After reading an article about Chevron's profit surges, I felt that everyone should know the how the oil companies are playing us for the gas needy citizens we are. While the average person frets about rising gas costs, soon it will be a luxury to drive instead of a necessity. For the people trying to make ends meet, rising gas prices can mean a world of difference getting to work. Out of all the companies out there, oil companies seem to care the least about its consumers. It’s increasing prices even if consumer demands stay the same. The company is pushing the selling point higher than it ever was before. However, we as consumers are just sitting idly by as the oil companies bully us. As we enter a new future of renewable resources and green living, we should learn to use alternatives to fuel and only use fuel when needed. We need to teach a lesson to the next generation about the dangers of the oil companies.

People have already started to think about how we could ever survive without oil. An online game was recently created called World Without Oil (www.worldwithoutoil.org). The design was based on what would we do without oil? How would it change our lives? How can we better ourselves without it? These are important questions to ask and as the oil prices rise, we should consider if we really need that much oil. Maybe we’re just being excessive, but soon, oil will be just another extravagance in our everyday lives unless we all do something to change it.

Pre-election BS.

With the upcoming preliminaries, it is hard to say who will win or who should win. Obama and Clinton are similar but yet differ so much in taste. While Clinton is leading with a famous name, her name seems somewhat falsely given. Bill Clinton has given much popularity and background to Hillary and it’s easy to see who wins the name recognition part but without it, she wouldn’t have much to stand on. Riding the coattails of another to gain position can be a positive boost but a negative hit to the actual credentials of the candidate. I’m for the idea of having a female president as well as the movement away from traditional male presidents but there are many pluses as there are minuses.

Obama on the other hand seems like the underdog. He’s often quoted to be “well spoken”, which could be open to different interpretations, and known for his “hot body”. As the younger generation of girls learns to vote, I guess it doesn’t hurt to be good looking. Obama also represents another minority lead; if Obama wins, he’ll get the chance to be the first black president. His major criticism of Hillary’s is that she supported the war at one point where as he has always been against the war.

The war is the most important issue now. It almost seems that we aren’t voting on a person but whither we should continue the war or not. Everything is decided by pro-war or anti-war. I’d be surprised if most people even knew what the other issues were. I guess we can’t go wrong considering last time the nation apparently voted for a president that they all claimed to hate. However, if you think about the way that was portrayed, it was the president that Hollywood hated but the rest of the country couldn’t care less. What about the Republican Party? Who knows and who cares.

If you couldn’t tell already, this was a satirical rant of the race for president.

Do you know what you're buying?

With the recall of so many pet food brands during the wheat-gluten scare, it gave me time to think a little bit about product liability. Is it too much to ask as consumer for businesses to properly check their sources and conditions before shipping its products to grocers? It seems that slipshod work is acceptable and that it’s only a requirement to take responsibility after something bad has already happened. The results weren’t only health hazards to pets but to humans too as other brands of food were found to contain salmonella contamination. Beloved pets were killed in the process all because companies didn’t take proper responsibility in checking the manufacturing of their products.

Due care should be an essential to any product that businesses produce. Companies should not produce products that harm because they are wrong in doing so. Stricter regulations need to be imposed on business that deal with health and food since these are essential to people and pets. Even well known companies can have slips like the recent recall of Listerine mouth wash for children that was found to contain microorganisms. If companies like this don’t take priority in their products, they will lose customer loyalty as well as their good name.

Behind that smiley face.

Wal-Mart is one of the biggest corporations out there, expanding from the US to foreign countries around the globe. However, in recent events, Wal-Mart has found itself unable to sustain a store in NYC. I find that amazing that such a big corporation that managed to open stores in China, finds it difficult to open a store in NYC. With a history of unethical practices, Wal-Mart has almost become all that is evil in corporate America. Sure, bright yellow smiley face greet you every where in the store, despite the fact that most of its 1.4 million employees who have to survive without health insurance. Since Wal-Mart is anti-union, it pays the average worker much lower than that of union members, at an astonishing average of $8.23/hr. A congressional report stated that a two-hundred-employee Wal-Mart store can rack up cost of $42,000 a year in house assistance, $108,000 a year in children’s health care, and $125,000 in tax credits and deductions for low-income families. These government effects are only for one store.

NYC has my congratulations for being able to keep Wal-Mart out. As Wal-Mart expands, the store is causing destructions in communities by closing down competitors, shutting out unique stores, and putting people out of jobs. Wal-Mart brings little contribution and requires tax credits when opening a store instead of paying the required taxes to help the local community. By keeping Wal-Mart out, NYC has managed to obtain their originality.

Not so reliable, not so dependable.

Article for Circuit City Layoffs

Circuit City was said to cut more than 3,500 jobs from its store workers due to falling sales. Workers who were laid off were allowed to reapply for their jobs after a 10-week delay. By doing so, workers would get lower pay and have to work at the same job they did before. With the urban sprawl of companies such as Wal-Mart, Circuit City has lost its competitive edge against these major corporations. It is hard for companies to sell specifically one item when a major store sells almost everything at a much lower price. The article makes a good point when it talks about the wrong way in which Circuit City fired its workers. The majority of their store workers are knowledgeable, and because they are, customers are more likely to shop there to get information and help. Unlike Wal-Mart, which mainly focus on price, Circuit City can use their workers for a competitive advantage but since it chooses not too, the future of this company looks bleak.

I can see why Circuit City would make such a decision, since the majority of its responsibilities are due to stock holder and not to their employees. What Circuit City did could be considered legal but in no ways moral. There are many employees who depend on this job and the massive layoffs could have affected the life of many. Circuit did not choose its employees and from the view point of consumers, it can make the company look cold and heartless. It is not detailed what the severance package contains but by the lack of mention, it is probably nothing much. In the short run, Circuit City may have benefited from this decision but the results for the long run is yet to be seen.