Russia: Illiberal Democracy

1)
Neil J. Mitchell, of the University of New Mexico, defines and illiberal democracy by comparing it to what makes a democracy. According to Mitchell, "Democracy is a bundle of institutional and behavioral components, including regular competitive elections, full enfranchisement, free speech, an accessible and critical media, and freedom of association. Proponents of the concept of illiberal democracy strip basic liberties from the bundle. Democracy is conceived more minimally as the occurrence of competitive elections." Fareed Zakaria further expands on this idea, mentioning how democracy has been able to spread around different parts of the world, but liberty has not.
According to worldiq.com, an illiberal democracy is "a country in which the leaders and lawmakers are elected by the people, but individual freedoms such as those protected in the United States Bill of Rights or the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen do not exist."

Russia is considered an illiberal democracy because of it's structure. The President of Russia is decided on whoever receives a majority of the votes. In this sense, Russia is acting as a democracy as far as choosing a leader goes. However, Russia is considered by many extremely corrupt thus limiting individual freedom and rights. While democratic elections take place, citizens are generally misinformed or not informed at all about their countries issues, and are left in the dark. This creates a system where, while leaders are chosen democratically, the citizens tend to have very little actual power in society.

http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/members/courses/teachers_corner/32074.html
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Illiberal_democracy

2)News Article:
http://georgiandaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20674&Itemid=132

News in the UK: Court Closings

The Justice Minister, Jonathan Djanogly, revealed to the public that the government will be shutting down 93 magistrates’ courts and 49 county courts in the United Kingdom in an effort to reduce the government’s deficit. According to the BBC article, “15m Euros per year in running costs, plus an extra 22m Euros in maintaining the buildings” will be saved should the selected courts close. While having less courts will prove to be an inconvenience to citizens, 85% of people (down from 90%) would still be able to reach a court within an hour by taking public transportation, according to Djanogly. The Labour Party, however, disagrees with the closing of the courts. Shadow justice minister Andrew Slaughter claims that courts are as important as police stations and town halls, and that it is not right to inconvenience citizens for a “crude, cost-cutting exercise.” Slaughter’s claim comes from the fact that county courts deal with issues such as divorces, business cases, accident claims, and small claims; all of which are fairly common among the average population. While the Labour Party is against reducing the deficit in such manners, Djanogly stands by the decision, arguing that with changes to the court system, a “better, more efficient and more modern” system will emerge.

Considering that only 5% less citizens wouldn’t be able to reach a court within an hour using public transportation, I think that cutting the deficit by closing some courts is a necessary measure to take. The United Kingdom is clearly having issues with their spending, and the citizens are not happy with the cuts, as shown by the student protests. While cutting public services is something that people wouldn’t want, it is necessary if the UK economy is to be saved. The UK doesn’t have an infinite amount of money, and the out-of-control spending is going to have to be cut somewhere, which, in this case, includes some courts that aren’t used as much. While it is good politically for the Labour Party to be against these spending cuts, economically it is bad for the UK. If the Labour Party is going to take a stance against closing some courts, then they’re going to need to propose a better plan.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11993436

Snow in Scotland and Online Orders

The past eleven months, the Unites States has experienced warmer than average temperatures. In some countries, such as Scotland and parts of England, that doesn’t seem to be the case. The United Kingdom as of lately has been receiving much more snowfall then they are used to this time of year and because many aren’t used to the large amounts of snow, preparations seem as if they have not gone too well. According to the video on BBC, Scotland, a part of the UK that is located more north, is having issues with online orders. With Christmas only about one week away, the Scottish could face a dilemma if their online orders cannot be shipped to their homes by the holiday. Not only are online businesses feeling the negative effects of the snow, but local businesses are as well. The local businesses only want to sell what they can promise they’ll be able to deliver, so with the snow, sales are falling short as delivery trucks may not be able to travel on the icy roads. Parts of northern England are also experiencing the same consequences of the snow, and I would assume that if the snowfall continues, more of the UK could become affected.

Video

News in the UK- Lib Dems and Tuition Fees

The United Kingdom and Great Britain are finally, along with many other countries, seeing the consequences of their over-the-top government spending to pay for entitlement programs. In Britain, there have been many student protests because the government can no longer pay for college education to the extent that they have been. Of course, it makes sense that raising fees would cause anger and unease among the student population because they feel as if they are entitled to a relatively cheap education. According to the video, many student protests are turning their anger towards the Liberal Democrat party, specifically because they ran on the promise not to raise the fees. The Liberal Democrats, however, should not have promised something that they knew could not continue on forever. Many are now expected to vote in favor of raising the fees because in reality, the only way to effectively reduce the United Kingdom’s budget is to look towards the entitlement programs; something that the UK has an abundance of.

Watching the video helped me to realize that the politicians in the UK and those in the United States have much in common, and will do anything as long as they gain votes. Economically, and abundance of entitlement programs does not make sense; there is just no way to pay for it all forever. That said, as seen in the UK and the US, entitlement programs work wonderfully in politics, because who wouldn’t vote for someone who would entitle you to more money and less responsibility? This video displays a perfect example of the consequences of entitlement programs, specifically in the United Kingdom in the case of protests carried out by students who feel as if their rights and entitlements are being stolen from them.

Video

Natural Gas Lobby and Gasland

The documentary Gasland, by James Fox, helps raise awareness on the issue of drilling for natural gas. Fox accomplishes this goal through his documentary by traveling to the people affected by the drilling, recording their newly acquired everyday troubles. This, however, is not the only way that Fox makes his documentary effective. Fox constantly emphasizes the fact that there are many reasons as to how the natural gas industry is able to continue drilling, even though it is evident that they are physically harming civilians near the rigs. The government, in an attempt to help the people for whom they work, passed certain regulations that would restrict corporations from harming the people. The natural gas (as well as oil) lobbies, however, have been able to influence the legislations, which would have otherwise damaged them.

In particular, the natural gas lobbyists have been very successful in influencing the politicians who draft up and vote on legislations. In February of 2009, natural gas companies responded to the growing public discomfort of their business practices by forming the American Natural Gas Alliance to “push broadly for more use of gas in power generation, transportation, and other fields.” By combining a vast amount of natural gas companies, their lobbying was able to become more united, and thus more effective. The lobbyists aim to emphasize the beneficial factors of drilling for natural gas, while giving very little attention to the main issues that the people have against them. A few of the mentioned benefits include the claims that “gas burns more cleanly than coal, is produced domestically, and relies on existing technology…” These claims not only work towards improving the image of natural gas, but also add a great amount of rhetoric that can be used politically. For example, with the ever-rising issue of energy dependence, it would be hard for a politician to argue against the claim that natural gas is domestically produced; whether or not the pros outweigh the cons, the natural gas industry does have a point, as the drilling would reduce foreign dependence.

