CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project
65 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

America’s most gerrymandered congressional districts

America’s most gerrymandered congressional districts | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
A brief overview of crimes against geography in the 113th Congress.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Why Education Spending Doesn't Lead to Economic Growth

Why Education Spending Doesn't Lead to Economic Growth | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Governments worldwide need to ensure that kids in school are learning and can find something useful to do when they graduate
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

As many of us might think that an improvement in education in a place will lead them to a better economy, however, this article explains the reasons of why education spending doesn't always lead to economic growth to the country. In Ghana, each additional year a child stays in school translates into an average annual income. By 2010, the average Kenyan had spent more years at school than the average French citizen had in 1985. But Kenya’s GDP per capita in 2010 was only 7 percent of France’s GDP per head 25 years earlier. It turned out that education acts more as a filter rather than an investment. Schooling signals persons with intelligence and ambition, rather than actually imparting or indicating skills that make them better at their jobs.

 

Do you think that education at all levels is such a great investment for societies as a whole? Why or why not? Do you think this article is true?


- Chelsie Rinaldi

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

China syndrome: Polluted air is taking its toll on more than cities

China syndrome: Polluted air is taking its toll on more than cities | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Visitors can smell it while waiting for a cab at the Beijing airport. They can see it hanging in the air, like L.A. smog, on the way into the city. China has a serious pollution problem and if it doesn’t bring it under control soon, the toll on its people will be high. The latest proof of the economic giant’s unhealthy air was a report last week from the Ministry of Environmental Protection. Only three of the 74 cities tracked by the central government in 2013 reached minimum standards for air quality. The lucky trio were Lhasa, Haikou and Zhoushan, in remote regions of the country. The big offenders, including Beijing, were mostly in northern China, where dirty industries are prevalent. In that region, air standards were attained over little more than one-third of the days. China’s
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

China is a country that is going through rapid modernization. It is also a country that is very industrialized, since many companies and factories are being placed there to manufacture their products and then export them. These companies are providing job opportunities to the Chinese population, but at the same time these industries are causing pollution, which is having an adverse effect on the health of the people. Polluted air is being spread almost all over China. Only 3 out of 74 cities in China have reached minimum standards for air quality. An example is Beijing, China. While walking around you may think that what your seeing is fog, but its actually smog and contamination. A solution that has been brought up is having bags that are filled with clean air, for people to buy and use them to breathe, but do you think this is a sustainable solution? Is the Chinese population capable of living through all this pollution, and getting used to having a mask and a bag all the time on, to breathe clean air?


- Lama Jaber 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Nato suspends Russia co-operation

Nato suspends Russia co-operation | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Nato suspends all practical civilian and military co-operation with Russia over the annexation of Crimea, describing it as a grave threat to European security.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Nato has temporarily suspended its ties with Russia for taking Ukraine's sovereignty over their land. The Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Russia's "invasion" to Ukraine's Crimea region was a big threat to the European security. It was reported that Moscow has recently established many troops on Ukraine's eastern border, causing alarm in Kiev and the West. The reason why Nato has decided to temporarily end their relationship with Russia is because they think what they did was illegal. A dialogue in the Nato-Russia Council might take place, but first they must study the case closely and make a decision. "We will review Nato's relations with Russia at our next meeting in June". Do you think that it's fair that Nato has taken this decision? Why? Do you think that Russia will be able to overcome this problem and have a good relationship with Nato in the future? 

 

Jesenia Duque

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 3, 2014 5:25 PM
I think Nato has done the right thing because there has been many conflicts because of the fight of Russia for Crimea, and big organizations like Nato have to intervene so that they can make peace with both countries. In my opinion, Russia will be able to fix their relation with Nato and all the other countries, but they will have to pay for the conflict they created, and wait some time so that peace prospers. -edgar
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 7, 2014 6:48 PM
In fact, Nato has done the right for right now, but we might not really know what will possibly happen in the future. At this moment, it is better to let Russia go from Nato until everything will becoming normal again. It is possible that in the future, Nato will have better relationship with Russia, however, it might take some times until these process are totally finished with peace and no problem. - Chelsie Rinaldi
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 7, 2014 8:59 PM
The relationship between Nato and Russia will not improve. This organixzation was ccreated for quite some time and the situation does not improve for several easons. Actions like Russia previously took about the Crimea are the reason why Nato exist and their relationship will not improve because of this. Countries feel the country is dangerous and in certain ways or aspects it can also be considered unstable. Russia has the largest amount of nuclear weapons and is a threaten for the national security of many countries. Therefore I think that the relationship between Nato and Russia will not improve. Alejandro Reyes
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Brazil drought brews trouble for coffee farms

Brazil drought brews trouble for coffee farms | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Global coffee prices set to rise as world's biggest producer faces worst drought in living memory.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Why is a drought and increases of the price of coffee related? How does this story relate to our discussion on the "dependency theory?" Is this the case of Brazil? 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Ukraine: What next for battered economy?

