Posted on 02/24/2009 8:27:15 PM PST by Mike3689
Hello, I am a long time reader and very rare poster, I apologize if I'm putting this in the wrong area. I don't think I've ever created a thread here before...
Anyways, I am a college student and have been asked by student.com to become a "News & Politics" blog writer. I've been around that site since I was 15 or so(22 now) and accepted, and I was wondering if free republic would be willing to look over my articles before I post them? I'd appreciate your criticism much more than the criticism of high school students. I know you guys would catch any misinformation that I might have been fed before I post it to a wide array of teens. :)
If I'm posting in the wrong area, let me know, and if I'm in the right area I'll post what I'd like to be my first real blog.
I don’t mind criticizing your articles.
Too many cooks spoil the soup. Find someone you trust and respect and ask them to review/edit your work. Don’t make this a group project.
It’s a trap. Don’t do it. After a few weeks, someone will contort what you wrote and intone how the tone ‘raises concerns’ that are ‘troublesome.’ Then they will run you out of town.
Not a problem. Proofing will not only allow you to catch errors but also will allow a flood of tips on additional info you may have missed in an article. I’d suggest posting your topic before each article to get the amazing links to info so many freepers seem to have stored in their “favorites”.
Sure, put it online and let people have it. In the end, it’s still your article, but you may find some of the comments interesting.
You’ve come to the right place.
I would have and should have been a journalist and writer myself. It’s my God given talent.
Than I got a look at the salaries they make and said no thanks. I’d rather use my skills to be a greedy Wall St. capitalist pig.
I’d be happy to help. What do you have?
If you are going to do it, prepare to be anylized to death. I say follow the other posters reccomendation and ask for a close trusted friend to help out. The FR is great, but just like anything else, you can never please everyone.
Ditto, I agree I’m sure there is someone familiar to you on FR, whose opinion you can trust. I’m sure if you asked, they would help. However, pls feel free to let me know if I can help. Happy blogging.
I'm just 22, so I'm sure I am wrong about many, many things. My goal is to fix these things, because as the audience I am talking to are high school and college students, they know as little as I do, so the more perfect I can make the argument, yet also address it to this age range, the better it is for our country.
Here is the article as it is currently being reviewed, I can still change it:
What Caused our Economic Problems?
posted February 24, 2009 11:02 PM by mike05
tagged under: consumer confidence, loans, media, uaw, banks
So many of you might just look at our economy, and go, “it's all soandso’s fault!” I would ask you to wait a moment before you blame your choice of group and consider a few points.
This entire deal started with the banks. Banks were making loans they should not have. I will refer you to this:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/reformedchicksblabbing/2009/02/a-school-bus-driver-wants-bail.html
How did a bus driver get an $800,000 loan? This may be an extreme example, but it gives me a point to start from. This woman should never have gotten this loan; if the bank had even bothered to do ten seconds of math they'd realize she would not be able to afford it. Many of the banks who are failing right now did this same thing, and other banks got caught up in it because this caused house values to fall rapidly.
This was the starting point for our problems, people who got loans when they should not have qualified for them. From there, they inevitably started foreclosing, and suddenly the media became involved. The media started reporting the horrible housing market, caused by these ridiculous loans(that part was of course left out), and suddenly consumer confidence dropped. When consumer confidence drops, spending drops and saving increases, which drops sales for everybody. When spending drops, companies are forced to do layoffs. This begins a crazy cycle of layoffs and further reduced spending.
So what is the government's solution? Lets give money to the institutions who failed! (now this, I fault Bush for... the bailout plan he signed was not what true republicans would've liked, and the voting record reflects this) Not just the banks, mind you, the UAW-run car companies have also failed. The workers earn something like 40% more than their Japanese-owned competitors who also reside in the states, yet they make about the same quality of cars. No wonder they're having financial problems. The Japanese companies(again, these are factories that reside in the states, with US employees) are finally feeling the effects of this recession, but notice it took them a -lot- longer to fall into it.
Just think about these things, and ask yourself, why are we giving money to these businesses who have proven they can not manage money correctly? If, say, GM went bankrupt... know what would happen? They would then have the ability to renegotiate contracts with their UAW employees, bringing their pay back down to a competitive level. Or, they could do like the Japanese companies do, and start over without any unions at all. GM going bankrupt does not mean GM would disappear, it would mean they would have a chance to lower their costs and start fresh.
