Government Growth: The Poor & Needy v. Rich & Greedy

The Food Stamp Program, as an area for growth [for me] would be essential. However, there seems to be a problem with feeding the nation’s poor, and there too is a problem when government cares more for war than feeding their own hungry people.

Today, according to the U.S. Census Bureau for the 2014 America’s Families and Living Arrangements table package includes:

Children living with two foreign-born parents: 38 percent have at least one foreign-born parent (28.3 million), and 10 percent live with a grandparent (7.4 million), 79 percent live with at least one sibling (58.5 million), 15 percent have a stay-at-home mother (10.8 million), and 0.6 percent have a stay-at-home father (420,000), 24 percent of children live with at least one foreign-born parent (18.1 million), Less than half (48 percent) of households today are married couples, down from 76 percent in 1940–  which costs an estimated $74.1 billion per year [US Census Bureau].

 I believe a certain proportion of society has been used as a scapegoat here.

 The reason the growth or expansion by government in the area is the existence of poor people, people working and still at poverty level, and more people coming into the country without means. It is the case, that whether black, white, Hispanic or some other people –there are poor people and some more so than others. Additionally, some have found themselves with and suddenly without because work ran out. Moreover, the fact that people need food, water, clean air—food being considered a common instead of public good is puzzling. For example, food is privatized which means a famer own the land which produces and sales that to private or corporate operations to sell to the public, and essentially, has taken even the right to grow food away from the public, that is, less people own land to grow their food, less people are educated to do so and so forth. Yet, to food is not considered a public good, but a need.

Jose Luis Vevero Pol (2014) wrote:

Air, water, and food are the three essential natural resources we human beings need to survive. Air is basically regarded as a public good. Water used to be considered a global public good up to the mid-20th century, but its very nature is highly disputed nowadays. However, usually we only pay for the purification and transportation of water. And then we have food, the third essential natural resource. The way we consider food has evolved since the 18th century, when the commons (land common to all) in Europe were gradually enclosed and transformed into privatized goods, either owned by private individuals or by the state or church. Communal property, that is customarily and legally considered as inalienable, indivisible, irreversible, not available for sale, and which cannot be encumbered or mortgaged, was transformed into private or public property. Since then, an increasing number of food production systems, such as wild fruits, coastal seafood areas, or oceanic fish stocks, have been privatized. This means that unless you have entitlements, such as proprietary rights or legal authorization, it’s almost impossible to get food freely from anywhere (Vevero Pol, 2014, para. 2).

Well, if people are poor and cannot buy their own food then this becomes a public problem. Consequently, it becomes a public problem when people are not well educated, are well educated, or in general cannot feed their families on minimum wage, as Lee, Johnson & Joyce (2008) stated the “Government responses to the demands of society” (Lee, 32) which says national hunger is a governmental issue. There is government concern as well when new people come into the land, as like immigration. Understandably, children whether natural or foreign have needed to be fed so the demand of the government to step in is broad covering healthcare and education over the importance of people eating? How can this be?

I agree with healthcare, but I do not agree with the public educational system in this country because it is not a fair one (Lee, 33). However, it’s a choice for parents to send their children there—still it is lacking for a proportionate number of students.

Concerning the FSP, however, government is local [i.e., handled by state] but there is a problem when senators during budget cuts decide that people need less food per month so the money can be placed somewhere else. Perhaps, those with the knife can spend a few days not knowing when they will eat next and see how that works for them.

That said, knowing America’s crooked politicians they will probably cheat and have someone sneaking them food while they lie and pretend they have been starving.

 

Related Articles

 One in Five Children Receive Food Stamps, Census Bureau Reports 

Why Isn’t Food a Public Good? 

HIV is Living Among Black America

slidethumb_fuelDid you know that 1 in 16 black men and 1 in 32 black women are diagnosed with HIV?

Statistics from the Center of Disease Control [CDC] estimate that in 2010, there were 44 percent of African American adults and adolescents carry the horrific burden of contracting and spreading the virus—13 and older.

Accordingly, African Americans account for 13 percent of the entire population but present with the virus eight times more than whites.