Ukraine: What next for battered economy? | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Ukraine is still reeling from the apparent loss of Crimea and trouble on its Eastern borders, but economic battles may ultimately be more important.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

After losing Crimea, Ukraine is starting to go through a hard time on their economy. It seems like after losing the Crimea, Western countries have taken into consideration helping them out. Ukraine is in need of money urgently, since it only has 12 billion dollars in its reserves and its per capita barely reached the 3000 dollars in year 2012, according to the World Bank. 20% of Ukraine's exports are directed to Russia, and 30% of their imports are brought in to the country from Russia, so Ukraine's economy is going to be affected by a lot. European countries are thinking of punishing Russia, and have also helped Ukraine in being part of the EU. Do you think Ukraine's economy will get better soon, or will it just get worst even with the help of other countries?

 

- edgar

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 27, 2014 7:57 PM
In my opinion, since the European Union and other countries are willing to help Ukraine to reboost its economy, Ukraine will be able to get out of its bad financiary situation. The economist mentioned on the article stated that it wouldn't be hard to help Ukraine, even in the state of its economy. It's true that Ukraine is passing through a harsh moment after the loss of Crimea, and its relations with Russia, but still, I believe its economy will get better soon. -Luis C.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 27, 2014 10:12 PM
Despite being in a hard situation, maybe Ukraine's economy is currently not as good, however, because everything will take time, with the help of European Union and other countries make it easier and helpful for Ukraine to stabilize their economy as long as their government will try hard to maintain the country's financial, their economy will go back soon. - Chelsie Rinaldi
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 28, 2014 7:26 AM
The situation in Ukraine is similar to what happend before after great wars. Once all of Europe was nearly destroyed and its economy was really bad. The USA helped those countries restart their economies and enhance their financial situation and thier people's through financial aid. The same thing will happen after other countries help Ukraine. It will not be easy or fast but it will be productive. Therefore the economy will improve in Ukraine. Alejandro Reyes
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Cut in Energy Subsidies Will Only Add to Iranians’ Economic Pain

Cut in Energy Subsidies Will Only Add to Iranians’ Economic Pain | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Confronted with a lack of funds, President Hassan Rouhani has little option but to take steps that will increase the pain for the voters who put him into office.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

People believe that the government is running out of cash. The middle-class Iranians voted in huge numbers for current President Hassan Rouhani, due to his promises of a quick economic recovery. The citizens of Iran are now losing hope because after six months the results are still the same. Do you think that by ending these subsidies, Iran's ability to develop will increase or decrease? Why? 

                                                    - Samantha Rodriguez - 

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 21, 2014 2:31 PM
Alazne Egues: If the government of Iran doesn’t subsidize energy, the economy of the country will improve. The government can invest the money that was once used to subsidize energy, to improve the infrastructure of the country (roads, hospitals, schools). The money can also be used to develop and advertise other business in the country so that they can have a more diverse economy with income coming from other places. A possible negative aspect is that the government will have more money and if corruption begins then the money won't be used to develop the economy. Even though the president claimed that there would be a quick economy recovery, I believe that this will be a very hard promise to keep, due to the poor situation in Iran. Also not subsiding energy will affect the lower class, because they may not be able to afford it, and be deprived of this. Overall it will be a slow and harsh process.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Obama hunting for deportation alternatives

Obama hunting for deportation alternatives | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Washington (CNN) -- After coming under fire from activists who labeled him "deporter in chief," President Barack Obama is asking his administration to find better, more humane ways of administering current immigration law, the White House said Thursday.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

The United States have being having problems ith illegal immigration for a long time. Their is a reason why they are so carefull about Visas and so watchful when we visit. THe United States have being having for a long time immigration laws and many have said that Obama trying to change some of the laws has created or caused people to move or try to even more. Almost two miliion deprotations have taken place. This number is alot higher than any time before. Presidents before hav enever reached such a high mark. THis hass teared apart many American families by spliting them away. The president is currently trying to cahnge the rules or at least make them more human. He has being called the Chief or immigration or deportaions. HE is trying to change this so he could stop being referred and ingumane. His top priority is solve this problems or make it less rough. 

 

DO you think that changing the laws and making them more "humane" can trigger or cause people to move more to the United States ?

 

Alejandro Reyes

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 21, 2014 9:48 AM
It is amazing that after so many years the situation of immigration has even gotten worst. Deportations going up to 2 million is too much and still their is no solution. I think that people are not given the chance and Obama or the government should consider being more liberal giving working Visas so the Mexicans can earn more money and they can stop being so harsh with people and stop destroying so many lives. If they are given the chance the illegal immigration rates could possibly decrease and the government wouldn't have to deport so many people. - Rossana Fuentes
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 22, 2014 5:41 PM
The reason why so many people go to the US is because of the false "American Dream." It is impossible to live in the US without a well paying job. Many illegal immigrants face this challenges: escaping form authorities and trying to survive with the money they have felt. It is incredible how they earn more money working in the worst jobs of the US and still be earning more than in their homeland. If Obama, passes his immigration reform then things will change. MAny more people will migrate or it might stay the same because the hard part is still entering the country. Obama will fight to give more rights to the ones inside not the ones passing the border. - Antonio Morales
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Life's Guarantees: Death, Taxes and 7.5% Chinese G.D.P. Growth

A researcher at China’s economic planning agency is offering what Prime Minister Li Keqiang won’t: a guarantee that the country’s economy will hit its growth target this year.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

China's powerful economic planning agency is guaranteeing its populations with a promise of 7.5 % GDP growth, death and taxes this year. Last year, they had the target of 8% of GDP growth and they lower it now. If you realize, the amount of 7.5% is not a small amount, a country has to work super hard with its economy to have this kind of growth. Song Li, the person that made the promise did not guarantee that number however. He worried that because of China's heavy air pollution, it would affect the country to develop. For years, officials at all levels of government followed the mantra “protect the eight” (bao ba), which meant doing what it took to make sure the government met its 8 percent growth target. On the other side, Mr. Li has committed to end this promise because this has pushed stoke local debts, wasteful spending and heavy smog.