Anyways, these are my current thoughts on the economy. If you think I've overstated something or have my facts wrong, please reply and I will take a look at it. I am by no means set in my ways in any of my opinions, it's perfectly possible I have been misinformed.
posted February 24, 2009 11:02 PM by mike05
tagged under: consumer confidence, loans, media, uaw, banks
So many of you might just look at our economy, and go, “it's all soandso’s fault!” I would ask you to wait a moment before you blame your choice of group and consider a few points.
This entire deal started with the banks. Banks were making loans they should not have. I will refer you to this:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/reformedchicksblabbing/2009/02/a-school-bus-driver-wants-bail.html
How did a bus driver get an $800,000 loan? This may be an extreme example, but it gives me a point to start from. This woman should never have gotten this loan; if the bank had even bothered to do ten seconds of math they'd realize she would not be able to afford it. Many of the banks who are failing right now did this same thing, and other banks got caught up in it because this caused house values to fall rapidly.
This was the starting point for our problems, people who got loans when they should not have qualified for them. From there, they inevitably started foreclosing, and suddenly the media became involved. The media started reporting the horrible housing market, caused by these rediculous loans(that part was of course left out), and suddenly consumer confidence dropped. When consumer confidence drops, spending drops and saving increases, which drops sales for everybody. When spending drops, companies are forced to do layoffs. This begins a crazy cycle of layoffs and further reduced spending.
So what is the government's solution? Lets give money to the institutions who failed! (now this, I fault Bush for... the bailout plan he signed was not what true republicans would've liked, and the voting record reflects this) Not just the banks, mind you, the UAW-run car companies have also failed. The workers earn something like 40% more than their Japanese-owned competitors who also reside in the states, yet they make about the same quality of cars. No wonder they're having financial problems. The Japanese companies(again, these are factories that reside in the states, with US employees) are finally feeling the effects of this recession, but notice it took them a -lot- longer to fall into it.
Just think about these things, and ask yourself, why are we giving money to these businesses who have proven they can not manage money correctly? If, say, GM went bankrupt... know what would happen? They would then have the ability to renegotiate contracts with their UAW employees, bringing their pay back down to a competitive level. Or, they could do like the Japanese companies do, and start over without any unions at all. GM going bankrupt does not mean GM would disappear, it would mean they would have a chance to lower their costs and start fresh.
Anyways, these are my current thoughts on the economy. If you think I've overstated something or have my facts wrong, please reply and I will take a look at it. I am by no means set in my ways in any of my opinions, it's perfectly possible I have been misinformed.
That's it.
I have a deep feeling my pretense is wrong, and you guys are going to tell me why. I actually got the idea of this subject from my mom, who reads free republic every day.
Whoops, I messed that up with a double paste... give me a sec
Hmm, guess there is no edit here, eh? Heh. Well, read the first half, ignore the second half. :)
First time poster! Forgive me!
I can’t say I was ever required to read that, and I have gone through EN300 in college.
Did I do something horribly wrong in my writing? I’ve generally been told that I am a good writer, though I suppose I don’t look over online posts as much as I would a formal english paper.
I think it’s a good start, but you may want to do a little more research to tie in CRA, Acorn and several other components that led to this mess. I know you probably have limited space and the audience may have limited attention spans, but at least place in some links:). Best of luck
You are right - I am addressing people who are generally high school aged, with a few in college like myself. Really I’m afraid of being too detailed, and that they will get bored. This is just my first post; I can make as many blog entires as I want in the future if I think I should go into specifics.
I’ve started to understand that the government had an effect which caused banks to give loans they should not have, but there are many banks who seemingly ignored the government and have done just fine. Personally, my bank, which also happened to make it through the Great Depression unharmed, posted a very nice profit in 2008(Capitol Federal, in Kansas). It seems to me the government should not be giving these failed banks money, but instead letting them go bankrupt, insuring their depositers their guaranteed amounts, and forcing the banks to start over. I guess I could be completely off, would this approach cost the government more money than they’re thinking of spending now?
Maybe it sounds rough, but why give money to banks who have failed? Also, why worry about people who put more than their insured amount into any single bank? Read things before you sign them, folks.
I found my calling in life criticizing articles posted on FR.
We welcome all comers.
Sounds good, good luck in this endeavour, make sure you get pdf screen captures of your articles when online, for your futre use in your portfolio, if you plan at all to go into the field.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.