Hillary Clinton participated in a round-table discussion about manufacturing on Friday in Syrcause.Credit Mike Segar/Reuters
Updated, 6:01 p.m. | Hillary Clinton defended her commitment to combating climate change on Friday, after an eruption with Senator Bernie Sanders over whether she accepts campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry rattled the relatively civil Democratic contest as both candidates vie for support in New York.
A day after Mrs. Clinton grew enraged, telling a young climate change activist after a rally in Purchase, N.Y., that she was “sick of the Sanders campaign lying” about her accepting political donations from the fossil fuel industry, Mr. Sanders doubled down on the accusation, saying on ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Friday that Mrs. Clinton had “taken significant money from the fossil fuel industry.”
The encounter on Thursday was not the first time Mrs. Clinton has been confronted by activists affiliated with Greenpeace, but it came as the two Democrats fight to win liberal support as the race turns toward New York’s April 19 primary.
Polls show that Mrs. Clinton’s significant lead in New York, her adopted home state, has narrowed in recent weeks, as Mr. Sanders’s promise to take on Wall Street and special interests has resonated with liberals in New York City and in economically hard-hit areas upstate.
On Thursday, Mr. Sanders, introduced by famous New Yorkers including the actress Rosario Dawson and the filmmaker Spike Lee, addressed a crowd of thousands of people in the South Bronx. Mrs. Clinton, meanwhile, kicked off her New York campaign at a rally on Wednesday at the Apollo Theater.
Photo
Senator Bernie Sanders at a rally on Thursday in the Bronx.Credit Todd Heisler/The New York Times
On Friday, she held a round-table discussion at the Institute of Technology at Syracuse Central high school, during which she unveiled a $10 billion proposal to bolster jobs in manufacturing. The event was the beginning of a concerted effort by Mrs. Clinton to win back the voters upstate who twice elected her a New York senator.
“We fundamentally believe her work in upstate New York really represents a blueprint or road map for people to follow in looking at what she will do as president in terms of creating good-paying jobs,” Mrs. Clinton’s policy director, Jake Sullivan, told reporters.
But the environment, in particular the candidates’ positions on hydraulic fracturing, is also a driving issue for Democratic voters in New York, one that was thrust to the forefront this week.
The back and forth began on Thursday when the Greenpeace USA activist asked Mrs. Clinton to pledge to reject fossil fuel contributions. Mrs. Clinton tersely responded, saying: “I am so sick — I am so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me. I am sick of it.”
Later, her campaign addressed the issue.
“The simple truth is that this campaign has not taken a dollar from oil and gas industry PACs or corporations,” Nick Merrill, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, said in a statement. “The simple fact is that the Sanders campaign is misleading voters with their attacks. The money in question is from individuals who work for these companies.”
On Friday, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign went a step further, enlisting New York City’s mayor, Bill de Blasio, to defend the former secretary of state’s record on climate change. “Any suggestion that she is in anyone’s pocket on the issue of climate change, or on any other issue, is flat-out false and inappropriate,” Mr. de Blasio said on a conference call with reporters, calling fighting climate change a “central force” throughout Mrs. Clinton’s career.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, of the $157.8 million the Clinton campaign has raised over all, $307,561 has come from individuals who work in the oil and gas industries. The Sanders campaign has raised more than $50,000 from individuals who work in the oil and gas industries.
Jeff Weaver, Mr. Sanders’s campaign manager, said in a statement that it was “disappointing” that Mrs. Clinton has accused Mr. Sanders’s staff of lying on the issue of fossil fuel industry donations. “Fifty-seven lobbyists from the industry have personally given to her campaign and 11 of those lobbyists have bundled more than $1 million to help put her in the White House,” he said.
“If you include money given to super PACs backing Clinton, the fossil fuel industry has given more than $4.5 million in support of Clinton’s bid,” Mr. Weaver said.
Developer William Walsh and his son, Peter, see their planned casino helping to generate jobs in Binghamton, N.Y.
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. — Developers competing to build a casino near Binghamton say the city has been listed among the most depressed, obese, pessimistic, and fastest-shrinking in the nation.
