Thursday, December 17, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Insurance article for my research
Decline in Average Auto Insurance Premiums December 07, 2009
PR Newswire US Email Free Newsletter
Copyright: unknown
Source: PR Newswire US
Wordcount: unknown
CLEVELAND, Dec. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) has released the 2006/2007 Auto Insurance Database Report indicating that several states have seen a decline in the average premium for automobile insurance coverage. According to the report, Ohio has benefited from three consecutive years of declining rates, which has made the state's average premium the eleventh lowest in the nation; down from thirteenth lowest in 2006. Much of the decline has been credited to a competitive market according to Ohio Department of Insurance Director Mary Jo Hudson, who stated, "Ohio has a healthy, dynamic and competitive auto insurance marketplace that helps drive the prices of premiums lower to the benefit of consumers."Source: http://www.insurance.ohio.gov/Newsroom/Pages/12022009AutoPremiums.aspx States such as New York and New Jersey have also seen a reduction in premiums and, due to the fact that motorists in the Empire and Garden State pay some of the highest rates in the nation, these rate reductions can be extremely beneficial for vehicle owners. Even if currently insured, it is always wise to frequently compare quotes from other providers; as competition tightens, insurers tend to lower the cost of coverage to grab a hold of a bigger share of the market.With several states reporting decreasing rates, now is a better time than any to shop around and attempt to find a more affordable policy. As the holidays inch closer, cutting the cost of coverage can take an edge off of seasonal spending and now is an opportune time to do so. Websites such as OnlineAutoInsurance.com encourage consumers to take advantage of the current reduction in premiums and "strike while the iron is hot". An efficient search for cheap auto insurance can be easily conducted online through fast quote comparisons. The Internet allows visitors to simultaneously compare the rates of multiple reputable companies in order to easily locate the cheapest policy. By visiting http://www.onlineautoinsurance.com/cheap/ consumers can obtain free quotes as well as useful information and resources helping motorist become more informed and knowledgeable in the auto insurance process.SOURCE Online Auto Insurance, LLC
Augmented Reality
Political Interest groups
I think my image of "certain" interest groups is not favorable; however I don't believe that opinion holds true for all interest groups. More times than not we see interest groups furthering political corruption. During the 2008 election, the pharmaceutical industry gave $135 million to Democrats while insurance giants gave $95 million. Those types of large contributions were used to buy up part of Obama's administrations future decisions, so to speak. Many other interest groups such as to automotive industry and the single largest donor, the US Chamber of Commerce also contributed large amounts of money to the Democratic party to buy their persuasion.
I went to the OpenSecrets.org website to take a further look into where the campaign candidates received their funding from. Obama received a large portion of his funding from individual contributors totalling $656,357,572 while John McCain received 199,275,171. I also looked into other types of interest groups that made contributions during the election namingly abortion pro-life group, which contributed heavily to the Republican party. While Abortion Pro Choice sent their monies to the Democratic party.
As a remember from the campaign speeches, it seems to me that interest groups that heavily contributed to a particular party had their view point choice as a focus during the campaign. By this ability to " buy a viewpoint", I think that interest group when involved in the politcal arena get intangled in corruption and cannot be view independently with this negative activity. It's unfair and it needs to become separate from politcs, but can it be? I don't think it can. But I do think that there are positive interest groups.
Two positive groups that come to mind are: the Southern Poverty Law center and BAMPAC- Black America's Politcal action Committe. The Southern Poverty Law Center was founded in 1971 and is a small civil right law firm. the Southern Poverty Law Center has worked diligently against hate groups such as white supremacists, skinheads, neo-nazis and other radical racist groups in an effort to protect miniorities. SPLC claims that supremacy groups rose by 54% in 2008 with the fear of increased immigrants and the successful campaign lead by Barack Obama.
The Black America's Political Action Committee created in 1994 has grown as one of America's leading Political Action Committees. It provides much needed financial and strategic assistance to candidates running for political office on all levels of government. BAMPAC is a non partisan federal PAC whose primary mission is to mobilize support for African American candidates and candidates generally who advocate a common sense approach in resolving the important issues facing America in the 21st century. This concludes the explanation of two positive interest groups.
Interest groups are defined as is an organized collection of people who seek to influence political decisions.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest_group.
Interest groups help to bridge the gap between citizens and government, help raise public awareness on various issues, provide political officials with detailed information to help them make informed decisions and help insure that officials carry out their responsibilities. Interest groups can help convey a group of society's viewpoint and can also present this information to the government, congress and even the President. Interest groups also can serve as analyzers of issues, people that take a closer look at how the issue at hand is being treated.
The two types of interest groups are public and private interest groups. These areas can be broken down into subcategories into the following:
Special Interest Groups ( SIGs), Business Interest Groups, Labor Interest Groups, Agricultural Interest Groups, Consumer Interest Groups, Senior Citizen Interest Groups, Environmental Interest Groups, Professional Interest Groups, Single- Issue Interest Groups & Government Interest Groups. The interest groups that participate in American politcs are PACS or political action committees. These are independent groups, organized around a single issue or set of issues, that contribute money to political campaigns for U.S. Congress or the presidency. PACs are limited in the amounts they can contribute directly to candidates in federal elections. There are no restrictions, however, on the amounts PACs can spend independently to advocate a point of view or to urge the election of candidates to office. PACs today number in the thousands.
Interest groups are different from political parties in that they try ti influence the outcome of elections but do nto compete for office as a political party would. The also have a high level of organization. They are financed through contributions or memberships. Organizers of interest groups might use a multitude of varying communcation modes such as newsletters, emailing, conferences and postal mailings.