 

Which side are on? Mr. Song(believes that China should grow it's GDP for 7.5 % this year) or Mr.Li(does not really care about growth, but more to the negative effects that China would get) ? If so why? do you think it is more important?

 

- Chelsie Rinaldi

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 14, 2014 9:06 AM
I believe I am on Mr.Li's side because his point is actually true. The effects of accomplishing this goal has many consequences such as the ones mentioned above like for example the air polllution and the the local debts. The local debts is like a the down side because even though they may be improving and growing, the debts are a negative aspect that have to be taken care of after. I think they have to try and grow but to a certain scale where it is balanced and not have an specific goal because while they are trying to reach it they may strongly hurt other aspects of the country and the economy -Kalile Escala
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Were the Vikings really so bloodthirsty?

Were the Vikings really so bloodthirsty? | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

If you were to use one word to describe Vikings, what would it be? Brutal, violent, red-hair, maybe barbarian. Why is it that this culture is identified with violence and not with peace. This article talks about how some investigations hypothesize that Vikings were more civilized and warm loving people. An artifact that identifies Vikings, is the helmet with horns, people assume that they used this in battle. Yet, it was discovered that it was used for drinking in celebrations and communicating. There is evidence that can debate the character of these Vikings. Something mentioned was the movie, The Vikings, which portrays Vikings as tough robust men and women. My question is, do you think that the image of Vikings has been distorted because of how the media wants to sell stories that interest the public. Has fictional movies or books changed our perception of the Vikings, by dramatizing and exaggerating the stories to make them more violent? Maybe they were not tranquil, or wild beast but just another greedy community who wanted to colonize the world.

- Alazne Egues

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 13, 2014 6:47 PM
I think that filming companies like Hollywood use Vikings to gain public attention and have more profit, because a movie of civilized Vikings won't get much attention from the audience. The industries have changed the image of Vikings for their own benefit, and also, there is evidence that says they were brave, but not exactly how everyone thinks they were. In my opinion, Vikings were fierce warriors that got an exaggerated image from the world as they started to disappear. -edgar
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 14, 2014 9:05 AM
I think this is a very interesting article because it helps you think for a second and realize if what you saw in movies, or read in books was right. In my opinion, I think movies did change the true story of who the vikings were. They did this because they wanted to create attention to the public about the past decades on Earth. Another reason is so that they can create better plots in the movie to capture the audience and make more money in different films. I believe that it's not fair that movie makers are doing this. Just imagine that in the very future, when humans are no no longer on Earth, the new people who come start making movies of us saying that we were only causing harm to each other and we were constantly found in battles and arguments. - Jesenia Duque
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 14, 2014 9:11 AM
When I hear the word "Viking" I think about tough & dangerous people, meaning that their concept has been truly distorted. We surely have to blame this on the media, because just by looking at their appearance, they created a duplicated image of the Vikings just to entertain the public an obtain more spectators. They dramatize them because in my opinion I don't think people from "both genders" would like to watch a movie about peaceful people conquering the world. Now, almost everyone identifies them this way which could make them feel or be apart from the modern community. - Rossana F
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

USDA Policy Fails to Address GMO Contamination of Organic Crops | EcoWatch

USDA Policy Fails to Address GMO Contamination of Organic Crops | EcoWatch | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

This may be one of the most important issues related to GMO's today. It seems that the coexistence of both organic and non-organic crops in the USA is becoming an issue. non- GE farmers claim their crops may be contaminated with this chemicals due to the drifting of the seeds making them equally harmful. The USDA argues between what should be done in this case whether it should be that the non-GE farmers should pay for the consequences or the GE growers should be penalized for the contamination. 

 

After reading the article, Explain why  you think the USDA should/ should not put the charges on the non-GE farmers ? What do you think non-GE farmers are going to do about this?