Here are the numbers:

  1. 70% African American men (14,700) of all new cases out of the 20,900 new cases reported
  2. African American men account for 63.6 new cases out of 100,000 populace which is 7 times higher than white men
  3. Men having sex with other men account for 72 percent (10,600) of new cases, and gay and bisexual men between the ages of 13-24 than any other race represented which means that Bisexual and gay men are more than 3 times more affected than other races
  4. African American women represent 29 percent of all new cases, that is 6.100 of adult and adolescent women, but since 2008 there is a decrease to 21 percent
  5. 1 percent out of 100,000 women have the virus which is 20 times higher than white women and 5 times more than Hispanic and Latino women

The need to bring this news to your house is urgent, and urgent for us all as a group; even more than for the individual who suffers such a fate. Consequently, when speaking concerning HIV as an epidemic in America the premise here is that people may not feel that the issue affects them since it’s not in their house. However, generally speaking the premise here is not the houses we live in per se’, but the house of Africans as a nation within America whose members are attracting the virus daily. Let us not forget that end of the woeful event for many is death; therefore, there is a need to deliver this news to your door, to my door and the doors of our neighbors that we are dying ever so slowly from the silence of non-adherence to the call that HIV creeps softly, but AIDS kills loudly.

I want all of us to get this warning, because we see a very small sound coming from health officials concerning this matter, or, we do not take heed concerning taking care ourselves, to educate ourselves because our children are dying, our women, our men. It is the case, that with all the education available we must send this call out right up and to the doorsteps of every person to feed of its contents at the dinner table, and especially when we prepare to lay down unprotected.

I ask —do your love yourself? We are going in-depth about this topic, dedicating much time to discuss every single detail to alleviate and protect our house that means the group, the family and the individual. It is the case that if we do not learn the truth about the behavior that leads to contact then no one can save us.
Look for more information on HIV and African Americans coming soon!

Watch: Out of Control: The AIDS Epidemic in Black America

Performance Evaluation and Standardized Testing

Test-Clip-art-640x330The ideal of performance budgeting carries with it some noticeable flaws.

For example, a budget of this type can be seen in the educational venue and the public schools where there is concern with standardized testing, and is a form of control in certain programs offered to  districts by the federal government. In essence, this type performance standard can be useful in other programs but not school, because it puts some students at a disadvantage even more , and today, instead of actually teaching subjects students are subjugated to perform for tests, untaught testing for some and most fail.

Meredith Broussard (2014) wrote:
The companies that create the most important state and national exams also publish textbooks that contain many of the answers. Unfortunately, low-income school districts can’t afford to buy them. (Broussard, 2014).So if the answers for the text are in the books and a particular the district cannot afford the book then why are children taking a text on something they have no way of learning?
It is fair to say that public means federal government so that the propensity for the government knowingly withholding funds in areas where there is lack is unconstitutional. This may be a tad off topic, but how can performance based assessments be tied to funding? Does it make sense for a public education system to do that?

Notably, are these low performing schools even included in the budget planning on federal or state level?

Of course the government should utilize and maintain performance budgets for agencies they support. However, the question to ask is if the agency supported is keeping in line with their supposed mission concerning (a) their various boards, (b) their workers, in this instance, their faculty, and (c) their students.

Mission

ED’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. Congress established the U.S. Department of Education (ED) on May 4, 1980, in the Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88 of October 1979). Under this law, ED’s mission is to:

  • Strengthen the Federal commitment to assuring access to equal educational opportunity for every individual;
  • Supplement and complement the efforts of states, the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the states, the private sector, public and private nonprofit educational research institutions, community-based organizations, parents, and students to improve the quality of education;
  • Encourage the increased involvement of the public, parents, and students in Federal education programs;
  • Promote improvements in the quality and usefulness of education through Federally supported research, evaluation, and sharing of information;
  • Improve the coordination of Federal education programs;
  • Improve the management of Federal education activities; and
  • Increase the accountability of Federal education programs to the President, the Congress, and the public (U.S. Department of Education, 2015).

Performance budgeting does not evaluate wholly what is being taught in the subject matter but to testing. In other words, ask is the testing necessary to pass the class?For example, it is not difficult to see that if a bus is in need of repair then why would you continually allow people to board the bus? No, the bus would be taken off the street until the necessary repairs are made, or it would be replaced altogether. Or, why continue to allow people to board buses in disrepair on one part of the city while on another side of the city the best buses are offered and used? See then if the budget is allocated for public transit then the public is all inclusive not based on the performance of the buses but solely based on the needs of the people.