Overall, the lobbying of the natural gas industry has been effective in their methods of influencing politics. It helps their cause that benefits of natural gas do exists, and since loopholes and exceptions that work in favor of natural gas drilling are already in place, the lobbyists do not need to concentrate on passing new legislation. Rather, I would think that they needed to work towards keeping the laws already existing in place. By uniting under the American Natural Gas Alliance, lobbyists have made it difficult for politicians to fix loopholes or change the laws already in place, even if it is what many people want.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123552499920765485.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

Gasland: 5 Questions

"Gasland" is a documentary by Josh Fox that explores the affects of natural gas drilling on Americans living near the rigs. Throughout the documentary Fox interviews many people, from the citizens effected to important figures in the EPA. Because he will be visiting our school, five questions I would ask him would be:
1. What was the main inspiration for creating a documentary on the subject?
2. How much has the natural gas drilling affected your life and house specifically?
3. Even though the documentary is finished, are you still working to expose the drilling?
4. Is your main purpose of the film to completely halt all natural gas drilling, or to have more regulations to make it safe for the people who live near them?
5. I'm assuming that your film has generated a considerable amount of money. Do you have any plans to invest it in making a sequel or advancing your cause?

News in Europe - Russia Co-operates with NATO

Recently, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, met in order to discuss the rising issue of possible ballistic missile attacks. The members of the organization have agreed on a treaty that would set up a defense system across Europe and North America, where most of the members are located. This treaty would help relations between major nations while protecting themselves from possible dangerous missile attacks from unstable countries. Russia, being the largest country in Europe, is critical to the success of the defense plan, and because its relations with the United States is not very strong, it was very possible the Russia would prove to be a difficult problem for the treaty. To the relief of the members of NATO, Russia, on November 20th, has agreed to “co-operate on NATO’s programme to defend against ballistic missile attacks.”

This agreement could possibly ease relations with Russia, a very advanced country militarily, and according to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, “A period of very difficult, tense relations has been overcome.” Russia controls much of the land and airspace in Europe and with its co-operation it would be able to detect and shoot down incoming missiles that wouldn’t have been able to be shot down had Russia not complied. Not only has Russia agreed to help with the missile defense system, but also to “allow more supplies to travel through Russia… to support NATO’s mission in Afghanistan,” displaying an even more possible future with Russia as an ally rather than as a hostile nation.

While the treaty has been agreed upon among NATO members, it still is faced with the challenge of passing the United States Senate, or else the United States would not take part. A passage of the treaty would call for the United States and Russia to both reduce their nuclear arsenals and allow the countries to inspect each other’s nuclear facilities. I would think that this could prove difficult for the Senate to pass because of the fact that current relations with Russia aren’t very good. According to Medvedev, “Our (Russia’s) participation has to be a full-fledged exchange of information, or we won’t take part at all,” which could end up supplying Russia with valuable information. That aside, I think that this treaty looks like it could be successful if managed appropriately and could also greatly improve relations with not only Russia, but also other important European nations.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11803931

The G-20 Summit

The G-20 Summit that is occurring in South Korea, while many may not know much about it, is very big and important news. In the G-20 a select group of countries that have large influences on the world economy get together to discuss the future of the global economy. In a way, it is almost like the United Nations only that it involves 20 countries and focuses on economics. The big issue surrounding the summit is without a doubt the trade/currency war, which is threatening the entire global economy, much like the one that occurred right before the Great Depression. According to an Article on the Associated Press, the summit is not in a very promising situation. China is under fire from other nations of the G-20 because of the Chinese government intervening in their currency, the yuan, with the purpose of keeping it devalued compared to other world currencies. Having a weaker currency relocates jobs from countries with stronger currencies to those who have weaker ones, such as China. With unemployment in the United States at 9.6%, Americans need the jobs that are being taken by China. The summit does not seem to be going smoothly, as “leaders of 20 major economies on Friday refused to back a U.S. push to make China boost its currency value,” showing that for the U.S. to leave the summit successful, compromises must be made.

In the meantime, with China refusing to allow the Free Market to determine the value of its currency, the United States had to take action. By pumping $600 billion dollars into the economy, the United States hopes to devalue its currency, which in effect would be the same as if China revalued theirs. Ironically, China greatly disapproves of this, claiming how the United States is artificially changing their economy to benefit themselves; although it was China’s intervention to keep its currency low that pushed the U.S. to do the same. This action of the United States also “undermines” its position to stop “competitive devaluation” in the eyes of other nations, displaying a weakening influence of the United States. Overall, it is clear to see just how complicated the economic issues involved are, and how difficult it will be to find an effective common ground between the 20 countries involved.




http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gtjTj_CqBCJ-Ta9d_OpDh-ATPNmg?docId=08eb0319cd654699bc1fd95a727d3862

Education in Japan

The education system in Japan is very rigorous and competitive, but helps result in a strong overall education for Japanese civilians. When Japanese students begin middle school, usually at age 12, 5.7% of the students attend private schools since it helps being accepted into high school. For example, some private middle schools are affiliated with high schools, which are further affiliated with universities; enrollment in certain middle schools will allow for direct enrollment in the affiliated schools. Parents who choose the option of private middle school want to secure a position in a good high school of their choice, since the race to be accepted into private high schools is incredibly competitive. This displays just how intense the education system is, which is directly related to how much importance the Japanese place on education. Furthermore, 90.8% of parents send their children to cram school, or juku/gakken, where they can further enhance their studies. These cram schools are basically after school study sessions, which prepare students for the high school entrance exams. With the education system being of utmost importance, many Japanese have a fair amount of education under their belts. For example, in 2002 97% of students advanced into senior high schools, as in the Japanese workforce, a high school diploma is widely considered a minimum for basic job opportunities.