The most representative political party school of though is the Party's Still Strong School. I think that the Democratic party , for example, has become stronger than ever. I agree with Valley in that today's parties are service oriented. Obama's plan for our coutry is to put more money into service oriented projects to boost our economy just to name a few of the ways the party's are still going strong.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Digital Rights Management
Digital Rights Management is a technological solution that allows publishers to control their digital media ( music, movies, etc) to discourage, limit or prevent illegal copying and distribution. If you have ever bought music from the song selling giant ITunes, then you have encountered DRM, stops users from duplcaiting music or ripping musically illegal and which also infringes copyright laws. The entertainment industry does not totally agree that DRM helps keep profits in the hands for the artists by stopping unauthorized copying of their material. Some critical analysts for the music industry believe that DRM has now stifled innovation. Other types of media carry DRM devices such as video distributors and movie rental companies such as Netflix.
Consumers that seek to make their movie experience a memorable one by trying to copy NetFlix or Blockbuster movies may find themselves extremely frustrated. But on the flip side, owner of HD monitors have launched several complaints that while doing Neetflix “ Instant Viewing” they had to agree with Netflix policy to reset their DRM and by doing so ended up destroying other capabilities they had with DRM with stores such as Amazon and many others. It has bought many consumers to frustration because when they make such pacts to have their DRM reset, they often fall victim to loosing access to other files and information they have purchased from other sites. Some consumers are going to the trouble of purchasing a VirtualBox to separate the DRM files from one another.
For some the use of DRM devices stands as no road block at all but purely just a nuisance. If people want a movie or a song bad enough they have researched ways to get around it by using programs like Cabo, LimeWire, Frostwire and other P2P networks. The inevitability for piracy will never be completely surmountable if the bad guy, so to speak, is always lurking around the corner, always one step ahead of technology’s advances.
“Congress in a shameful act of service to the campaign contributions of the entertainment industry passed "PRO-IP" legislation that requires our government to work directly on the industry's behalf against the public interest. Under the deceptive banner of ”intellectual property”, the bill as passed has several unacceptable provisions
Besides over $23 million in campaign contribution the industry used scare tactics to get it passed, trying to draw a connection between copyright infringement and...terrorism. The bill expresses the "Sense of Congress" as agreeing that "terrorists and organized crime utilize piracy, counterfeiting, and infringement to fund some of their activities;" and that stopping copyright infringement should be among the highest priorities of government. This attitude sets us up for a future world of Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) and large-scale seizure of computer equipment the industry accuses of being involved in file sharing.”( John Sullivan). People need to closely examine some of the negative effects that DRM is causing consumers. On the one hand it can act as a protection for artist and those in the music industry.
Vioxx and Ethics
In May of 1999, Merck was granted approval by the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA) to market rofecoxib ( Vioxx). Ted Frank writes in his working paper titled” The Vioxx Litigation about 2 individuals that took Vioxx and suffered from its effects…”Robert Ernst was fifty-nine, with two partially blocked arteries, when he suddenly died in his sleep from an arrhythmia. He had been taking the painkiller Vioxx for eight months. On August 19, 2005, a Brazoria County jury in Angleton, Texas, held Merck, the pharmaceutical company that sold Vioxx, liable for his death. The jury assessed damages at a staggering $253 million: $24 million “compensatory” damages and $229 million in punitive damages.
Frederick Humeston suffered a heart attack after taking Vioxx for two months. On November 3, 2005, a New Jersey jury, presented with the same evidence that led the Ernst jury to assess punitive damages for outrageous conduct, found that Merck had done nothing wrong in its marketing or sale of Vioxx, and exonerated Merck, without even having to evaluate Mr. Humeston’s shaky evidence of causation or questionable claims of substantial injury. Still, Merck spent millions of dollars defending itself in the seven trial.
In the next preceding months , more than 80 million patients had taken the drug and sales for Vioxx reached into the billions. With profits soaring, Merck kept Vioxx on the market, ignoring several studies that were stating that Vioxx was linked to excessive risk of myocardial problems and strokes. After thousands and thousands of people reported having cardivascualr issues related to taking vioxx, Merck pulled the plug on Vioxx. The withdraw of Vioxx was the largest prescription drug withdrawal in history. Had Merck and the FDA not ignored all the signs along the way that this drug was not safe for the public, this whole situation could have been avoided.
February 8, 2001 , the FDA Arhtritis Advisory Committee met to discuss their concern over the cardviovascualr risks associated with Vioxx, according to the New England Journal. But the FDA waited 2 years after the fact to convene a study to determine the effects that Vioxx could have instead of following the advise of many studies that were running concurrently with Vioxx reported billion dollar surge in sales. They were not concerned with the health and safety of arthritis patients and other that were taking this drug, they were more concerned with making a profit. I consider this to be very unethical because it shows that companies will stop at nothing to make an easy dollar. The FDA had the opportunity to conduct more studies to assess the dangers that Vioxx presented but they never initiated such research. Merck continued to reassure the public that this drug was safe to take and send out many publications and pamphlets, giving the public the opinion that they had to need to discontinue usage.
This type of behavior is not accepted. Allowing people to be misled in order to achieve financial gain in thievery and should be considered murder in this case. Merck spent over $100 million per year in direct to consumer advertising, a type of activity that the FDA strictly regulates, but in this case they drew a blind eye and let them continue on their marketing campaigns. Society should hold these 2 accountable for destroyed the quality of life that patients taken Vioxx. Given the amount of people that took Vioxx, the FDA and Merck are responsible for the lives of those patients. Had they been honest and open with the public, they could have saved people from suffering.
I personally take some prescription drugs, a few of which are said to have adverse effects on the heart if taken out of dosage. When I take my medicine I assume that the FDA has done their part fo assure that this product is safe. We are the general public have no way to really test these types of things out. They allow millions of drugs to be put on the market and they need to take the time to properly study and research them before they hit the market. Doing so after the fact is very careless and selfish .