See then that the scenario for the performance budget and school fits as well and reflects bias because the students are the passengers and the system in need of repair.

According to the TIME  (2012) article, the exact information is given:

Do standardized achievement tests unfairly advantage white and Asian students and disadvantage the rest? According to a group of educational organizations and civil rights groups the answer is yes. The recently filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education pointing out that black and Latino students in New York score below whites and Asians on standardized tests so consistently that although they are almost 70% of the overall student body, they are only 11% of students enrolled at elite public schools. As a result, the complaint argues that New York City is in violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act because schools rely on a test that advantages one racial group over another. (TIME, 2012).

In this way,  yes performance budgeting might be needed, however, not this way. Evaluate the teachers, but not because of their ability to teach a test that they do not have answers to and most certainly do not punish the students for not learning what they have not been taught.

Related Articles

Why Poor Schools Can’t Win at Standardized Testing

Why It’s Time to Get Rid of Standardized Tests

US Department of Education Mission Statement

Slum Lord or Just Plain Slow?

Broken-FurnaceThis article is for those people who might have a few questions concerning tenants rights, ethical behavior and basic human rights; as well as, what it means to have those rights violated as far as law.

My husband, daughter and I just moved into a new place at the beginning of the year, and for lack of better words the experience has been trying and draining. For one thing moving in the cold for some people would be a turn off. However, for us the cold weather has proved to be an excellent factor in our seeing the condition of the stead, that is, things that might have not been known until later were brought forward.

First, there is need to realize that ignorance plays a huge part in what property managers get away with and for how long. When I say ignorance, prospective tenants who are not aware of the ins and outs of what to look for  in their properties, or about the business of doing your own inspection of the property to look past good looks, more space, new countertops and new carpet. Hence, these, though eye-catching for renters need to be at the end of the list as far as move-in readiness of the property.

America’s constitution pronounces, “Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness.” Therefore, most Americans have the freedom to choose where they want to live. Accordingly, no one is happy when some have spent their money to move only to find that though they want your money they do not care to spend money so that you can live happily, or at least with the liberty to be happy.

Abraham Maslow developed a theory concerning the basic of human needs saying that people are most motivated when certain needs are met.

They are: (a) physiological, (b) safety, (c) love, and (d) esteem all these which one must have and which lead to a self actualization. It is the case that without these people cannot be motivated. In this we discuss safety because we are speaking about housing.  Therefore, people feel safe and are safe when they have adequate shelter. That means, when a home is  purchased or renting of  a dwelling that the shelter is not substandard, that is, the roof is good, the air and heating is working, as well as the plumbing.

Subsequently, some have been taken aback to find that once they moved in all hell has broken loose. In our case, what happened is the heat stopped working in the dead of winter and temperatures well below 30 degrees, so that even with a fire going the place was cold. What has happened over the last few days has been a nightmare. I finally, after not being taken seriously had to call code compliance.

 

Ladies and Gentlemen, I believe that stereotypes have played a part, because nothing about my speech says education I look like a typical black female, sound like a typical black female which means that I am not well versed, or rather, pro-perrr in speech. I jest here, but my landlords may have taken that to mean uneducated, and here I set with a Bachelor degree and near finished with a Master. Big mistake for them, because needless to say I know more than what I might look like. Moreover, I have rented before but it is a far cry from housing and HUD to actually house hunting on one’s own.

For you, here are a few tips. Always make sure that the property has been properly inspected.

1. Check the attic to make sure that it is properly insulated, especially, those homes older and with cathedral ceilings.

2. If you have a fireplace, before move in ask to start a fire, or, ask for inspection of the fireplace.

3. Make sure that plumbing is working. If the water is off, ask them to turn it on to check that the toilets flush and there are no leaks. One place we had already paid our deposit when it was found that the last tenants had poured cement and cut electrical wiring.

4.Make sure the lights are working everywhere. Some places have the electric connected for tenant viewings already.