The Japanese curriculum is fairly similar to that of the United States, with moral values, academics and arts being taught in elementary schools. Japanese middle schools are tough, with the teachers moving at a fast pace and sticking to the textbook in order to prepare their students for high school entrance exams. While the curriculum tends to be similar among elementary schools and middle schools across Japan, the high schools differ by type (most prestigious to least): Elite academic high schools, Non-elite academic high schools, Vocational high schools, Correspondence high schools, and finally Evening high schools.

Overall, I find the Japanese school system to be very effective. With 90% of students graduating from high school and 40% from a university or junior college, a large percentage of the Japanese people are well educated. While the competitive aspect of their system does contribute to a large amount of stress, I feel that that is why a vast majority of the Japanese have completed a high school education. It is also interesting to note that the Japanese believe that their education system allows for equal opportunity to move up in the social ladder. Many believe in the notion that entrance into good schools is based on merit and long hours dedicated to educational life. The Japanese school system definitely must have its flaws, and some could say that dedicating years of childhood experience to possibly be admitted into a superior high school isn’t right. There also is less importance on critical thinking and thinking as an individual, since many years of schooling is just to prepare for entrance exams. Nevertheless, I find the Japanese educational system to be very impressive and respectable.



http://www.education-in-japan.info/sub1.html

Veterans

Today is Veteran’s Day, where the United States honors those who defended our country in active duty and who are now retired. Veteran’s Day is always on November 11, for the reason being that the armistice ending WWI was signed at the 11th hour, on the 11th day, on the 11th month in 1918. While many veterans are thanked for their service when they return home, recent veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan face many troubling issues. For many soldiers returning from war overseas, it’s incredibly difficult to assimilate back into civilian life. Many return home because of injuries that prevent them from fighting on the battlefield, and if they don’t have family that can take care of them they are faced with a really difficult situation. A significant amount of veterans return home suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and undergo treatment at various Veterans’ Hospitals across the country. Veteran Hospitals in comparison to other civilian hospitals are in very poor conditions, and they will only get worse when more and more soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan return home. According to ajc.com, 49% of the 1.2 million veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have obtained VA healthcare from 2002. Because of the state of the economy, more veterans are losing their healthcare and turn to VA healthcare supported by the government instead.

While America clearly cares for its veterans by providing them with special healthcare benefits, the care they are receiving isn’t the best it could be. Some think that the government should spend so much money on special care for veterans, but I don’t think they aren’t spending enough. It is in American culture to care for our veterans to such a great extent, and it’s one aspect that, in my opinion, makes us unique. Americans will always honor the soldiers who fight to protect our freedom, so I think it’s necessary to give them the utmost care.



http://www.ajc.com/news/rising-tide-of-veterans-736523.html

Political Culture and Socialization Project: Japan, Part 3

Which term is the greatest political strength in your individual country?

The term that has the greatest political strength in Japan would be the political socialization of its citizens. The Japanese have been able to retain their strong cultural heritage while transforming into a modernized world power, as shown by the presence of an emperor. Another huge aspect of the Japanese culture is that of respect for elders and those in a higher position, shown by the extensive use of honorifics in the Japanese language. This type of socialization is why high education is such a strong agent of political socialization just after the family. As many people already know, the Japanese stress education to its full extent and are in constant interaction with either teachers or peers. Overall, this displays just how strongly the Japanese are socialized to absorb political opinions based on their experiences in higher education. This also plays in with the aspect of honor in Japan, since students have great respect for their teachers and professors and thus take what they teach as fact. Thus, political socialization is the greatest political strength in Japan seeing how it is connected with their strong cultural heritage that has survived to this day.

Which term is the greatest political weakness in your individual country?

The term that has the greatest political weakness in Japan is the political subculture. In Japan, there are two major parties, the DPJ and the LDP. Because of the general Japanese distrust of government, many Japanese are trying to distant themselves from party affiliation. Unity among party members is slowly deteriorating as more scandals are revealed, which in the end could be negative. For example, without two defined political parties, such as in America, it could be harder for compromise in the government concerning important issues. This also creates problems in the legitimacy in the government as more and more Japanese see their party system as ineffective. Another subculture issue is the issue of diversity in Japan. With 99.8% of the people in Japan being of Japanese descent, the large amount of minority groups experience racism and xenophobia (not to be taken as saying the majority of Japanese are racist). There also are some minority groups, such as the Burakumin who were descendants of “outcast communities during the federal era,” who are also discriminated against. Interestingly, ethnic matters are of very little importance in the Japanese government and there is currently no legislation that enforces the civil rights of citizens, thus allowing discrimination to continue with little penalties.

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/rc20100128a1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_issues_in_Japan

Political Culture and Socialization Project: Japan, Part 2

What are the most significant agents of political socialization in your country?
According to Political Women in Japan, the family, which is the most significant agent in America, is relatively weak in Japan. The book also states that the most prominent agents are those that come later in life, such as “higher education” in particular. Higher education plays a large role because of the fact that “in a subculture where experimentation is accepted and even valued,” an educated person is able to discuss their different beliefs and change their views when discussing issues with other educated people. I would infer from this information that the Japanese people tend to be more open minded when it comes to the smaller, more specific issues.
http://books.google.com/books?id=vR83saYJhgUC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=Agents+of+political+socialization+in+Japan&source=bl&ots=3Ek1WdvWH-&sig=h8yK4kfpF_2e69cmpJSEk7NXkvw&hl=en&ei=NRPUTNP-Esmr8Ab6ltz6DA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CCwQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Agents%20of%20political%20socialization%20in%20Japan&f=false

What is the basis of government legitimacy in your individual country?
When speaking about the general Japanese feeling towards political legitimacy, Carmen Schmidt, author of Japan’s Circle of Power: Legitimacy and Integration of a Nation Elite, states that overall, there is a general mistrust of politicians and thus the legitimacy of the government. The author first points out that the Japanese people aren’t represented in a fair manner because of the corrupt election districts, which “are not proportionate to the population size.” Also, while elected officials are considered to be legitimate, there are many “elite groups” that aren’t elected (thus illegitimate) which have a strong influence on the elected politicians. Schmidt proclaims that another cause of general mistrust has to do with the mass media. Journalists are required to be members of “kasha kurabu” or “press clubs,” which “function as the primary conducts of official information.” The mass media, while it cannot be considered a pure source of propaganda, doesn’t act to restrict the power of the elite. Percentage-wise, the newspaper Yomiuri Shinbun found by polling that in December 1998, 17.7% had faith in the Japanese political system as a whole.
http://www.asienkunde.de/content/zeitschrift_asien/archiv/pdf/Schmidt96.pdf

Political Culture and Socialization Project: Japan, Part 1

Agents of Political Socialization
Agents of political socialization refer to the separate factors that influence a person’s political opinion. In Japan high education, family, religion, and the media are agents of political socialization.

