Transportation network companies: Yes!

       Everyone has been a witness of the controversy creates by Online transportations network such as Uber. Belonging to these customers that use almost every week those online transportations, I judge necessary to talk about it. Uber is a company with a free online application that provides transportation to individuals. People just need smartphones and credit cards to subscribe. But what differentiate Uber from the taxi union? Uber’s drivers are not companies’ employees and use they own personal cars. They do not have the requirements taxis can have. As the issues between Taxi and Uber have been here for several years, the past two years Uber has been facing lawsuits with many governments in the world, including the US government. The taxi union is not longer competitive compares to this online transportations. Today, I want to call to action. Uber is more than helpful for the American society, and the government should encourage those initiatives. 

        For my part as I said before, Online transportation are part of my everyday life since I have to use them whenever I am running late for class or meetings, and that happens every time. The government should try to find common ground with Uber and his concurrent lyft. The negotiation may lead to an employment regulation and tax collection. The government has to considerate the advantages of those mobile apps before taking drastic decisions. First of all, Uber provides employment to more than 5.000 Americans and help them fulfill their needs. A company that creates job should not be disabled.  Uber has a relatively lower fare than taxis, the time between the order and the pick up are very short. People don't have to wait several minutes to be picked up and don’t have to fumble for cash. Uber drivers provide better services than taxis one. I think the government should just impose more strict rules to these companies but should not try to stop them. Our world is evolving, technologies and services should be growing with it. Dear colleagues, I would like to invite you all to vote for the Prop 1 for those companies on may 7.

Comment on my colleague's blog: The Truth Of America

           As I had for this assignment to comment on one of my colleague blogs, I read almost everyone's blog and the one that interpellate me is the post of The Truth Of America: Is changing wages a good idea?
I believe that this question of raising the minimum wages is a very crucial one and that everyone need to give their opinions.
         Jesus Tovar made a very effective and persistent argument in his editorial. However, it is important for me to notify that low wages here would mean wages that can sustain to people’s need. Workers aspire to get wages that will help them fulfill their needs. No one is interested in working somewhere they are likely to receive low incomes. The US purchasing power has declined which make harder for American low wage worker to afford certain commodities; they would have to work for longer hours. My colleague emphasizes the fact that hardworking Americans are the only ones entitled to wages increase, but he does not seem to recognize that the effect of raising minimum wages would have an impact and will make “lazy” people get motivated and work hard. 

Military attack again ISIS or not?

      According to the article, “Obama to bomb ISIS in Syria: 5 reasons for and against airstrikes.” The United States foreign intervention and policies through the use of the military attacks have become a contagious issue in the recent times.  Given that the Syria government is no longer recognized by the America government, the United states administration claimed that it won’t seek permission of conducting the military surveillance from president Bashar Assad become they  no longer recognize the government of the day. There are many reasons as to why the United States government shall authorize the airstrikes and a launch of the military attack against the ISIS which might include: ISIS expansion into Syria, calls for airstrikes are growing steadily, an assumption that airstrikes shall stabilize Syria, the fact that United State is already striking Syria and the need of the united states government to protect its territory. 

        According to United States government military attacks against Syria will actually stop the ISIS from advancing to Syria where the Sunni militant group is believed to have strong base command in Raqqa near Iraq.  The military attack will eventually control various military bases in the country where the ISIS is among the rebellious group under the control of the Syrian crossing in the border. The attacks of the Americans and other countries citizens in Syria by the ISIS rebels have necessitated the United States government to call for the military attack against Syria. The United States government believes that in order to attain law and order and to ensure that the human rights are respected in Syria it would be appropriate for the military attacks from the United States military. The United States government believes it is time to bring President Assad out of the power in order to stabilize Syria because he is the greatest supporter of the ISIS rebel instead of being a propagator of peace in Syria and the world. The United States Government believes that through the military attack the Syria democracy in political, social and economic sectors shall be restored.

        Give the mission of the United States military attack is to stop the ISIS rebels from advancing and expanding to Syria. There has been no need for hesitation because the military is already in the Syria grounds fighting the rebels. Moreover, despite the fact that the Pentagon has confirmed that the Islamic States has no potential to conduct terrorist attack against the American soil, president Barrack Obama has taken the issue with the serious it deserve because he believe that the western members of the ISIS have the potential to propagate the terrorism attack against the United states. Nevertheless, issues such as public opinion, the need to stop strengthening President Assad, high risk of casualties and inadequate intelligence are some of the factors the United States government continues to evaluate.