5. Water heater. One of the things that happened here is that our water heater was working but sprung a leak. Come to find upon the inspection of the heater that it  was manufactured in 1988. This is 2015 can you imagine? That water heater was tired.  Luckily it was a slow leak and thanks to our grandson’s incessant complaints about his wet socks we were spared our carpet being ruined.

6. Keep written record of events, emails, pictures and phone calls requesting maintenance

For more information concerning Tenant Rights and Landlord Responsibility you can visit your city’s Code Compliance or Enforcement site or call.

Watch:  Tenants Rights for Safety

Business Law and Ethics|Legal Underpinnings of Business Law

images (5)  Today it is apparent that businesses in the United States have had problems with their owners’ and managers’ practices of being transparent and free from fraudulent activity concerning  dealings with partners, employees and consumers. It is the case, that many people have been harmed because of a business collapse under unethical leadership tactics.

In explanation, of unethical leadership tactics within a company the repercussions of such activities can be detrimental to not only consumers, but investors and employees. In preparedness for these kinds of situations the United States Congress has developed, and passed laws to thwart shady dealing by shady corporations; such as the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and the Consumer Protection Act of 2010; as well as, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau [CFPB] which for all purposes as noted by Seaquest (2012), “Increased oversight of the financial industry and was a preventative measure to risk taking and deceptive practices in areas such as mortgage lending” [The Regulatory Environment Section; para 1].

Concerning regulating the business environment –standards have been set that would protect both business and consumer. In this article, however, the businesses are deemed small and there is discussion of the Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service owners who have taken on certain business titles and by law have specific responsibilities when they breach a contract; such as is found in (a) Sole Proprietorship, (b) General Partnership, (c) Limited Partnership [LP], (d) Corporation [Corp], and (e) Limited Liability Company [LLC].

In business law, both parties enter into a contractual or verbal  agreement which says that Tinker’s Home Security Service install their systems free and monitor them monthly for a standard cost of 48.00 plus applicable sales tax per state allowance. In the first analogy of sole proprietorship Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service is being sued. Here are the problems with sole proprietorship as determined by the people at SBA.gov (2014) who state the disadvantages are that they could face sole liability (SBA, 2014) which makes sense since they own the business by and for themselves.

Here are the disadvantages to starting this type of business, but can also suffice to conditions that they could face in court:

  1. Unlimited personal liability. Because there is no legal separation between you and your business, you can be held personally liable for the debts and obligations of the business. [In this case, a suit takes money to defend oneself, that is, in the case of obtaining an attorney].
  2. Hard to raise money. Sole proprietors often face challenges when trying to raise money. [In this case, a sole proprietor’s money is not separated from home and business in the instance of cash flow. In essence, most people who own such businesses could consider this business their sole livelihood so extra money for court fees, unless, the owner sues a customer is out of pocket].
  3. Heavy burden. The flipside of complete control is the burden and pressure it can impose. You alone are ultimately responsible for the successes and failures of your business. [Hence, it is the case that a failure for the business could be a law suit which can impose harm to the business; such as damages paid out] [Disadvantages proprietorship Section] [Emphasis added].

In the case of the General Partnership for Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service establishing the business was relatively an easy one there was not application with the state and all was needed was for the partners basically to know how to install the systems, however, since the suit is against them the partners cannot agree to which the suit should attributed. After all they are both owners of the entity and since both own both are responsible. There are risks that can be gathered here, or rather, be taken heed of for future reference. In the article, “Sole Proprietorship and General Partnerships are Risky Business” the pronunciation of the risk stated, “If you are a co-owner of a business, and you have not formally created a corporation, LLC, limited liability partnership, limited partnership, or a limited liability limited partnership, you are operating a general partnership. This means that you have unlimited, personal liability for all of the businesses debts, including the acts of employees. In addition, in a general partnership, you also have unlimited, personal liability for the acts of all of the other owners” [Partnership Liability is a Major Risk Section; para. 1]. Therefore, the risk of being General Partner is provoked in the lawsuit. It is the case, that the acts or non-acts of either are the responsibility of both.

For example, in the initial installation of the alarm Partner 1 damages a wall in the home of the consumer and does a shabby job with the alarm so that he malfunctions often. Partner 2 states that damage to the wall is not his responsibility since he did not do the installation because Partner 1 took the call and the repair to the wall should come from Partner 1 since he started the business. Partner 1 screams that he cannot afford such a hit on his already taxed expenses and so forth. In reality Partner 1 did the damage, but since they are partners the damage belongs to both.