 

-KAlile escala

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 5:11 PM
This is an important problem because "healthy products" have been affected by the contamination. Meaning that the company (farmers) should be charge because when scenes like this happen, its because of a bad work planning and maintenance. If this crops were distributed, the effects would have been even worst. Both sides should pay for it, but GE farmers are presented as the constructers of this problem. - Rossana Fuentes
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 10:08 PM
I think that the USDA should do something, since they are mostly defending GE farmers only. If they don't do anything than all organic and healthy crops will disappear eventually. I don't believe the charges should be put but actions and regulations should be made. Regions of GE and non-GE should be noted so that the contamination doesn't occur and this problem doesn't grow any bigger. There is no much that non-GE farmers can do. If the government doesn't support them than the GE farms will take over the entire market. - Antonio Morales
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

US GMO crops show mix of concerns - USDA report

US GMO crops show mix of concerns - USDA report | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
After more than 15 years of using genetically modified crops, US farmers are continuing to see an array of benefits, but the impacts on the environmental and on food production are mixed, and high fa
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Ambar Casado

Studies have already shown that GMOs are dangerous to rats the most under covered and miss treated spices. CATOs in which genetically modified soy and corn were fed to mammals found that a GMO diet often led to liver and kidney problems. While results may or may not be relevant to humans, these results show that GMOs may have unintended effects on wildlife and livestock. Another issue with this pesticide is that people are not willing to buy them because of the toxins they cause and that may be left in thier consumers body?

Do you think that in 20 years there will still be GMOs or would there be another kind of plant?

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Before Blaming the Robots, Let's Get the Policy Right

Before Blaming the Robots, Let's Get the Policy Right | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Job growth has ceased to track productivity growth in recent years, but whether and how technology has been a factor is hard to discern because of other damage to the economy, an economist writes.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Rossana: Predictions are saying that technology advancement would affect the agriculture and increase unemployment. Robots are  being used as an important tool for having a faster and more industrialized harvest and production.  There are many contradictions about "robots" taking the jobs since with the use of technology the production process can be done “simultaneously” by a robot, so less workers are needed. Many economist think that this technology would lead to fewer jobs and less growth over the business cycle. There are others that don’t support this idea, but state that our major problem has to do with the following of bad-policies that creates unemployment. If we do it, maybe the use of robots would work more sufficiently or we would be able to handle it better. 

 

Question: Do you think the technology would lead us to fewer jobs and make us be under the control of “robots”?  How can it affect our future economy or the gaining of profit, for example, for the farmers? 

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 25, 2014 6:52 PM
I do think technology can lead us to fewer jobs and make us all fall under the control of "robots." We all use technology in our daily lives, and we all know how great it is, but like everything in this world, it has its advantages and disadvantages. Before all this technology was present, people's lives were different, and in some ways more peaceful. Back in those days, these new advances weren't available, and people learned how to do everything manually, they worked more, and I believe they were more dedicated to their jobs. In addition, I think everything was cleaner and more pure. With all these new technological advances, we have been using them for good things such as medicine, but we have also used them to modify our food, to modify genes and in companies and factories, where people used to work. This leads to your second questions, which I think it can affect our future economy and the gaining of profit of each individual. If we continue using technology in larger quantities when it comes to agriculture, farmers in the near future won't exist, since they would raise enough money to maintain themselves nor their family. Everything would be done by machines/robots, which could lead to the unemployment of many workers when it comes to things produced in factories. There are many other reasons out there of why technology may reduce our jobs and in a way control us, therefore, we must all realize, how this is affecting our lives. - Lama Jaber
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 25, 2014 7:28 PM
I personally would think that the use of too much depending technology is not only taking all the jobs which would increase unemployment, but it is also not good for the company that's using it. Imagine if someday, everything is made out of or got it done by machines, and then one day, these machines are suddenly getting older and older and we start to lose the materials. Can we really go back to a traditional farming method? Can we really start to live without machines? By imagining things like this, we could obviously know how this would affect the future economy of a country. It is pretty much the same like if there are no internet for example. If a country used to exports grains, and suddenly could't make any, a panic and disaster situation could possibly happen. Even though the use of technology are faster and sometimes better, but there are still many disadvantages of using it as well. - Chelsie Rinaldi
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 4:42 PM
Alazne Egues: Technology is something that has benefited humanity greatly, but maybe we have already used all of its positive potential. What if we are at the top of the hill and from now on we will start falling? Technology and robots are starting to replace what humans used to do. With the advances, they have a larger capacity to do things more efficiently and faster. So maybe the company will make a greater profit because instead of having dozens of workers they have one machine that does all the work, yet more people will be unemployed. There should be a balance between using technology and man work. If we let machines rule our world then men will eventually become less smart and active since they will be used to having other things do their job. If regular people don't have money, then no one will buy anything from large companies which will also affect the economy of the company owners since it will not be affordable for them to continue production if nobody buys.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Nigeria is Africa's biggest economy

Nigeria is Africa's biggest economy | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Nigeria "rebases" its gross domestic product (GDP) data, which pushes it above South Africa as the continent's biggest economy.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

One might think that the biggest economy of Africa is Egypt or South Africa, but the truth is that Nigeria is ranked at the top. This depends on the way that the wealth is measured, in this case, Nigeria has a higher GDP($509.9bn) than any other African country. Do you that the standards of living of Nigerians is reflected on the GDP? Why or why not. Which country do you consider more developed, South Africa or Nigeria? Explain. Is GDP the most accurate way to measure wealth, which is a more efficient measure? - Alazne Egues

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Why can't the selfie generation find jobs?

