Taxation must align with broader policies
I was disappointed to see Thursday's articles on the flat tax address it as an isolated issue. If there was a roughly even playing field for generating income, a flat tax would be eminently reasonable.
I was disappointed to see Thursday's articles on the flat tax address it as an isolated issue. If there was a roughly even playing field for generating income, a flat tax would be eminently reasonable.
The past month has had me thinking a lot about Catholic teaching regarding abortion and contraception. Several of my friends went to the March for Life in Washington, D.C. a few weeks ago, and the news for the past few days has been filled with stories about the health insurance mandate on Catholic employers to provide contraceptive services to its employees.
Over the past few weeks, Catholic leaders have accused the Obama administration of insensitivity to the "Catholic conscience" and called for a reconsideration of the recent H.H.S. mandate that universities and other Catholic institutions include contraceptives in their health care insurance package.
What can we do about racism? "Probably not much.""Nothing."
Here's a survey question for you. No, it's not a 10-minute long process on SurveyMonkey your friends guilt you into taking to help them with some class project. Just one question. Ready?
Just finished my daily reading of TMZ. Looks like Gary Busey's still crazy. Demi Moore might have fled rehab. Kim Kardashian wants to televise her divorce trial. And guess what? I'm sick of all this depressing celebrity news. (Except for the part about Kim's divorce trial on live television. That just sounds awesome. P.S. Kim — call me at 508-320-0847. I'm single and ready to mingle.)
We are reminded this week there is ongoing debate in Washington over the Obama administration's mandate to require most employers to provide coverage of prescription contraceptives. As a member of the Notre Dame community and as a woman, I cannot help but feel personally drawn to this debate.
Brilliant constitutional lawyer David Boies has a stellar reputation for presenting savvy arguments before the Supreme Court. Boies contends the Obama administration's recent so-called "mandate" contains no constitutional conflict that exempts churches but requires religious-affiliated employers to provide contraception at no cost to their female employees. He notes that in fact, nearly two-thirds of the states already require such a mandate or do not provide any specific exemptions even for employers such as churches and other places of worship whose primary purpose is imparting religious beliefs.
As Notre Dame's election season gradually makes its way through every pore of student government, students will head to the polls to determine next year's leadership. Like Wednesday's election of future student body president and vice president Brett Rocheleau and Katie Rose, the ballot will be simple — no special referendums, no initiatives and no propositions.
It looks like the debate over contraception in these hallowed pages of discourse are drawing to a close — nonetheless, I'd like to make some remarks about the tone of the debate and the overall point.
I have never considered myself a fan of women's basketball. Sure, I know about Notre Dame's successful team, and I know names like Geno Auriemma and Brittney Griner because I watch a lot of SportsCenter. There is another name I also know — University of Tennessee's head coach Pat Summitt.
The discussion over the flat tax is always a very interesting one. Usually people who support it are heavy on details of its benefits and light on details of its negative consequences. But when examined closer, the negative consequences of a flat tax would make one wonder why anyone would support it at all.
If we acknowledge the way we currently collect federal taxes as both inefficient and unfair, what can we do differently to correct it? The strength of a flat tax is in its simplicity. I don't need fancy jargon or a bunch of obscure numbers to explain it, nor do I need to go too far into a debate to convince a person with half a brain that it is fair to all Americans. It's a concept so easy and so fundamentally better than the current options that only politicians would be incompetent enough to not enact it.
The international community has been aware of Brazil's potential for a long time. However, it was not until recently that the country broke free from corruption, high crime rates and extreme poverty. Last month, Brazil passed the United Kingdom as the sixth biggest economy; in addition to an expanding economy, the country will be hosting the 2013 World Youth Day, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics.
In his work, "How to Change the World: Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas," David Bornstein writes, "In rich and poor countries alike, it is common to find the ‘best and the brightest' — young people with an array of options — choosing work that allows them an opportunity for social impact." The students at Notre Dame should be extremely proud to be a part of that dynamic — the best and the brightest who focus on achieving social change for the betterment of the human family.
I am writing in response to several of the Letters to the Editor published on Friday, Feb. 3. In her letter ("A woman's dignity"), Ms. Reser describes the perspective taken in "Contraception and dignity" (Feb. 1) as "discouraging." What is discouraging, Ms. Reser, is that at the most renowned Catholic university in the nation, so many people fail to understand the Church's stance on contraception, or for that matter, to even care to find out. Mr. Galeziewski's question, "How is (NFP) any different than using a contraceptive?" ("A (brief) case for contraception," Feb. 3) gets at the crux of the problem. The fact that he, like so many, doesn't see the distinction is illustrative of the apathetic attitude that is far too common among students.
Dear Observer Editorial Board,