Legitimacy
The Japanese government gains its legitimacy based on their Constitution, which was ratified in 1947. Because of the strong cultural heritage of the Japanese, there also is a constitutional monarchy that includes an emperor; currently Akihito. The monarchy aspect of Japan is, of course, hereditary while the parliamentary aspect is controlled under democratic elections.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html

Parochial
Parochial political culture is a part of political culture in which citizens have little awareness of the presence of a central government. Because of the large Japanese population as well as the relatively small size of the country, there isn’t an abundance of communities not aware of their government. It’s possible that there are small tribes or villages on the remote islands surrounding the mainland, but as one of the most advanced nations in the world, the amount of people unaware of government is insignificant.

Participants
Participants are a part of the political culture in which citizens take an active role in their government and thus are not only active in the output of government, but the input as well. Like the United States and other major democracies, the number of participants is particularly high.

Subjects
Subjects are a part of the political culture in which citizens obey the government and its laws, but don’t participate in the government. Around 30% of Japanese citizens are subjects, according to the graph provided by Sean Richley, Ph.D. This is actually an improvement from data collected earlier.
http://www.jsps.go.jp/english/e-plaza/e-sdialogue/03_data/Dr_Richey.pdf

Political Culture
Political culture is “the traditional orientation of the citizens of a nation towards politics, affecting their perceptions of political legitimacy.” The political culture in Japan is fairly different from that in western nations as Japan has been able to modernize while retaining its historical culture, which “remains manifest in Japanese politics and economics.” One large aspect of the political culture in Japan is how it is taught that the group should come before in individual, which I find interesting considering Japan is a democracy.
http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_roskin_countries_8/0,8011,842019-,00.html

Political Socialization
Political socialization is “a concept concerning the study of the developmental processes by which children and adolescents acquire political cognition, attitudes and behaviors.” In Japan, the most influential agent that affects socialization is without a doubt higher education.

Political Subculture
The political subculture in Japan is, like in America, broken down into various political parties. However, as of late more and more Japanese have tried to distance themselves from political parties. The two major parties are the Democratic Party (DPJ) and the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). The ethnic subcultures in Japan are divided as follows: 98.5% Japanese, 0.5% Korean, 0.4% Chinese, and 0.6% other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Japan

Topic Ideas

Topic 1: Nuclear Weapons
1. Iran nuke development
2. Effects on the world's security
3. Nuclear war
4. U.S. nuclear relations
5. Russia's nukes
6. Should Iran have nukes?
7. Demilitarization of nukes
8. Should the U.S. stop/ease development of nukes
9. Different country's positions on nukes
10. Past nuclear bombs (Hiroshima, Nagasaki)
11. Nuclear weapons and the Cold War
12. History of how nuclear weapons were invented and put into use
13. General information of nuclear weapons and how severe they are
14. Medical effects of nukes on the human body after an explosion
15. Side supporting nukes, side opposing nukes

Topic 2: Global Economy
1. Currency war
2. World inflation/deflation
3. Comparison of different economies of the world
4. Global economic growth - what is it, how is it determined
5. Global imports/exports
6. How nations deal with debt
7. Troubles with the Euro
8. Idea of single global currency
9. U.S. dollar as world reserve
10. First world vs. Third world economies
11. Major types of economies in use- Smith, Keynesian, Marx
12. Country trade relations
13. Compare standard of living with different economies
14. Unemployment
15. How different countries spend their budget

GE- Currency War

What many people tend to not notice is while there are wars going on in the Middle East, a war is occurring that is affecting the entire world and could drastically change the United States- the currency war. While there aren’t actually people who are being killed, this type of war is in essence the same as a cyber war, in which certain aspects of a nation are attacked, pulling it into chaos, rather than attacking an army or citizens directly. In order to understand what exactly the currency war is all about, it’s vital to have a basic understanding of economics and how it plays into the collective world economy. First, you must understand that there are two types of countries when it comes to the economy: deficit countries such as America and the United Kingdom, and surplus countries such as China and Japan. The main distinction between the two is that deficit countries run on, of course, a deficit, which allows them to take in more than they put out when dealing with international goods. Surplus countries are the exact opposite; according to Laurence Knight, “they lend to other countries to help finance their exports.” This makes sense, considering America is a large buyer of foreign goods, and China produces a handful of cheap goods. In affect, the deficit spending allows countries like America to have a high value attached to their currency, in this case the dollar, while having a surplus will keep a country’s currency low in value, such as the Yen and Yuan. Economists who are familiar and knowledgeable about the former currency war, which occurred in the 1930s, are predicting that if the currency war as it is continues, then history will ultimately end up repeating itself.

The financial crisis in 2008 was in large a trigger of the current currency war. With not as much money to spend, deficit countries haven’t been able to purchase foreign goods, which in turn reduces the amount of exports that surplus countries are able to sell, causing a worldwide economic downfall. The situation becomes much more complicated when it comes to the recovery. According to the article on BBC.com, “The U.S. says it wants to export more, to help its economy recover. But the surplus countries don’t want their exports to lose their competitive advantage.” This last sentence outlines the main idea of the currency war- countries are racing each other, trying to get their currency to a lower value so other countries will buy their cheaper goods, thus improving employment rates in the country that is exporting the products.

