffs-n57982093100/
Tao, N. (2018, October 25). Trade war offers China a ‘strategic opportunity’ to seize global leadership. Retrieved October 24, 2018, from https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/united-states/article/2169955/how-china-can-turn-trade-war-strategic