1. The main point of this article is to further explain how containment can, will, and is affecting China.
2. The title of this article is referring to what has been triggered in the last year by a sudden increase to China's claims to all of the South China Sea.
3. I honestly did find this article a little bit confusing. I agree with the point by the author that stated "Obama doesn't isn't trying to contain China, but he didn't just spend three days in India to improve his yoga" because it really opened up the conversation and went into detail about containment.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Friday, November 5, 2010
Outsourcing
Outsource: to obtain goods or services from an outside source
Here's a list of American owned companies in South Asia:
Here's a list of American owned companies in South Asia:
- Agilent
- Agro Tech
- American Express
- Amway
- Avaya
- Caltex
- Caterpillar
- CB Richard Ellis
- Cisco
- Citigroup
- Coca Cola
- Cognizant
- Colgate Palmolive
- CSC
- Cummins
- Discovery
- Dupont
- EDS
- Eli Lilly
- Emerson Electric
- EXL
- Federal Express
- Ford
- Franklin Templeton
- GE
- General Motors
- Gillette
- Honeywell India I
- BM
- Intel
- Johnson & Johnson
- JPMorgan
- Kellogg India
- Kimberly Clark
- Kodak
- McDonalds
- Metlife India
- Microsoft
- Morgan Stanley
- New York Life
- Ogilvy and Mather
- Oracle
- Pepsico
- Pfizer
- Pizza Hut
- Sun Microsystems
- Texas
- Tecumseh
- Timex
- Tyco
- UPS India
- Visteon
- Whirlpool
- Xerox Modicorp
My reflection on http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/opinion/03friedman.html?_r=2&src=me&ref=homepage is that globalization is being taken literally to new heights providing 3G access on the top of Mount Everest. However, it's possible that even with all of the hype about China, India, and globalization it could be under hyped.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Interactive Assignment
Density: The Earth's population has jumped from 2 million people to 6.3 million people since 1930. The highest populated countires being India, China, Indonesia, and central Europe.
Why isn't the United States one of the most populated?
Growth: By 2050, the total number of people expected to be on the Earth is 9 billion. However, in the developing countries that have large populations, their resources could decrease and not be able to reproduce fast enough to meet the demands of all the people that will be there.
Why don't we all join together as a community to better our planet by planting more trees and protecting our oceans and coral reefs? Would that be enough? Why or why not?
Cities: By 2030, 60% of the population will be living in cities compared to 37% 30 years ago; there are many pros and cons to living that lifestyle.
If all the of the population are becoming more urban, what impact will that have in rural areas?
Water: Out of the 70% of water that covers our planets, only 2.5 of it is freshwater, and that's vital to all human beings. Many countries are considered to be short of water. Even with new technology, the amount of plentiful freshwater may not be fully replaced.
If many countries don't have the amount of freshwater they need to survive, shouldn't the countries that have plenty of it help them out? How can they help?
Air: Pollution has risen 30% in the last 200 years as a result of an increase in harmful industrial fumes. The World has been producing more dangerous gases than the Earth can convert back into oxygen, which is an issue because all of us humans need air to survive.
If everybody is trying to be "Eco-friendly" now, why isn't there a way to eliminate the fumes that are hurtful and replace them with something better?
Climate: Climatologists blame air pollution and fossil fuel emissions for global warming. They predict that over the next 100 years, surface temperatures will increase up to 11 degrees Fahrenheit, causing a possible reduction of lakes and rivers, severe flooding, and the extinction of some plant and animal species.
If the temperature increase won't be for awhile, shouldn't we try to figure out how we might be able to stop the destruction of our resources and species?
Forests: Due to aggressive logging and agricultural clearing, a large portion of forests have been lost. 40% of forests are presently in danger when half of our land used to be covered with forests.
Do you think that the policy of replacing the number of trees a person(s) cuts down would apply here? Why or why not?
Land: The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization altered half of the land we use into four main uses.
What do you think the other half is being used for?
Habitats: Since the population keeps growing dramatically, habitats are being lost because our main source of food is animals. If this keeps up, our coral reefs and some other major habitats could disappear as soon as the next 20 years.
Would developing a way to protect the animals and plants while giving us the food we need be the only option to solve this problem?
Why isn't the United States one of the most populated?
Growth: By 2050, the total number of people expected to be on the Earth is 9 billion. However, in the developing countries that have large populations, their resources could decrease and not be able to reproduce fast enough to meet the demands of all the people that will be there.
Why don't we all join together as a community to better our planet by planting more trees and protecting our oceans and coral reefs? Would that be enough? Why or why not?
Cities: By 2030, 60% of the population will be living in cities compared to 37% 30 years ago; there are many pros and cons to living that lifestyle.
If all the of the population are becoming more urban, what impact will that have in rural areas?
Water: Out of the 70% of water that covers our planets, only 2.5 of it is freshwater, and that's vital to all human beings. Many countries are considered to be short of water. Even with new technology, the amount of plentiful freshwater may not be fully replaced.
If many countries don't have the amount of freshwater they need to survive, shouldn't the countries that have plenty of it help them out? How can they help?
Air: Pollution has risen 30% in the last 200 years as a result of an increase in harmful industrial fumes. The World has been producing more dangerous gases than the Earth can convert back into oxygen, which is an issue because all of us humans need air to survive.
If everybody is trying to be "Eco-friendly" now, why isn't there a way to eliminate the fumes that are hurtful and replace them with something better?
Climate: Climatologists blame air pollution and fossil fuel emissions for global warming. They predict that over the next 100 years, surface temperatures will increase up to 11 degrees Fahrenheit, causing a possible reduction of lakes and rivers, severe flooding, and the extinction of some plant and animal species.
If the temperature increase won't be for awhile, shouldn't we try to figure out how we might be able to stop the destruction of our resources and species?
Forests: Due to aggressive logging and agricultural clearing, a large portion of forests have been lost. 40% of forests are presently in danger when half of our land used to be covered with forests.
Do you think that the policy of replacing the number of trees a person(s) cuts down would apply here? Why or why not?
Land: The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization altered half of the land we use into four main uses.
What do you think the other half is being used for?
Habitats: Since the population keeps growing dramatically, habitats are being lost because our main source of food is animals. If this keeps up, our coral reefs and some other major habitats could disappear as soon as the next 20 years.
Would developing a way to protect the animals and plants while giving us the food we need be the only option to solve this problem?
China VS. India
China and India both have the largest populations in the World at 1.35 billion and 1.21 billion people. But who cares right? What am I going to do with that piece of information? Use it to better understand the current status of our World. If the number of people every year rises in a bulk, it could impact the Earth's finite resources and could lead to disaster, not only for wildlife and ecosystems but also for human populations. Every year the link between population growth and environmental decrease becomes harder to ignore. I do think it's wrong for government to force families to have small families because it's a free country and I think that people should have as many kids as they want. If they only want one child, fine. Six, go right ahead. It should be their decision. If the government really wants to control their population, they could set a limit saying, maybe no more than 4 children per family, or something like that so the people get to decide their future and the government can keep control of their population; creating a win-win situation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)