Another main issue with the currency war is how it affects the citizens of any given country. In America, for example, we are faced with unemployment close to 10%, and a falling dollar. Before the financial crisis of 2008, Americans, living in an extremely deficit-run country, enjoyed an extremely high standard of living. This was because Americans had access to very cheap goods exported from surplus countries, allowing the dollar to have a large purchasing power. Meanwhile, in countries such as China, whose government has been seriously manipulating the Yuan to keep it artificially low, the Chinese citizens experience a much lower standard of living than Americans do. This gives the U.S. options of how it wants to deal with the issue. With the Fed’s main job being unemployment and inflation, many think that the dollar, as well as other currencies, will continue to weaken. If the U.S. is able to lower the value of the dollar relative to other currencies, job creation will boom in America, as we transform into an export-run country; one the other side, however, we wouldn’t be able to enjoy as much luxuries produced in foreign countries. If, however, the dollar remains higher in value in relation to other world currencies, even if overall the value drops, we could still have the same purchasing power, which might not change much.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11608719

Nuclear Weapons: Iran

Nuclear weapons pose a great threat to world peace, and many countries now claim that they right a right to them. One specific current issue has to do with Iran and their move towards becoming nuclear. Iran has proved to be untrustworthy, and the president has even gone as far to claim that Israel should be wiped off the map. With a large portion of the country wanting to destroy other countries such as Israel and America, allowing them to become nuclear proves an immense threat. The United States as well as their ally Israel currently has sanctions on Iran in hopes that they will stop their nuclear program. Iran claims that their becoming a nuclear nation is only for peaceful purposes, such as supplying nuclear energy to citizens, but the U.S. obviously doesn’t agree since they reacted with putting sanctions on Iran. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, “Iran has so far done little to disprove the allegations that it may have been trying to develop a nuclear warhead.” In my opinion, the Unites States is proving to be very weak, which only gives the impression to Iran that they can and will continue with their nuclear program. The sanctions obviously are not working, as the U.S. and Israel plan to further tighten them soon. Other strong countries, such as Russia, have made exceptions to the sanctions, which allow them to basically support Iran’s program. President Obama didn’t protest against this by allowing it to happen, and is doing nothing to stop it. With countries like Iran that know no limits, it’s impossible to reason with them. In fact, the Iranian government probably knows by now that Obama is such a weak president who will try to reason rather than use force, so they’d feel more comfortable proceeding with their nuclear programs. If Obama really wanted to stop this, he would have used force, however, he won’t because it would be unpopular and he is already well into campaigning for a second term. Unless we decide to inspect the facilities and is necessary forcefully stop Iran, they will continue their program.

http://www.rttnews.com/ArticleView.aspx?Id=1448680&pageNum=2

Japanese Economy

In order to understand the Japanese economy, it’s very important to note that the country has little to no natural resources, as it is a relatively small island compared to its population. Because of the geographical situation, the Japanese economy relies heavily on its exports to other countries. In U.S. dollars for easier understanding, Japan currently has a GDP of $4.15 trillion, the 4th largest in the world. It makes sense to have a large amount of purchasing power, as the Japanese have a reliance on buying raw materials from other countries. The labor force is divided up into three sections, with 4% in agriculture, 28% in industry, and 68% in services. The unemployment rate, although not nearly as bad as the United States, is at 5.1% according to the 2009 records, which I’d assume it only grew in the year 2010. Their external debt as of June 30, 2009 is $2.132 trillion, and is the 8th highest when compared to other nations of the world. It’s easy to see that the Japanese economy is very advanced, and is growing at a very fast rate as well. For the Japanese, however, that isn’t purely good news. The value of their currency, the Yen, has been increasing dramatically in comparison to other currencies of the world. This leads into probably one of the most current important issues surrounding the Yen. The key to understanding why the Japanese want their Yen to be devalued is because their economy relies heavily on imports and exports. If, for example, 1 yen was valued at 10 U.S. dollars, then a Japanese product that cost 5 yen to make will sell for $50 in America. However, if the yen increased to 5 yen per 10 dollars, then the same product would only bring in $10 to the Japanese economy after the currency exchange. One of the reasons why here in America we are able to purchase exported Chinese goods at low prices is because the Chinese government, although at the expense of the country’s standard of living, artificially keeps the Yuan at a low value. The Japanese are a democracy though, so it poses a problem on how much the government should intervene in the free economy to artificially lower the value of their currency. Overall, the Japanese are doing incredibly well in the economic sector. That said, having their currency backed up by U.S. dollars, and having the U.S. being one of their largest purchasers of exported goods, the Japanese are being hurt by the global economic crisis. Other than the looming currency war, however, Japan seems to be doing just fine relative to other structured nations.

http://www.economywatch.com/world_economy/japan/
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html

MA Governor: Jill Stein

Jill Stein is the fourth and final candidate for the governor’s race, and represents the Green-Rainbow Party. While I usually will side with Conservatives, I can still see benefits of the Democrats, such as gay marriage, stem-cell research, and abortion rights. However, as much as I try to find the good with Stein, I simply can’t. I find her to be ignorant of the world around her, as well as very unknowledgeable about everything she stands for. She seems to me to only partake in first-stage thinking, only considering what sounds good and fair and peaceful without going to further levels of thinking, considering many of her ‘benefits’ have dire consequences. I’ll try to point out issue-by-issue why exactly I have a problem with Stein.
First of all, it only makes my blood boil hearing her say that higher-income taxpayers don’t understand the burden of taxes and aren’t paying their fair share. First of all, looking at data from 2007, the top 1% paid 40.42% of all federal income taxes according to the IRS. And if a person who went through years of specialized training and now works 10 demanding hours everyday plus overnight on-call and pays about half of their overall income to the government isn’t paying a “fair share,” than I don’t know what is. Stein is under the impression that higher income earners have no problems with money or debt and live life the easy way by taking advantage of others. She is very mistaken, and by raising taxes to be more “fair,” she will only hurt the upper-middle class since larger corporations and multimillionaires have the resources to move their money else ware in order to evade taxes. Personal rants aside; raising taxes also is a horrible move during a recession. With the economy so tight right now with not a lot of circulation of currency, you want to encourage consumers to go out and buy new products. Taking away more of their money will only make them hold on to what they have, one reason being because they now need to be more cautious with their money, and another being how they wouldn’t have predictability in the market anymore, only further encouraging them to hold on to their money.
Second is her issue on green jobs. Green jobs simply are not efficient, and in times like these the economy and welfare of the economic situation of the U.S. is more important than the environment. If green jobs were as incredibly efficient on saving money and putting people to work as Stein claims, then why aren’t they already here? Businesses have one main goal, which is to turn a profit. If green jobs would help them save money while putting people to work and while keeping a profit, the businesses would have had green jobs be a priority for years now. The government has no right to step into the free market and use taxpayer money to create jobs that wouldn’t prove to be worth it any time soon. Once the government beings to promote jobs in their interests, they’re going to have to keep pouring money into the program, because the businesses will refuse to pay more money for a worker simply because it’s a green job. She seems to only want to use other people’s money to clean up the planet rather than help the economy and social stability of the state.
Third is her stance on healthcare. She states on her website how she is supportive of a single payer system, and would promote a similar model would she be elected. Once again, she only thinks at the first-stage level saying that all this plan will do is lower costs and make everything better. What she doesn’t understand are the consequences. First of all, I don’t think it should be my family’s responsibility to pick up the tab for other people. While I think that our current system is extremely inefficient, I think a single-payer tax system would only be moving backwards. Already, as my father has seen in the emergency room, people come in for the most ridiculous things, such as a splinter or an ache somewhere in their body, since patients can’t be denied emergency medical care. This is a complete waste of time and resources for the hospitals and doctors, who sometimes, will only be paid 20$ for a few patients who come in on government-funded Medicaid. Not only will people feel like they can go to the doctor for any reason, but there will be long lines. One of the most critical aspects of the healthcare systems in countries such as Canada is the long lines, as well as the equipment not being as good as it is in America. Many more people will be going to the hospital, and people who are in need of emergency medical care might not be able to see a doctor with the long lines. I feel like I should point out how the Premier of Newfoundland & Labrador traveled all the way to the United States for his heart surgery; this only suggests that the technology wasn’t as good in Canada, or that the lines would take too long. In one incident, 150 ill patients with cerebral hemorrhages (bleeding in the brain), were rushed to the U.S. because there weren’t enough beds in Canada. Stating that the cost of healthcare would decrease because of a single-payer system also doesn’t make sense to me, since Canada has spent billions of dollars just to decrease the wait times.
I think it’s be pretty obvious about my stance on Jill Stein as a candidate, thus if I had to vote for her, she’s be my last choice out of the 4. I realize that I haven’t gone into the education aspect of her candidacy, but from what I’ve skimmed she basically has the same as the other candidates: overall improve the system, help with funding, and give students a better environment to learn in. To be honest, I don’t feel like going too much into depth with the issue since I think I overdid it a little considering the assignment was a 250-word blog…