Why can't the selfie generation find jobs? | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Unemployment for young Americans is higher than the population at large. Has the US raised a generation unable to fit into the traditional workplace?
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

The new generation has being named with one of their creations, the selfie. the question is why is it so hard for this Generation Y to find jobs if they grew up with much more resources to success than their predecessors generation X. The 16 to 24-year-olds have a unemployment rate of 14.5%. Several theories are given to my this might be, like the fact that today the biggest student debt since the Great Depression in America. Or the fact that many are not going to college and just opting to find a well paid job with no knowledge. Some other reasons are that the teaching at home of life values have change which is a factor that might influence and that now free lancing is the way many graduates are taking. Now in days the young adults are not going out to find jobs they are just hoping that out of the blue a high rank, well paid job, and from 9 to 5 arrive to their door without them looking for it.  

 

Question:

        Why do you think this problem is occurring? Do you agree with the reasons presented in the article or do you think there is another reason for this crisis?

 

-Antonio Morales
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Exxon shrugs off climate change risk

Exxon shrugs off climate change risk | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Exxon Mobil, the US's largest oil and gas company, says in a new report that world climate policies are "highly unlikely" to stop it from producing and selling fossil fuels in the near future.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Global warming poses a major threat both to the environment and to global development. Caused by the excessive build-up of heat trapping “greenhouse” gases in the Earth’s atmosphere  in particular carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of oil, gas and coal  climate change threatens virtually every segment of the biosphere and human society. Yet this big companies that have billions of dollar keep investing daily to get more oil from the ground. Exxom believes that the market would not crash that way they can still make money. Do you think that this a solution for them to be investing in more oil and not being worried about what can happen to our planet?

 

- Ambar Casado

 
more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 4, 2014 6:21 PM
Global warming is causing climate change in the world, which could later lead into other catastrophes. As we have seen in class, companies are always thinking of making profit so it is very unlikely that Exxon would stop investing in oil. Even though temperatures are lowering causing glaciers to melt and sea levels to rise which will create many consequences in the future, the businessmen who control Exxon, are thinking of their welfare in a short term. I don't consider this a solution because while they are benefiting themselves now, oil is a nonrenewable source, so when it is depleted we won't be able to count with this source of energy and the damage in the Earth will be already done. This is why these companies should invest more money in scientific research to create a source of energy that is eco friendly. - Alazne Egues
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 6, 2014 6:43 PM
The people running this companies are obviously not environmentalist. Their optimal goal is generating money with their business. The sector the work in is the major cause of global warming which every day becomes a more imminent catastrophe. Exxon mobile will not stop making money to save the planet, what they may consider is implementing ecological rules and invest money in reinventing the way petroleum is use so that it doesn't degrade the atmosphere. The current methods are not sustainable but its what is developing the world and they won't change their mind set no matter what we think. I think that they should can their ways in-order to have a bright future. - Antonio Morales
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Is Crimea gone? Annexation no longer the focus of Ukraine crisis

Is Crimea gone? Annexation no longer the focus of Ukraine crisis | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Crimea's annexation is no longer the main focus of efforts to resolve the Ukraine crisis.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

After losing the fight of the Crimea, Ukraine has remained with an economic crisis. The loss of Crimea, which is being annexed to Russia, is not a conflict between just Ukraine and Russia. The European Union and the United States are very concerned about the situation too. The Russian government is thinking on making of Crimea an special economic zone, which is starting to lose its dependence towards Ukraine. Diplomats from countries have agreed to discuss the possible arrangements that could prosper peace in this conflict, and furthermore, involve Ukraine completely in the situation, so that every side can be happy with Crimea being a part of Russia. -Luis C.

 

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 3, 2014 6:14 PM
I think Crimea would be a good place to establish a special economic zone, because Crimea is a peninsula. Being it a peninsula, it has access to the sea. A special economic zone is a geographical region that can produce employment and is capable of exporting goods. A special economic zone, is a tax-free zone and it is a zone that could be exempt from federal laws, to make these good manufactured in these areas at a global competitive price. Special economic zones are free trade zones. Russia would benefit economically by making Crimea a special economic zone. - Lama Jaber
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 3, 2014 10:58 PM
Yes! Crimea has many benefits from both countries and it is also in the country eyes. Crimea has free access to sea. Russia would obviously benefity economically and powerfully by making Crimea a economic zone. -Andrea Scire
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 5, 2014 1:19 AM
Yes, I agree since trading might be a great part of this development due to its location and Russia could make profit from it. Surely, this place could not only benefit Russia, but part of Ukraine since investments could also be made in it. By having or using more land... larger beneficial ideas could grow to an unpredictable scale. _Rossana Fuentes
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

3D printing: 10 companies using it in ground-breaking ways

A growing number of innovative companies are experimenting with 3D printers, propelling the technology closer to the mainstream market.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Many different big (as well as) small companies are starting to use 3d printing to make ""better products" and benefit ttheir company. By doing this there won't be many people working for these big companies since the printer will just print the item. Do you think this will be good for the companies? Do you think it will help them improve their items? Why or why not? -Andrea Scire