In review of the Limited Partnership [LP], the owners of the Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service the lawsuit may be more favorable. In this instance what comes to mind would be a sign to tell consumers that ‘Owners are not responsible for damage resulting from installation’ or something more outstanding to inform the customer that basically they are not paying for it, and for this reasons consumers’ should beware of getting professional help. However, if one knows their neighbor is good at what he does who needs assurance? So here is a good reason for a more acceptable outcome in court, according to Stephanie Morrow (2005), author of the article “LLC or LP: What’s Best for Your Business?”

She wrote:

An LP has one or more general partners and one or more limited partners. The general partners participate in management and have 100% liability for partnership obligations. Limited partners cannot participate in the management and have no liability for partnership obligations beyond their capital contributions, protecting them against personal liability for the partnership’s debts and other obligations. They do, however, receive a share of the profits for their involvement as limited partners. Many partnerships are formed as LPs because the limited liability is attractive to passive investors. It is often easier to market limited partner interests as an investment and general partners can raise money without involving outside investors in the management of the business. Assets are also protected in an LP. Unlike a corporation, which allows a shareholder’s stock to be confiscated in a personal lawsuit, an LP has provisions that protect a partner’s interest from being taken away when that partner is sued personally [What is an LP Company Section; para.1].

In essence, in a limited partnership the implications here are that there is no liability beyond that of their contributions. In other words, shareholders have no say in the functioning of management from day to day. Hence, for the Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service their breach of contract lies with the owners, Tinker and Taylor not the members who contribute and neither their investment in the company as stated above. For example, Partner 1 is accused of defrauding the customer in their free installation agreement and receives a bill that ultimately goes unpaid and is now on the customer’s credit is not the fault of the partners who have limited claim to the company but the actual owners.

Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service, as a Limited Liability Company [LLC] and a Corporation are similar, in that a Limited Liability Company has some of the same exact features as a Corporation, but the question is would how would a breach of promise affect the LLC, or would the two be affected the same? In an LLC company Morrow (2005) wrote:

An LLC is a hybrid business organization that mixes the best of corporations, partnerships, and sole proprietorships. Each owner (also called a member) of an LLC has limited liability like a stockholder of a corporation. LLCs allow any entity, including individuals, partnerships, trusts, estates, corporations, or other LLCs to be owners. They also offer greater flexibility than corporations—like no limits on the number of members—yet they have the tax advantages of a partnership, such as pass-through taxable income and losses [What is a Limited Liability Company? Section; para.1].

So it is fair to say that as an LLC all members are not privy to lawsuits. In essence, we can see that in larger corporations although managers in smaller entities might be privy to lawsuits not all of the players are included in these, such as breach of contract. However, big corporal giants can be included in class action suits such as discrimination and some class action suits are privy to lawsuits such as overcharges and overbilling; however, one might need to narrow down the identity clause there and go after individuals, because identity is difficult to prove with larger corporations seeing there are many business inside the one entity.

There are several descriptions related to the lawsuit against Tinker and Taylor’s Home Security Service and their different establishments; as well as their approach to the breach of contract  suit which in review of the outcome notes that (a) for sole proprietor there will be loss in consideration to damages, (b) the general partnership has as much responsibility to damages in a law suit even if the blame is caused by an employee whether of acts or none acts of the company both partners are held accountable, (c) for LP the liability is more favorable for the partners in that they are more protected, however, the owners are still held accountable, and (d) LLC and Corporations, as mentioned, are not all privy to lawsuits because not all partners are involved as like investor, or rather silent partners. However, there can still be suits brought against individual companies or those who own them. In essence, the outcome here is that sole proprietorship and general partners is taking on a huge risk.

 

Watch: The Secret to Starting a Small Business Online

 

Sources:

Sole Proprietorship and General Partnerships are Risky Business. Business Owner’s Toolkit.

 Corporation Definition

Choose Your Business Structure.

Seaquist, G. (2012). Business law for managers. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

 What’s Best for Your Business? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crime and Business: Negligent Tort

 

CarOn June 29, 2014, the General Motors Company recalled thousands of vehicles which are said to have faulty mechanics and parts which have led to or have been the cause of serious or fatal injury to consumers.