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article661794.ece
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/top-1-paid-more-in-federal-income-taxes-than-bottom-95-in-07/

MA Governor: Tim Cahill

Tim Cahill is the only Independent running for the Massachusetts governor’s race this election. As an independent, he isn’t affiliated with either the Democrat or Republican Party, but it should be noted that he was registered as a Democrat before his change of parties. However, by looking at his website and the views on which he bases his campaign, he seems to lean more towards the Conservative side.
There are a few reasons why Cahill should be chosen as governor over the former two candidates. By only reading his campaign website, Cahill looks like he’s more of a Conservative, whom I tend to mostly agree with. I support his method of how he wants to lower taxes of all kinds. Lowering the taxes will ease the burden on employers, allowing them to expand their business and thus hiring more people. He also seems to understand that sometimes promoting alternative energy, while ‘benefitting’ the environment, can hurt the economy. Finally, I agree with his stance on illegal immigration; if the federal government won’t help with the problem, then the states should try to fix the issue on a smaller scale.
As with all candidates, however, there are reasons why Cahill shouldn’t be voted in as governor. To me, he doesn’t seem like the trustworthiness person. I simply don’t understand how he can change his entire views on certain issues 180 degrees around in, comparatively speaking, only a short amount of time. During the election of Deval Patrick, Cahill himself supported the tax increases and tended to side with the Democrats most of the time. To change into almost a polar opposite just seems fishy to me. There’s speculation that the only reason why he’s running is to attempt to divide the Republican Party base in Massachusetts between Baker and himself so that Patrick is reelected. Considering how he went from supporting higher taxes and Democratic principals to Conservative ones, that assumption doesn’t look like it could be far off. On the issues themselves as displayed on his website, he doesn’t elaborate on healthcare. Like every candidate so far, he claims that he would be able to lower the costs of healthcare, and also like every candidate so far, he doesn’t say how. How he will approach lowering the costs is more important to me than only saying that it’s an important issue to him.
Overall I probably wouldn’t vote for Cahill. At first, when looking at his website, he seemed to me a worthier candidate than Baker if I were able to vote. The main issue that I have is that I find it hard to believe that he believes everything on his website which he claims to stand for. With the public turning away from the Democrats because of their inability to fix the economy, it’s in the candidates’ interest to claim that they aren’t with Obama, but are either more Independent or Republican. I think that Cahill is exactly one of those people, who are only putting out what the people want to hear, not what he stands for. Overall, I support strongly the positions that he claims to have, but I just don’t think he is truly a Conservative-leaning Independent.

Government MA: Charlie Baker

Charlie Baker is the Republican candidate running for the Massachusetts governor position. Because he is a Republican, he tends to believe the opposite of what the Democratic candidate, Deval Patrick, believes. There are a few reasons why he should be chosen as the governor over all of the other candidates. One would be how he wants to stop wasteful government spending and wants to create a more organized budget for the state. He also supports the public school system and claims to want to fix it. His stance of Healthcare is to lower it, as governor Patrick also wants to do. However, most government officials don’t know how the system works and because Baker was the CEO of an insurance agency, he knows exactly how the insurance companies work. Another positive is how Baker wants to lower taxes basically across the board, allowing people to spend more money in the economy rather than saving it thinking that their taxes could be going up. Finally, I agree with him on his stance of illegal immigrants. He supports the Arizona law and doesn’t think illegal immigration should be rewarded with tax-funded benefits.
The positive being said, there certainly are negatives and why you shouldn’t vote for Charlie Baker. First, he says he wants to stop wasteful government spending. While I believe that he honestly wants to, I doubt that he will. In my opinion, the Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats. They say they will lower spending, but the spending only goes up. His claim that he will lower healthcare costs also doesn’t make sense to me. He won’t specify on how he will accomplish this goal, which only leads me to assume that his solution is government intervention to artificially lower prices. With the new federal healthcare bill, costs will go up and I don’t believe Baker can stop it.
With a choice of only Baker and Patrick, I would side with Baker. Deval Patrick as proven to me to be untrustworthy, and I am against him on many policies. While in effect I don’t think Baker would be an opposite to Patrick, I agree more so with his stance on policies and the fact that he wants to lower taxes, which I think are ridiculously high.