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 28, 2014 7:31 PM
I think this advance is better for the companies since they will be able to increase their production since the 3d printers work more efficiently and quickly that way gaining more profit. Another benefit for the companies is that they can cut the workers staff. Also since most of the job is done by machines, and the part that humans do doesn't need much skills, then the wages of the workers can be reduce. This will cut the spendings of the company creating more profit. Since they are spending less money on paying workers, the company can focus on improving the quality of the products. In the future, the 3D printers will probably be more accurate making the items created even better. - Alazne Egues
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 30, 2014 5:22 PM
I think that I will be beneficial from companies to have 3d printers since they can be less dependent on factories to build some pieces. The can created that individual piece in their assembly lines or offices and not de depending on the factory in the other side of the world. I think that the iteams will be the same quality they will not improve since the materials are not being changed. The 3d printer copies the original pieces exactly. - Antonio Morales
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, April 4, 2014 11:16 AM
I think 3D printing by big companies can have its pros and cons. The first one is the loss of jobs which will be worst than today since atleast there are some employees needed in todays factories, with this system, fewer will be needed. This may cause unemployment in many areas. A benefit for the companies would be that they would have less workers so it means less people to pay. Also they would have to make a big investment on the machines but it will later pay off faster than the methods used today.- Kalile Escala
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Will computers make human workers obsolete?

Will computers make human workers obsolete? | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
For more What in the World watch Sundays at 10 a.m. & 1 p.m. ET on CNN

By Global Public Square staff

Many people are worried that in tomorrow's economy, a machine might take their job.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Would the economy depend complete on machines taking our jobs? 

That’s the main concern of many workers and this is because machines have been improved over time as well as computers. This article explains the complexity computers are able to reach or create, for example, they are able to do human activities (driving a car) by themselves or talking to us. It is said that the computer inside your cellphone has a greater amount of power than the computer used at the Apollo space program. After all, computers would continue improving and the role of the human is to use their creativity and benefit wisely from it. 

 

If you see a negative effect on how computers are changing the world, what it would be and why?       - Rossana Fuentes 

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 26, 2014 8:23 PM
I do see a negative side to that because if machines end up doing, not only factory jobs, then where will this end? If they can drive cars, will they be able to teach or even be doctors in the future? It is frightening to think that because then, what would happen to the workers in the world? What would they have to do in order to make money and have a living? I think this a very crucial and difficult topic that must be discussed soon. We can't let technology control our lives because we don't know were or how we can end. -Jesenia D
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 27, 2014 9:56 PM
I can actually picture how the future will be, if humans didn't do anything and computers/machines did everything for us. What would we do? We would just sit there doing nothing, even if we want to go out, we wouldn't need to drive, because the computers can do that for us. Our lives would be kind of sedentary, and I think that sedentary lifestyles would increase. When it comes to jobs, machines are not found almost everywhere, and even thoug right now they need in some parts people to control them and manage them, in the near future, people won't need to do that and that job won't be available anymore. Also, then jobs will start decreasing and unemployment will increase. In a way, this is being caused by industrialization and globalization. - Lama Jaber
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 28, 2014 2:23 PM
A negative effect this computers and robots may bring to our world or life is the reduction of jobs. while this machines are working, they are more efficient than humans and there are no wages or social problems. this may cause real issues since that can turn into more poverty and less education. Also it makes humans less useful since everything can be done with machines, humans would rely on them so much that many of the first and most important activities may be overlooked or replaces. On the other hand, this may bring an upgrade to certain economies since they can get more money in fewer time with more efficient working material.- Kalile Escala
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Unemployment falls to 6.7% in Wales

Unemployment falls to 6.7% in Wales | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
The unemployment rate falls faster in Wales and now stands at 6.7% compared with 7.2% for the UK as a whole, figures show.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:
Wales has accomplished a progress in their economy. The nation has lowered the amount of unemployed people in their territory. Throughout the last couple years, Wales have had an increased 9.4% of unemployment, which today has been lowered to a 6.7% percent. Moreover, compared to the UK, Wales has a higher quantity of people working in all type of industries, which have helped to lessen the number of unemployed citizens more than the UK itself. However, there is another improvement that the government assures that is still need to be defeated. Youth unemployment is still a big concern, and even though the percentage of people with no jobs have decreased, young people are still having trouble for finding permanent jobs that will assure them a stable life. Another fact that is being criticized is that although this employment percentage reveals a positive progress, experts say that the salaries have not increased at all, and that although there has been an increase in the number of jobs and employers, they haven't been able to get more money for their families. Can you think of something that will help to increase the wages for all workers? Can you also think of something that will help young people to get good and stable jobs? By: Tony Micale
more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 20, 2014 7:56 PM
The last comment was Jesenia's
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 20, 2014 8:30 PM
Decreasing the unemployment rate is good, because that means that there are more job opportunities in the country and older people are working, instead of retiring at a younger age. Young people, which in this article are believed to be from 16-24 are not finding jobs easily, because at these ages, these young people should be in the process of completing their education. That is why it becomes harder for them to find jobs, because they still haven't graduated college or even high school. Many companies, won't take these kind of people into consideration since they haven't finished their education, nor graduated. What the government can do is try to implement more or create part-time jobs, so these people can continue studying and work at shops, or touristic stops/attractions. Maybe some students would enjoy working at a museum giving tours. these kind of jobs could be only for a couple of hours, and that can give the people chance to also focus on their education. - Lama jaber
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 21, 2014 9:09 AM
wages and salaries are what keeps an economy working and its workers happy. Sometimes this workers choose this jobs because they have no other better options. It may seem hard for this salaries to go up since it may have to be done by the government and their concerns. In my opinion, I´m sure the people may have already requested it but the country may have certain economic situations and maybe the raise of the wages s not beneficial. On the other side, I think young people should be having better and more stable jobs in order to maintain themselves. There are many jobs that could work for them like for example secretaries, where they can work and also learn about other higher ranks or jobs at the same time. - Kalile Escala
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

How safe is your passport?