It may seem odd for backers of the planned Traditions resort to highlight local lowlights to the state officials who will soon choose upstate casino sites, but a big goal of New York’s gambling expansion is to bring jobs to upstate areas that need them the most.
Casino applicants like Traditions are promoting not only their ability to make money with a local casino, but how badly it is needed.
It’s an argument that resonates in New York’s Southern Tier. ‘‘The economy is so depressed around here, anything is a plus,’’ Steven Shaffer, owner of Pepe’s Bar-B-Q, said as he grilled chickens under a tent on a careworn Binghamton city street. ‘‘That’s how bad it is around here.’’
The Binghamton area boomed in the 20th century as IBM evolved in this area from a maker of punch-clocks into a high-tech powerhouse and waves of immigrants came for work, many to make shoes at the Endicott Johnson factory. The old story is that newly arrived immigrants would ask officials, ‘‘Which way E.J.?’’
Back then, a job represented lifetime security and neighborhoods thrived, recalled 68-year-old lifelong resident Diane Stento, who interned for IBM in high school when her father worked at E.J.
Many of those old businesses have left the area or dramatically scaled back. As in many upstate areas, the economy slowed.
‘We have to look at other revenue-generating opportunities and other ways to put people to work here.’ Bill Walsh, Prospective casino developer
MY COMMENTS*************************************************************
Following our class discussion on the situation that has lasted in the state of Michigan, my selected article on casinos follows this pattern of "loss" here in America. Many of our cities and states have been hurt when a major company, like in Detroit, The three automakers, and in Upstate New York, IBM, leaves for whatever reason, mostly financial, and the town is , to a large degree, left jobless. I have watched documentaries and read newspapers over the years, dealing with things as this. Why companies move to greener pastures is many times obvious. Tax deals, less cost, cheaper paid wages and such, may be better for the company, but the people left in that state are decimated. The whole city of Detroit, for instance, is fallen on hard times. Surrounding areas, if they were dependent on the automakers, are at a major loss themselves. Workers move to where the business and jobs are, and virtually no one wins except the company profit line.
Now, in upstate New York, IBM leaves for finer pastures along with Endicott Johnson, another major business, and the people in Binghamton suffer too. a casino may be there only option to bring lots of jobs into the area. Politicians and businessmen alike are putting their hopes into something that will revitalize the economy and build up the area. Hopefully things will work for the better for the masses.
Money is a term difficult to define. It is a concept subject to deep individual interpretation. For some, money means power, to others, a way of living; some say it begets stability, and there are those who believe it is at the center of everything. In fact, I am one of those last people.
From my perspective, I see money as something than can become anything due to its existence as a medium of exchange. It is something universal, in the sense that the entire world accepts its existence and value, and it represents a common want, and to a degree, a common need among all people. This universal importance makes it in some ways similar to religion.
.Continued on Next Page below »
MY COMMENTS******************************************************************
In many ways , shapes and forms I believe that money is to a large degree something that we all want, need and maybe even pray for. Not that I believe it is a diety, but people needing it enough will talk about it, steal for it and die for it. It is a comfort zone of sorts, it can stabilize our lives. We need it for so many things. If we do not have it, we try to get it. I guess that you can say if a mass of people want and need something, a religion may not be enough. Our discipline of Economics is an easy connection to this topic. Nations are built on it and its power.
Of course, nations can be built on anything , from slavery to gold. But in its most simple form, money is a necessity all around the globe, and certain countries that are capitalistic, its all we want and more.
Once the powerhouse of America's industrial might, Detroit is more recently known in the popular imagination as a fabulous ruin, crumbling and bankrupt. But city planner Toni Griffin asks us to look again — and to imagine an entrepreneurial future for the city's 700,000 residents.
MY COMMENTS****************************************************************
This particular video saddened me because I have seen and heard stories of Detroit growing up. I had really been more emotional after watching a PBS documentary concerning the subject years ago. It had focused on a man who worked for the Detroit Sheriffs office who had the task of officially informing residents of eviction notices and proceedings against them.