MA Governor- Deval Patrick

Governor Deval Patrick is up for reelection this year for the Massachusetts governor race. He is the candidate for the Democratic Party, running against candidates from the green rainbow party, Republican Party, and an independent. While not everyone agrees with everything he stands far, there are certain reasons why he should be reelected and certain reasons why he shouldn’t.
The current governor should be reelected by the citizens of Massachusetts because of a few motives. One reason should be because he is our current governor. In these rough times where time is important in making decisions, Patrick would be able to return to a familiar environment where he could get back to work. Other candidates, if elected, would need a few days to get used to being governor and would have to be briefed of what had been going on behind the scenes. In my opinion, he also seems to have good intentions. For example, from reading his post on Boston.com and from looking at his website, he feels like education is one of the most important issues that should be dealt with. If what he says is true, then he could end up helping the education system.
The positives being said, there are also reasons why Patrick shouldn’t be reelected as governor. Two aspects that stood out to me were those on energy and immigration. According to the Boston.com post written by Patrick himself, he thinks that it’s time to be in a clean energy world. I disagree with that. I feel that the era of clean energy will come when it’s cheaper and more accessible than fossil fuel based energy. When the public wants it, they will buy it, and seeing as though everyone prefers fossil fuel based sources rather than wind or solar, whether it be the price or a different issue, it is not the era of clean energy. With Patrick, the government will be promoting an industry that the people, by voting with their dollars, don’t want as much as other industries. I feel that this is a waste of time and money and is a place where the government doesn’t belong. On the issue of immigration, the governor did not answer the question given to him. Nowhere in his post does he say he agrees or disagrees with the Arizona law. By looking at his track record, I feel as if he doesn’t know how to deal with the issue. By giving tax-supported public housing, university tuitions, and drivers’ licenses to people who come here in vain of the law, I see it as he is rewarding those who have broken the law with the citizens’ money. If he must use taxes to pay for other’s colleges and housing, he should give it to tax-paying citizens, not people who have broken the law. On a final issue, he doesn’t give an answer as to what he will do with the economy. He states that his administration will create jobs, and the new jobs are needed, but I think it’s safe to say that everyone would agree. He doesn’t, however, say exactly how he will creates these jobs he talks about, which gives me the impression that, for some reason, his method could have a consequence that he doesn’t want the public to know.
Overall, I think it’s easy to see that I don’t support him as a governor. I think he’s irresponsible with money, and can’t manage it well. I also disagree with him on many issues, and his record of his time as governor doesn’t seem to sit very well. While I’d first assume he’d be better than a Green-Rainbow Party candidate, I have a strong feeling that I’d choose either the Republican or the Independent before Deval Patrick.

Japan, bowing to pressure from Washington, pulls out of Azadegan oil project in Iran

The article from asahi.com explains the issue of Japan’s oil drilling in Iran, and how the U.S. involvement with Iran and its plans for sanctions are causing issues for the Japanese. Because Japan has little to no natural resources, they must either purchase their oil from other countries or drill their own offshore. Today, the Japanese company Inpex Corp. currently drills in Iran’s Azadegan field, one of the most prominent reserves in the world. The Japanese government, however, has agreed to pull out of their successful oil project. With Iran’s new nuclear facilities quickly approaching reality, the United States plans to put sanctions on the country, with the suspicions that Iran would have the power to produce nuclear weapons; something they don’t want. The United States government has warned Japan and urged them to stop the drilling in Iran, because their company, Inpex Corp., would be put on the list of sanctions. This would very negatively affect the Japanese economy by not allowing them to trade in the oil sector with other prominent nations such as America and other European countries. While Japan has agreed to the United States’ terms, they are in the process of a negotiation aimed to allow Inpex Corp to be an exception to the list of products and services mentioned on the sanction. While the oil sanctions played a large part in Japan leaving Iran’s oil fields, the danger of the oil field also played a part. Being surrounded by minefields, the Japanese can’t work to their maximum efficiency. None of the oil has gone to Japan either, meaning that they must export it to other countries; which they wouldn’t be able to do with the sanctions. This story is significant because of two main reasons. One, it’s greatly impacting Japan in a negative way. Japan will no longer be able to drill for oil in the oil field they’re currently in, bringing their overall export of good down. Second, this story displays how issues between only two countries can affect the entire world. The Japanese aren’t that involved in conflicts with Iran, while the United States is. Because of these two nations being in a dispute, Japan will suffer from being put on the list of sanctions if they continue their drilling in the area. This just goes to show how when an important country in involved in a serious conflict, most likely other countries will be dragged into it as well.

http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201009300244.html

Okinawa Weighs in on China-Japan Spat

The article, Okinawa Weighs in on China-Japan Spat, by Yoree Koh gives further information about the current dispute between perhaps the two most powerful Asian nations on Earth, China and Japan. While the issue might not have been receiving much publicity on American news sources, it is without a doubt a very large issue in Japan. Even though the Japanese government has recently released the Chinese fishing boat captain from detainment, the concern of who the rightful owner is of the islands is far from over. What makes the story so critically important to current issues is the fact that it has the possibility of escalating to a tremendous intensity. Both countries lay claim to the group of small islands, and the Japanese Coast Guard currently controls them. That being said the Chinese government is beginning to up their coastal patrols, only inviting more conflict to arrive. Should China go to the extreme and attack the nation of Japan, the United States, as a strong ally of the Japanese, could be forced to send in troops for aid. The article, however, talks specifically about the Okinawa Prefectural Assembly and its demand that the “central government [of Japan] lay claim to the Senkaku islands.” The assembly, other than asking China to take the issue carefully, desires local Japanese fishermen to be permitted and protected to fish at the location of the chain of islands. The article continues to point out specifics of the conflict, such as China standing by its claim to the islands by sending more coastal guards. Once again, this conflict is such a large issue in Japan. Not only are the Chinese increasing the presence of their defense at the islands, but they are also in the process of developing awfully powerful underwater missiles. These missiles would possess the capability of destroying military equipment, which proves as a great source of intimidation to the Japanese. Overall the conflict between China and Japan concerning the Senkaku islands represents an even larger issue of territorial control between the two nations.
http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2010/09/28/okinawa-ever-helpful-weighs-in-on-china-japan-spat/?KEYWORDS=japan

Video: China and Japan Relations

This video clip is a continuation of the video in the blog post before this one. The Japanese has recently allowed the crew members of the Chinese fishing boat to be released and allowed to return to China. However, the judging of the Captain of the boat was extended and he is currently being kept in Japan. The Chinese take great offense to this action of the Japanese, and is increasing the tension between the two countries by a greater degree. While many don't think China will go the the extent of using it's military powers, it's easy to see that the Chinese government doesn't consider this situation a small one.