How safe is your passport? | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
The mysterious case of missing Flight MH370 and two passengers with masked identities could spell change for travellers.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:
This article talks about the current incident of the Malaysian plane. It gives us an update on the investigation and they say that the possibility of a terrorist attack was disproved by the interpol. It talks about how passports are screened and an how oftenly they are screen. Question: Which are the three countries where passports are most oftenly screened and why? why are passports so important? - Antonio Morales
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Vladimir Putin must do more to reduce Ukraine tensions, says David Cameron

Vladimir Putin must do more to reduce Ukraine tensions, says David Cameron | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it

-British PM calls on Russian president to agree to contact group allowing direct talks between Kiev and Moscow

CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Tensions between Ukraine, Crimea and Russia have been coming up. After the overthrow of their president, the area Crimea, has still been having some problems, since the majority there are wanting to unite with Russia. Russia will take that into advantage, but there are still part of the population there, that want to stay with the Ukraine. More pressure is coming up, since Putin, Russia's president, is creating them, so Crimea can be controlled by Russia. David Cameron, UK's prime minister, has been talking to Putin, because he needs to reduce these tensions, and he asks him to agree to the creation of a contact group that could lead to direct talks between Kiev and Moscow. Do you think Crimea will join Russia, if so, why? Do you think the influence from other countries talking with Russia's president will help solve tensions, or make them worst? 

 

- Lama Jaber 

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 14, 2014 1:51 PM
In my opinion Ithink that joining with Russia will make a mess because the country needs to learn how to be alone and do their lives in the country alone and progressing alone and with no help. If Russia joins the Ukraine, People in the UKraine won't like that and then there will probably be a war for independance in the future. So for now I think people in the Ukraine need help, but not that much help because who said that by joining another country they will become established again? -Andrea Scire
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, March 19, 2014 7:55 AM
I don't think Crimea will become part of Russia. For Ukraine's economy the separation of the Crimea would affect negatively their economy. If the USA and other world powers confront Russia and ask it to reduce tensions and leave the matter alone, the problem could be solved. Sadly Russia will not give up that eassily. Crimea could become an independent sate but it does not favor Ukraine or Russia. Therefore if the Crimea where to become an independent state, it would have a lot pf pressure and conflict between Russia and Crimea and Ukraine and Crimea. The matter is very delicate and anything is possible at this momnet. Elections will not affecct too much the conflict or solve the problem because not matter what the result is, someone willnot agree. Alejandro Reyes
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

GMO crops may cause major environmental risks, USDA admits

GMO crops may cause major environmental risks, USDA admits | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
A new report published by the United States Department of Agriculture demonstrates that the vast majority of corn and soybean crops grown in America are genetically-engineered variants made to withstand certain conditions and chemicals.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

GMO's are worrying to several people in the US, who are the major consumers of these type of products by far. The USDA, the United States Department of Agriculture has transmitted certain information out to the media, in order to inform the public about GMO'S. It's been said that GMO implementation on farms have been growing exponentially over the past few years. Just last September, 7,800 releases of Genetically modified corn were approved. The variety of chemically engineered food has been growing, as scientists have discovered ways in which to adapt crops to certain environments. The USDA has also admitted GMO's may have major environmental risks along with their use, even though their consequences are still unsure. Will all this being said, do you think more information will be given out to the public about the truth of GMO's? Also, what major environmental risks could the USDA be talking about? -Luis C.

 

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 4:13 PM
I think GMO's will be revealed more to public as things get worst because the government has to let the people know. GMO's have harsh effects on the environment and I think the USDA knows all of their secrets. I think some of the risks GMO's give out are damaging the soil in a way that it has to be invested huge sums of money to be grown again. I think GMO's should be replaced by other foods, since the consequences are just too huge. -edgar
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 5:16 PM
I agree that GMO's are being used in excessive use. However thay have many usefull aplications. I dont thing the USDA will give any further information about GMO's. The problem is that scientist have developed many uses to GMO;s and some of them can bring bad consequences. Therefore they should restrict the use especially since the pants can be engineered to resist herbicides and pesticides. The exccessive use of this chemicals then go into rivers that cause serious environmental problems, It kills animals and harm ecosystems. Alejandro Reyes
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

Cocoa-nomics: Why chocolate really doesn't grow on trees

Cocoa-nomics: Why chocolate really doesn't grow on trees | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
"So tell me," an old school friend asked, "if the demand for chocolate is so high, why are cocoa farmers so poor?"
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Cocoa farming is one of the biggest industries in the world today. But have you ever wondered were this cacaos originates from and how they are processed into the delicious chocolate we eat? This article caught my attention because it's ironic to see that the chocolate industry is huge today, yet the cocoa farmer are poor people living in the middle of the jungle. What the author was trying to make the readers understand is that this "Cocoa-nomics" is taking over child labor in cocoa farming, and how the big chocolate industries (Nestlé, Hershey) are answering to this problem that they are mostly responsible of. What Nestle is doing is that they are constructing schools to promote awareness of child labour in rural communities. This "Cocoa Plan" has spend $120 million worldwide over ten years, at a new research and development centre. They plan to give away 12 million new plants to Ivorian farmers by 2016.