Unfortunately, a job is a job, but this particular gentleman knew all the people he was basically removing, or attempting to remove, from the place they have lived in for years. When the economy of Detroit had fallen, starting in the late 1960's, he associated with, partied with and even befriended many who now suffered from the fall of the auto industries and associated companies. When the "big three" closed up, all the jobs went with them. People were left without homes, apartments, money, etc. When they could not keep up, he came, a sort of harbinger of doom to add to their troubles. He had official notices from the city stating your home is no longer your own. He was very sad to do his job, but nonetheless he continued to do it.
When the "big three" closed up, all the jobs went with them. People were left without homes, apartments, money, etc.
Unfortunately many more cities will soon face this dilemma. On the article we were to read concerning " How Did Economists Get It So Wrong", no real expert or financial guru could see Detroit's future of misery. None of them could even evaluate fully their own estimations. The financial world cannot really be put into a "trained dog" level, in my view. It will always be a runaway pup that you have at least 60% control. More and more people will be asked to contribute to the financial success of states, towns villages and cities. We may even have to get involved on a government level to ensure we are allowed to work in order to survive. Companies cannot drop us at the drop of a hat just to make sure their profit margin goes up. We need guarantees .
MY COMMENTS*********************************************************
This article proves that no one basically can predict the future. Of course, not the financial future anyway. Certain predictions depend on variables that no one can plot, plan or verify. The above cartoon, showing one aspect of our economics discipline, shows the sheep as variables that are surrounding an investor. He did not plan on that many and he is being smothered.
The stock market is something that I myself have dabbled with over the years and with only a few stocks I see rises and falls. It is unpredictable as the weather and the weatherman has been wrong from time to time as well. We can only try to gather as much information as we can in order to predict a possible outcome by the available facts, none of which is guaranteed. The recent housing market collapse, Banks and automobile companies running to congress for bailouts and super aggressive markets show a force of areas where people are saying what will fail next.
MY COMMENTS**************************************************************
This was a total surprise for me. I am shocked that someone like Sadir would have the guts to approach such people for an interview, of all things. I am glad the person survived the night. It does, however, put a new light on analyzing people that are in society that use illegal substances to profit themselves and then "still live with Mom", so to speak. There is more to "dealing" than meets the eye. bravo to the student from the University of Chicago.
After watching the video "Is religion good or bad?" I first thought of our reading assignment "Freaks , Geeks and Cool kids". Is belonging to a religion a "wanting to belong?" Are we attempting a family structure of sorts, to share, be accepted, or loved? We have no shortfall of religions across the world yet we tend to follow what we like or were born into, good or bad?
Of course, I do not believe that illegal substances dealers will quit their profession by watching this video, but I would not think twice in believing that one or two might do a double take on their position and find similarities with what the video shows.
When Mr. Levitt talks of how many of the dealers are still "broke" and live at home with mom, I thought that it was almost too funny. All those illegal actions and they end back where they started. The violence, bloodshed, and lives lost to basically go nowhere shows an element in society that takes us down many levels. this particular video is connected to our Economics discipline in which it deals with the supposed finances of illegal dealers. It can, as well, be connected to Psychology as well.
***Copy and past this link into your browser. Very Interesting.
MY COMMENTS****************************************************************
I first saw this video on Youtube a while ago, possibly over two years. I thought to myself, it is powerful, but the subject matter has changed slightly. The first time it dealt with finances, not religion. Now the newer version deals with both and on many levels it is frightening. It connects both to our Economic discipline and our Political science discipline in that it melds them together in a way that warns us what will and already is happening to our and many other governments. We, it seems, need to defend against ourselves and prepare for the end of days, but I will not give this video away. I will let you click on it yourself and make your own judgments.
Economics is the social science that studies economic activity to gain an understanding of the processes that govern the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services in an economy.