The models affected are: 1997-2005 Chevrolet Malibu; 1998-2002 Oldsmobile Intrigue; 1999-2004 Oldsmobile Alero; 1999-2005 Pontiac Grand Am; 2000-2005 Chevrolet Impala and Monte Carlo; 2004-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix. The problem?  Reportedly, the ignition key can be bumped out of run position while driving [See: CNN Report| Every General Motors recall in 2014], and it is estimated that as many as 7,610,862 million vehicles are at risk nationwide. Consequently, as noted in news reports there is negligence on behalf of the GM employees; as well, as their CEO, Mary Barra who is accused of covering up faults in the installation of ignition switches the vehicles. This article will show where corporations, notably General Motors, failed or are neglectful and which might reportedly have led to civil action suits against them; hence, the elements of discussion are:  (a) Duty of Care, (b) Standard of Care, (c) Breach of Duty of Care, (d) Actual Causation, (e) Proximate Causation, (f) Actual Injury, and (g) Defenses to Negligence.

The General Motors Company apparently is no stranger to such recalls as this, however, not to such a magnitude because according to the list there have also been a number of recalls; not only for June, but also beginning with February 2014 through September 2014. According to Seaquist (2013) there are at least involved in the Duty of Care, or Reasonable Personal Standard (Seaquist, 2013) which speaks of the standard of behavior expected of a person in a particular situation. For example, there are at least 230 [including fifteen fired] employees accused in the suit, and as mention the CEO.

The article, “GM Admits Incompetence, Negligence Led to Delayed Recall,” disclosed GM’s lack of Duty to Care:

Last month, GM paid a $35 million fine — the largest ever assessed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration — for failing to report the problem quickly to federal regulators. GM knew about problems with the ignition switches as early as 2001, and in 2005 it told dealers to tell owners to take excess items off their key chains so they wouldn’t drag down the ignition switch. In 2006, an engineer at GM approved a change in the switch design, but didn’t inform the government or change the corresponding part number. In subsequent years, that made it harder for other GM engineers to figure out why older Cobalts’ performed worse than newer ones (The Associated Press, 2014).

In this case, there is a burden of proof for the defendants for them to prove that they are not negligent, according to Seaquist (2013) who wrote concerning the Statutory Duty of Care.

There certain elements:

  1. Defendants have burden of proof to prove they were not negligent.
  2. Plaintiff must prove that the defendant failed at the duty of care.

There is also the element of Foreseeability [actual causation] and Proximate Causation which is direct causation, or the breach of the Duty of Care, or rather the circumstance of negligence which caused the injury and this includes foreseeability which begs the question of whether the defective part was known beforehand. In essence, knowing the part was faulty, and also knowing the consequences beforehand; yet, still allowing the cars out for sale causing injury to consumers (Seaquist, 2014).

Here is the premise, for example, is it foreseeable that people who buy cars have a tendency to add other objects to their key rings, and can be a problem with an already faulty ignition switch? According to the Associated Press article, GM knew and yes they knew there would be a problem, because they apparently recalled vehicles before for the same thing:

A new article stated, “In 2006, an engineer at GM approved a change in the switch design, but didn’t inform the government or change the corresponding part number. In subsequent years, that made it harder for other GM engineers to figure out why older Cobalts performed worse than newer ones. In May, GM recalled another 2.7 million vehicles for various issues. The bulk of the recall was for Chevrolet Malibu cars from 2004-2012 as well as the 2004-2007 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx, 2005-2010 Pontiac G6 and 2007-2010 Saturn Auras, all to modify the brake lamp wiring harness” [The Associate Press, 2014].

The last thing on the list to find negligence on the part of the manufacturing company General Motors is the industry of care which would give reference to expert opinion. Notably, there were also investigations initiated in notice of interviews, and firings which subsequently resulted from those. In the article, “General Motors releases delayed recall investigation, cites negligence and incompetence” Barra reports the finding of the experts in the scandal. The Daily News stated, “In 2006, GM engineer Ray De Giorgio – who designed the switch – approved a change in the switch design, but didn’t inform the government or change the corresponding part number. In subsequent years, that made it harder for other GM engineers to figure out why older Cobalts performed worse than newer ones. Barra confirmed Thursday that two employees placed on leave in April have been fired; De Giorgio was one of those employees.” (The Daily News, 2014). Hence, the manufacturer is in a jam as far as the defendant proving lack of neglect, because they have admitted their part, and as the article stated paid a hefty fine as a result.