 

Question: Do you think this "Cocoa Plan" by Nestle will be effective enough to culminate with child labor in the chocolate industry today? What are other ways in which they can end this problem? Why do you think these children are put to work? Explain.

 

- Jesenia Duque

 

 

This plan will not be effective because the privately owned businesses that are small will not follow the plan. If Nestle were to refuse the cacao of farms that use child labor it might help a bit. The problem is that a lot of child workers are the kids of families working on farms, and the parents want the to work so that they can avoid the costs of real employees. I think if companies were to provide more education to these children it would help because they could then get a better job in the future which would maybe persuade parents to allow them to go to school instead of work.

       - Samantha Rodriguez -

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 4:11 AM
This plan might or might not success, because when I first knew the promise, I thought it wasn't as easy to do. If we think about it, would it be complicated for the company to share the same amount of new plants, and make sure that everyone get it? It is not easy to be fair. The other plan from the American food giant Cargill would be able to success, because when someone teaching, we are making sure that they really know how to do it properly, not like giving away the plans, they might not be able to do the right thing and ending up loosing all of the new plants given. There are many child labor because they don't have to pay their children to put to work, and it is mostly their main reason to have many children, to help produce money for the family. - Chelsie Rinaldi
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 4:16 PM
I think that this plan will not be that effective, since the private owners of small businesses like this will not follow it. Many small, private businesses will bend the rules and break them, and many of them since they are small, are not looking to avoid using child labor, but instead, they are looking for what are the ways they can earn more profit and spend less on the workers. Another problem that comes up is that, many of the kids working on these cacao farms have their parents working there too, and in some cases their parents require them to work there too, so they can gain more money to support the family. IN other cases, these children are working on these farms on behave of their parents, because their parents are either drug addicts or alcoholics, and they oblige them to work there, if they want to keep living with them and getting food and water. I think that other ways in which this type of problem can end, is by the police checking this cacao farms and making sure they are not using children as workers, and if they are, these companies should have to pay fees, or the parents of these children should go to jail, for accepting this. Child labor is being used throughout the world, because companies don't have to pay the kids a lot of money, since they are under 18, and also, because these children don't have a voice in their communities. -- Lama Jaber
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 28, 2014 5:01 PM
Alazne Egues: The most important thing for a company is to make profit. Most just do what will benefit no matter if it damages society. Large companies like Nestle and Hershey should stop supporting farmers that have chile labor. The reason why children work is because the entire family works on farms because if they don't, they don't make enough money to live. Companies should pay more money to workers if they want child labor to end. If they just stop working with small farms that use child labor, the farm will start working with another company that does accept it. Instead they should offer them benefits like education for their children and a better payment.
Scooped by CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration
Scoop.it!

California Seeing Brown Where Green Used to Be

California Seeing Brown Where Green Used to Be | CIPLC AP Human Geo Class Project | Scoop.it
Losses from farms idled by drought are hitting hard among farmers and those who relied on paychecks from working for them.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's insight:

Andrea Scire: Farmers are calculating losses in terms of land. Thousands of farmers are loosing money and they are getting unemployed throughout the years. Chandler who is a farmer who own a 500-acre farm has watered crops from a canal near his ranch which holds rainwater and runoff from the nearby Sierra mountair range. California has faced its worst drought in modern history.

 

After reading this article, why do you think California's federal officials will not offer any water to the farmers? And how do you think this problem can be solved?  

more...
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 18, 2014 7:40 PM
One of the reasons as to why they wouldn't provide any water to the farmers could be that the amount of water needed to stabilize the acres of land to be lost are too big. The officials may be concerned of a possible runoff from the reservoirs they have. One solution would be the implementation of a plan to provide water to the acres of land, from which just some will benefit because the process will be far too cost to save them all. In my opinion, not all acres will be lost, but profit is going to decrease substantially soon. -Luis C.
CIPLC Human Geo Collaboration's comment, February 26, 2014 6:57 AM
Agrculture depends on the climate. If their is alteratios or extreme droughts or even flooding their is teerrible loss. The officials do not want to provide the water because it is too expensive and transportation is not easy. Another reason why they do not want to provide the water is because if they provide 10,000 liters, it will not be enough for all the acres. Therefore it is too much money and resources wasted. I used the term wasted because it will evaporae quickly or abossorbed by the crop quickly and require more water as the plants grow. It makes more sense if they only use part of the land sos the famrers can still make money and the officials do not spend that much money. It is also too much water and money to maintain all the accres of land. Alejandro Reyes