The term economics comes from the Ancient Greekοἰκονομία from οἶκος (oikos, "house") and νόμος (nomos, "custom" or "law"), hence "rules of the house (hold for good management)".[1] 'Political economy' was the earlier name for the subject, but economists in the late 19th century suggested "economics" as a shorter term for "economic science" to establish itself as a separate discipline outside of political science and other social sciences.[2]
Economics focuses on the behavior and interactions of economic agents and how economies work. Consistent with this focus, primary textbooks often distinguish between microeconomics and macroeconomics. Microeconomics examines the behavior of basic elements in the economy, including individual agents and markets, their interactions, and the outcomes of interactions. Individual agents may include, for example, households, firms, buyers, and sellers. Macroeconomics analyzes the entire economy (meaning aggregated production, consumption, savings, and investment) and issues affecting it, including unemployment of resources (labor, capital, and land), inflation, economic growth, and the public policies that address these issues (monetary, fiscal, and other policies).
Other broad distinctions within economics include those between positive economics, describing "what is," and normative economics, advocating "what ought to be"; between economic theory and applied economics; between rational and behavioral economics; and between mainstream economics (more "orthodox" and dealing with the "rationality-individualism-equilibrium nexus") and heterodox economics (more "radical" and dealing with the "institutions-history-social structure nexus").[3][4]
MY COMMENTS*****************************************************************
I almost laughed at this video, "The Intricate Economics of Terrorism. When the speaker stated that the group of terrorist had run out of money it seemed like a parody of sorts. Of course, speaker Loretta Napoleoni does not really mean to give a speech about how broke terrorists are funny, but does show an interesting point as she explains how terrorism is a business that does require large capital to exist. I apply this to Political Science and Sociology as the disciplines this connects to.
In many newspapers I have seen governments supporting terrorists to achieve their own ends. The fight will definitely have a winner or loser, and if it is oil, land, or power, people, governments, or whoever, they want to be on the winning side. Many things in the issue depend on what they fight for, and how much they have to fight with.
Today's generation of kids has been labeled the "me, me, me" generation. Let's face it: Today's technology fosters a culture of narcissism.
Our digital existence allows us constant access to the Web, text messaging, instant messaging, Facebook, Twitter and more. Young people are constantly tweeting, blogging and Snapchatting. So how can we flip the screen and get kids to pay more attention to the actual world around them?*Click on link above for the rest of this article
This particular article deals with something I believe affects us all. Being financially responsible in todays economy has had a lasting effect and people, even students at NYIT can suffer especially if you are on a budget or have to work to make ends meet. Most of the time being a student, especially if you are returning to school on your own dime, wasting means suffering at another time of the month. I have found that if money is gone now, it will not be there later. Taking advantage of saving, putting aside for later, and generally making sure you can pay bills and even buy a metrocard, can get you along in life.
Dealing with children is even a bigger hassle, especially when they might think that money grows on trees. Moms and Dads constantly giving them things, taking them places, and buying even necessities may make the child spoiled in a fashion. A parent needs definitely to explain to the child we cannot go here o cannot buy that or we have one at home might upset the child, but as the article states we are in an age of technology that brings many things into our environment we may or may not be able to handle.
In the run-up to the passage in 2002 of the McCain-Feingold Act, which tightened the nation’s campaign contribution restrictions, Senator John McCain predicted, "There will be a period of time of relatively clean elections — I emphasize relative — and then we will find some smart people who find smart ways around it."
Mr. McCain proved prescient. Twelve years later, a series of workarounds and court rulings have allowed more cash than ever to flood the political system. In that period, the top dozen individual donors spent at least $396 million in federal elections — about 1.5 percent of the entire $28 billion spent across the country — and an additional $271 million in state elections. And those amounts understate the donors’ total contributions: They don’t, for example, include money given to political nonprofit groups, which are not required to disclose their donors. This is why the billionaire Koch brothers don’t appear on the list.
MY COMMENTS*********************************************************
This article from the New York Times I found very interesting. It shows how Super rich people spend much of their wealth on political parties, functions and politicians. They are not your ordinary donors. They give millions in what they believe in. Their word carries a lot of weight and their money carries even more. You could probably lose an election if they supported another candidate on their money alone.
Of course there are campaign rules to follow concerning large donations. You could support hundreds of people in different states on their dollars. Separately the candidates would probably get the limit but the whole party itself would be well taken care of. Imagine not having to run out and raise money for a campaign because the millionaire or billionaire supporting you is taking care of all the bills? That to me would make the election much sweeter. Of course, is it legal? we will see. Each state has different rules.
