It’s definitely indisputable that the issue of gentrification is becoming more prevalent as the days go by. I love the last line of the article in which a concerned resident states that they do hear that Brooklyn is getting better, but then she asks for who? Because she’s definitely not witnessing the change. I feel like that is something many people can relate to. Many politicians claims that they are working in behalf of the community and that they are trying their best to get the rights to the people, but at the end of the day we don’t see much of that change/work they claim to be doing for the benefit of all. I do believe in the power of the masses and I think that if all of the residents of Brooklyn being affect by this issue come together to get their messages across, they can accomplish a lot. At least they will be able to avoid unbearable situations like the one Maria Najera had to go through. Living in a place without a leaky roof and/or dangerous conditions isn’t a luxury, it’s a right we should all have. They key factor while striving for a change is organization and being well-educated about the topic to be able to provide viable solutions for the city as well as the tenants. Nonetheless, it’s never useless to think about other alternatives to make a change, what else can be done?

Link: http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/37/43/dtg-rent-stabilization-law-anti-gentrification-rally-2014-10-24-bk_37_43.html

Regardless of how much America claims to be a free country with equal opportunities for all, there will always exist a certain sense of prejudice and rivalry between all races. Over the years, despite anti-segregation or anti-discriminatory measures, society hasn’t managed to suppress or move on passed the racial gap. This is when it becomes evident in police cases such as the Rodney King beating case in which the police officers were acquitted. And nowadays, we just keep adding cases to the list, just like the death of Eric Garner and/or Robert Davis, a retired elementary school teacher suspected of intoxication. And there are many more. I agree with the article when it states that different people had different interpretations of the video that went viral after King’s beating. On one side, evidence such as a video could easily prove whether someone is guilty or not, however, it was also frustrating because even after the judge saw the video he still decided to acquit two of the four officers. This is the meanings I stuck with. Unfortunately, justice doesn’t always get the job done. In addition, the article states that the relations between communities cannot be mediated in a neutral fashion, and I completely agree with that. There isn’t such a thing as neutral in current society, as hard as that is to accept, there will always be some sort of biased actions/thoughts/words/procedures executed by someone.

Question: What do you guys propose as a solution for this gender inequality issue?

It was very interesting learning about the laws that actually support the unethical and atrocious behavior of cops towards the people.

I feel like what the people in charge of the city at that time meant to do with the safety of the streets was a good thing. But, unfortunately, us human beings tend to take advantage of the power given to us and so we end up distorting the purpose of many things, such as the “zero tolerance” law. Nonetheless, it was a ruthless law, as well as the “quality of life” policing. It seems quite ironic to me that the people who were supposed to keep order and enforce the law on everyone, equally—the word “equally” didn’t seem to have much meaning back then. I wonder if people think that we still see somewhat of this behavior nowadays? And what do they think is the cause of such behavior?

I do know one thing for sure, the root for racism back then was easily political more than just a social issue that affected, not just the blacks, but the lower income class. Which could lead to the conclusion that any other state government that ended up implementing these laws that were first tested out here in NYC, were just as racist and/or biased as NYC at that point in time.

The article “Oxfam study finds richest 1% is likely to control half of global wealth by 2016” shows a wide-spread concern focused primarily on the gap that is ever-increasing between the extremely rich and the painstakingly poor of the world. This article impresses me in showing how the richest percentage of the world can easily control an important and vital amount of money in the economic world. For instance, the connections and the amounts of investments that can be summed up by these people can easily determine the future of many corporations as well as international multi-millionaire businesses. Other than believing this as an inevitable end that will happen, the wealth that is just gathered in such few hands, can be redistributed at a much widespread rate. In addition, this article also begins to make you think of several possibilities that will eventually lead to a much more desired outcome, for example heavier taxes for the rich, much more money limitations and a lot more taxes for trivial activities that can only be afforded by the richest people of the world. Yet on the flipside, the immensity of such a project will never be a one-night job so what do you think? What improvements or ideas do you have that will limit the rich and help the poor without endangering or boosting the middle class of the world?

This article highlights the obvious inequality that exists within our society. Interestingly enough, however, I have heard of a few individuals who deny such phenomena.

I am sure that a storm like Sandy caused many headaches for all New Yorkers. Unfortunately, not everyone was able to get back on their feet at the same time. This articles proves that not every neighborhood of New York gets the same amount of attention and support from the agencies that are supposed to keep an eye on their well-being and provide them with standard services. Once money is involved, companies as well as the governments tend to forget that a family’s inability to live in a high-class neighborhood doesn’t determine whether they get the help they need promptly or after weeks. At the end of the day, it’s human beings that all of those companies are dealing with, so how about they come up with recovery plans that would benefit both, low and high income families, simultaneously. In other words, not focus all of the resources on the people that are able to quickly pay for them, such as the upper class, but also spread some of the help to the middle and lower classes.  Like Levin, from the article, states “cost should be the last consideration.”

Question: Do you guys think that if the government/agency officials were part of the middle and lower classes, that then and only then advocate better for the people with less resources?

It definitely warms my heart knowing that so many people from all over the world would make the effort to be present in such event. Yes, they are expressing their opinion about the way politicians have dealt with the global warming issue, however, no one can guarantee any sort of result after protesting. But, it definitely did leave a mark on many people’s lives and they were also very successful at getting their message out because the media, such as The New York Times, wrote and article about them.

Although actions by the governments have been taken, there’s a lot more we, the citizens, can do about this issue. I simply do wonder what else has to happen—in terms of geological disasters—so that people become conscientious enough about their actions and change so many destructive habits they have. For instance, reducing the amount of water used while taking a shower, and taking a shower instead of a bath; while brushing their teeth turning the water off helps, people continue to do otherwise, however. And the list goes on…

Question: What small action do we do at home to help the planet ourselves?