Japan and China

Japan Seeks to Weaken Yen

On Wednesday, the 15th of September 2010, the Japanese government intervened in the international currency markets for the first time since 2004. Because Japan is an export-led economy, they moved to weaken their growing yen, while also raising the value of the dollar. The officials who are in charge of managing the Japanese economy have recently purchased United States dollars and sold Japanese yen. An intervention in the economy is a surprise to some, since Prime Minister Naoto Kan, who on Tuesday won a party-wide race, hasn’t talked much of intervening in the economy. The article points out that it’s also a surprise to some because of the recent trends of countries and their economies. Countries have of late been trying to stay out of market intervention, and rather are attempting to allow the markets to sort out themselves. However, the Japanese have felt the need to intervene since the yen had reached a 15-year high, which hurts its export-based economy. While this move as helped weaken the yen since other investors are selling their yen, keeping the yen from eventually moving back up will be difficult. Other countries also want to keep their currency on the weak side to boost up their exports, so they won’t want to buy Japanese currency. That said, other leading countries are supportive of Japan, because a weaker Yen helps them out too. For example, a strong yen will end up making overseas exports much more expensive, and lowers the value of overseas earnings when they return to the Japanese economy. For an economy based on its exports, a weaker currency is a must.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/business/global/16yen.html

More Specific Focus on Japan

Many of the large issues that are currently talked about in Japan have to do with their relations with other countries and what it means for Japan. Just recently, the country lost its rank as the second largest economy in the world to China, and is now in the place of the third largest economy in the world. This is because the economy in China is obviously growing larger, but also because the economy in Japan is being hurt by the economic recession in the United States. Japan is worried about deflation, as their yen value increases and the overseas markets slow down. Because Japan has very little natural resources, they are one of the world largest importers of goods. With overseas markets heading downhill, Japan’s importations are affected and so is their economy. To counter this, the Japanese are considering passing a Stimulus program although there are many economists who are advising against it.
In more recent news, the Japanese have just revealed what their execution chambers look like to the public. Of the industrialized nations, only Japan and the United States currently have capital punishment, and the Japanese are generally in support of it. The United Nations have tried to sway Japan into dropping their capital punishments because of “the large number of crimes that entail the death sentence, the lack of pardoning, the solitary confinement of inmates, and executions at advanced ages and despite signs of mental illness.” Some also claim that some on death row might be innocent. Japan has a 99 percent conviction rate, and is assumed to be because of the “widespread use of forced confessions.” People who believe this use the case of Toshikazu Sugaya, who was convicted of the murder of a 4 year old and had served 17 years until he was recently found innocent, as their defense.
Some more interesting facts about Japan’s capital punishment:
- Inmates on death row don’t know when they will be executed until late minute.
- All executions are carried out by hanging.
- The executions sites are kept in secret locations, so journalists have to arrive in a bus with closed curtains.
- Before the execution, inmates are allowed to read their last rites with either a Buddha, an altar of the Shinto religion, or a wooden cross for Christians.
- Sentences aren’t carried out on weekends, national holidays, and around New Year.

CIA World FactBook

For many centuries, Japan (known in Japanese as Nihon or Nippon) was isolated from the rest of the world until they signed a treaty with the United States of America in 1854. After their role in World War II, Japan become an ally with the U.S. and is currently one of the top economic powers. Their current form of government is classified as a parliamentary government with a constitutional monarchy. While there is still an emperor to this day to show national unity, only the elected politicians have the power to make decisions affecting the country. They have a judicial, legislative, and an executive branch of government, and suffrage is granted to all citizens at 20 years of age.
Japan has a population of 127,078,679 people, and currently has a growth rate of -0.191%. Because of the long isolation in Japan’s past, 98.5% of the population is of a Japanese ethnicity, and 83.9% of the population practice Shintoism. The main industries of Japan include motor vehicles, electronic equipment, machine tools, steel and metals, ships, chemicals, and processed food. The currency of Japan is called the Yen, and has a value of 94.5 Yen per US dollar.
In current Japan, Emperor Akihito holds the title of emperor, and the prime minister is Naoto Kan. Naoto Kan is a member of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), but other political parties that tend to be popular in Japan include the Japan Communist Party, Liberal Democratic Party, New Komeito Party, People’s New Party, Social Democratic Party, and the Your Party.

The Greatest Threat The World Faces Today

In the world that we live in today there are many threats, some larger than others, which could cause a global catastrophe. While I feel that among the leading world powers the greatest threat would be terrorism, one threat that the entire world faces, leading powers included, is disease; more specifically, bacterial resistance. With the ever-growing population that the world is facing, people are living closer and closer to each other. This allows certain organisms and particles to spread from person to person much more easily. With all of these hand-to-hand encounters, disease is sure to spread among countless populations. However, with our modern medical technology, we are able to treat sicknesses such as the cold or flu at home with simple medicine. Appendicitis, which back in the days would have been a death sentence, can now simply be cured and the patient can return to their normal lives in a matter of days.
Much is this is able to happen because of antibiotics. Before the discovery of antibiotics, a small cut could kill you if it were to get infected. Infection was one of the leading causes of death. Wounded soldiers would die in the hospital from infections, and even today, in diseases such as AIDS, the virus itself doesn’t kill you, but the infections and small colds do, since the body’s immune system can’t fight off the bacteria. It’s easy to say that bacteria are very deadly, but we just have the resources to combat them. All of this could change if bacteria become resistant to antibiotics.
In one specific occurrence certain prisons in Russia, to people that are sentenced to serve time there, are the same as a death sentence. The bacteria that causes Tuberculosis is very common in the prison cells, so prisoners receive antibiotics to combat the disease. However, some bacteria are able to survive the first level of treatments and if the patient isn’t further treated, those bacteria with the gene of resistance to the antibiotic multiply. When they multiply enough for the symptoms of Tuberculosis to return, antibiotics will no longer do any good and the person will ultimately die.
I believe that this is the world’s largest threat, since so many people use antibiotics when they catch a cold or get an infection. With bacteria that are resistant to the antibiotics on the rise in population, unless we discover a new way to fight the bacteria, this could become a huge problem.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/261677/problems_posed_by_antibioticresistant.html?cat=58