Edward Snowden's Invasion Of Privacy
Consider the technology that defines everyday life in America- texts, email, internet, and phone calls. In performing these constant activities, most never questioned their privacy, that is, until Edward Snowden squealed on the NSA’s less than ethical maneuvers. Without citizens’ consent, the American government was collecting metadata, “all the information surround a call, including the caller’s number, the receiver's number, the time and location of the call, and how long it lasted” (Diamond). The government may have been shooting for just the bad guys, but all American civilians got caught in the crossfire. Nothing would exempt a person from these invasions of privacy, and their data would be scanned and stored just like that of a seasoned
…show more content…
This is supposedly done to safeguard the worker, to make sure they save money for when they are no longer able to work. But here is the issue- the government is not just hanging on to the money like a savings account, and what one puts into Social Security is not how much they will get out. “People retiring today will be among the first generation of workers to pay more in Social Security taxes than they receive in benefits over the course of their lives” (Kadlec). That means the government’s supposed “safeguard” on the people’s money is actually just a well-advertised robbery. An American would have more money to better plan for retirement without the government’s involvement. Not only that, but “As recently as 1972, Social Security taxes applied only to the first $9,000 in annual wages that a worker earned. This year, that figure has climbed above the $110,000 mark” (Caplinger). This means that the government is creeping up the pay scale on the amount of taxable income, resulting in the more that you make, the more you lose. Reaching a figure above $110,00 for most is altogether unattainable, so they are subject to income taxation. The government takes hard-earned …show more content…
This line should be razor sharp and distinct to the point of these instances seeming like polar opposites. Instead, these government entities are stealing the American people’s right to livelihood. Recently, under the guise of protecting the environment, the Environmental Protection Agency crafted a fresh set of limitations upon carbon emissions. The “carbon limits for power plants are projected to cause 90 gigawatts of coal plant capacity to retire by 2040,” which would “significantly raise electricity costs, close numerous power plant and kill the jobs of the people working there and in related fields” (Cama). The coal industry is historically vital to the survival of the American people. Not only do more plant keep prices low, they keep more people employed. This is not a power the government should be able to hold over its people, saying how low is too low for electricity prices, or deciding how many is too many people employed in the power industry. These people will be out of work, not because they did anything wrong, but simply because they are at the mercy of the government’s fickle decisions. These people will have no source of income, and more than likely will end up on a form of Social Security. Once again, even more money will be taken away from the people’s retirement because of a governmental decision. If the people decided carbon
This is supposedly done to safeguard the worker, to make sure they save money for when they are no longer able to work. But here is the issue- the government is not just hanging on to the money like a savings account, and what one puts into Social Security is not how much they will get out. “People retiring today will be among the first generation of workers to pay more in Social Security taxes than they receive in benefits over the course of their lives” (Kadlec). That means the government’s supposed “safeguard” on the people’s money is actually just a well-advertised robbery. An American would have more money to better plan for retirement without the government’s involvement. Not only that, but “As recently as 1972, Social Security taxes applied only to the first $9,000 in annual wages that a worker earned. This year, that figure has climbed above the $110,000 mark” (Caplinger). This means that the government is creeping up the pay scale on the amount of taxable income, resulting in the more that you make, the more you lose. Reaching a figure above $110,00 for most is altogether unattainable, so they are subject to income taxation. The government takes hard-earned …show more content…
This line should be razor sharp and distinct to the point of these instances seeming like polar opposites. Instead, these government entities are stealing the American people’s right to livelihood. Recently, under the guise of protecting the environment, the Environmental Protection Agency crafted a fresh set of limitations upon carbon emissions. The “carbon limits for power plants are projected to cause 90 gigawatts of coal plant capacity to retire by 2040,” which would “significantly raise electricity costs, close numerous power plant and kill the jobs of the people working there and in related fields” (Cama). The coal industry is historically vital to the survival of the American people. Not only do more plant keep prices low, they keep more people employed. This is not a power the government should be able to hold over its people, saying how low is too low for electricity prices, or deciding how many is too many people employed in the power industry. These people will be out of work, not because they did anything wrong, but simply because they are at the mercy of the government’s fickle decisions. These people will have no source of income, and more than likely will end up on a form of Social Security. Once again, even more money will be taken away from the people’s retirement because of a governmental decision. If the people decided carbon