Some forms in Defense of Negligence are: (a) Contributory negligence, (b) Comparative negligence or assumption of risk, and (c) Pure Contributory Negligence. The first contributory is where the plaintiff along with the defendant is responsible. In essence, as Seaquest (2013) noted about the snow on the walk, that is yes it is the business owners duty to make sure the snow is shovel, however, if there is snow on walk why did the plaintiff walk on it.  Could he have gone around? Did the customer have to use that business? Who knows? Hence both have a part, although the defendant might owe the greater responsibility for the injury because he did not shovel the walk (Seaquest, 2013). Secondly, Comparative Negligence would stem from the plaintiff help with his injury. Hence, if the defendant sued for two million dollars, and a jury decides that the plaintiff should pay a portion then that total is subtracted from the total award and the plaintiff wins the remained. In example, 2 million – plaintiff deduction/part = remaining award. In the Pure Comparative, the law agrees that the irresponsible party wins something no matter if the accident was caused by the defendant; however, the plaintiff’s award is greater.

Concerning Consumer Protection [ which is mentioned briefly], it is all important and is law which protects customers from harm. Seaquist (2013) wrote:  Strict Liability in Tort In contrast with absolute liability, strict liability is a recently developed theory in law that holds manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers liable for defects in the design or manufacturing of products that render such products unreasonably dangerous to the intended users (Seaquest, 2014). Consequently, GM has to face Congress on their negligent acts and failure to protect the public they serve [Read: General Motors executives to face Congress over car recall scandal]  in their efforts or lack of thereof in keeping their Duty of Care.

 

 

Sources:
LIABILITY OF AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS FOR UNSAFE DESIGN OF PASSENGER CARS

Business law for managers. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

General Motors releases delayed recall investigation, cites negligence and incompetence

GM Admits Incompetence, Negligence Led to Delayed Recall. Mashable. Business

Money Every General Motors recall in 2014 

No More Locked Doors!

download (4)All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. [US Constitution Amendment 14 Section 1].

College students in America should be aware that the job market, or rather attainable rights to own and run business and the job search market might seem to be on level footing but they are not, because underlying levels of discrimination and bias are at the frontline. Accordingly, some reports say that though many people might have the same initial education or degrees, seemingly, there are great disparages among blacks and whites with the same education or degreed status.

In the case of Amendment 14 Section 1, people might have an idea that legally this would allow immunity against being sued or some other legality concerning court. However, when the subject of one’s immunity is brought forth this would also mean protection from harm in all things pertaining to ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’. Therefore, one’s ability to seek a job, and/or own a business measurable with their education should be a mainstay. However, though allowed to seek and even be in a top list of candidates the ability to obtain employment is stalled at the door. Hence, establishment of programs to curtail employers who tend to discriminate in the application process, but do they help?

In the article, “Black Men Need More Education Than White Men to Get Jobs”, Margaret Barthel (2014) wrote:

A recent report from the advocacy group Young Invincibles suggests not: African American millennial men need two or more levels of education to have the same employment prospects as their white peers. White male college graduates have a 97.6% employment rate. Black male college graduates have a 92.8% employment rate—which correlates more closely with the job prospects for white men who have some college education but no degree (92.5%) (Barthel, 2014, para. 2).

Discrimination and or biases is further noted in the article which alludes to white sounding names versus black names being a problem in the applicant process as well. Hence, one should ask what  the protection against such clandestine treatment is there. Please note, one employer stated that he does not deal with applicants with ‘tribal’ sounding names. In essence, this thinking targets blacks whose names might seem unusual rather than standard names such as Mary, John, Martha or Mark and is in direct contradiction to the amendment which states that, “any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,” and to which employers should adhere to but apparently have found a loophole to avoid it.

In essence, the situation begs the question which asks, what is a person to do if one cannot get in the door of opportunity?

Watch: African American unemployment hits depression-era levels