Domestic Policy Summary: Safety Net Programs

My position on Safety net programs is that they are beneficial to the citizens and residents of this
country. It provides people with a sense of security and a way to make it through tough times. Social
security and Medicare is essential. The working people are entitled to this sort of recompensation for
their hard work and contribution. Other programs such as the food stamp program are also very
essential. I have known of many people who have fallen into a deep crisis and food stamps helped them
during that time. Of course there are plenty of individuals who abuse of the system and do not use the
safety net program as a way to ease their path to self-efficiency rather they use it to live life easier.
But I do not believe the programs should be restricted in helping individuals because many individuals
need the help. To me this is not the biggest fraud issue, the biggest fraud issue lays within the huge tax
cuts and political influence wealthy (by this I mean very wealthy) people receive. If we ever want to look
into keeping more money and influence for the people we should criticize that.
In the Article Food stamp fraud, Rare but troubling by Kim Severson it is explained that fraud from
security net programs are low but need to be managed. I love how the reporter explained this whole
issue. First of safety net program fraud is real and it needs to be solved. Obviously there is no doubt
about that. The author tries to bring us to an understanding that poor people will do what they need to
survive and who can blame them for that. We are attacking a poor person for robbing the system of
$300 dollars when we have bankers robbing $10 million and we dont make a fuss. This article explains
exactly how I feel.
Citation
Severson, Kim. "Food Stamp Fraud, Rare but Troubling." The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-
economy.html?pagewanted=all&module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw%2C%7B%222%22%3
A%22RI%3A12%22%7D (accessed July 14, 2014)
Foreign Policy Summary: Weapons of Mass Destruction
Weapons of Mass destruction are a very delicate issue. I personally have never thought profoundly
on my take on this issue. Mostly the whole issue simply frightens me but I have challenged myself. I
believe in general all actions have to be taken to control the development of these weapons; whether
it be diplomatic or forceful whatever works as long as it is backed up by good reason (not like the
made up Bush reason). We must slowly but surely start ridding countries of such weapons.
Regardless of what any country says I do not believe anyone can be responsible with such
weapons. There is such a fine line that can be crossed in the making of these weapons ad use that it
is not even worth having such weapons. I would love to think Flower power could rule the world but
that is a long shot. I just believe governments should learn to understand the evil potential of these
weapons and responsibly guard the ones that have already been made and prevent others from
being made as much as possible.
In the article Why the Boston Marathon Bombs are considered weapons of mass destruction by
Jon Terbush a definition WMD and what weapons can fall under that category is explained. When
you hear the words Weapons of Mass Destruction most people automatically think of atomic
bombs or a chemical weapon. In reality a WMD is anything explosive, chemical related or fire related
can be defined as a WMB. Now in the Boston Marathon the government decided to classify the
weapon used by the attacker (a pressure cooker) as a WMB. Many believe this undermines the
meaning of WMD. It is pointless to have such a powerful word and use it to describe weapons that
are not as potent as an atomic bomb. This article helped me received a better understanding of what
a WMD is and how to correctly use the term.
Citation
Terbush , Jon. "Why the Boston Marathon bombs are considered 'weapons of mass destruction'."
The Week. http://theweek.com/article/index/243109/why-the-boston-marathon-bombs-are-
considered-weapons-of-mass-destruction (accessed July 14, 2014).