Printers failed to spit out thousands of students' reading guides this week after a national printer paper shortage reached America's homes. Recently, a multitude of labor shortages have arisen due to employee strikes, causing manufacturers to halt production of certain goods, including an unexpected necessity: printer paper.
In the current campaign, candidates revealed their true nature in various responses to this crisis. After hearing the statements of the four candidates, the Democrats are more composed and focused on solving the roots of the issues, while the Republicans' responses were highly contradictory and unrealistic.
The best response was clearly from Hope Johnson, living up to her name by spinning the crisis in a positive angle. She shedded light on the environmental policies while simultaneously fostered a sense of advancement in the country, despite the crisis.
“According to the Global Forest Resource Assessment, roughly 80,000 to 160,000 trees are cut down each day, a huge detriment to our ecosystems,” Johnson said. “Over the past year, we have shown that we can adapt and are able to work in an online setting, so why shouldn’t we be able to use this shortage as a way to further shift to electronics?”
Another lively and inspiring response came from our other Democratic candidate, Senator Armstrong. His efforts focus on the workforce, which he refers to as “the backbone of our economy,” and reducing the problem at its source rather than simply importing more paper and disregarding the loyal American workers. His hearty speech, ending with a salutatory chest thump, is exemplary of the passion we need in office, especially concerning the people of this country and their living conditions.
However, our republican candidates were not as composed when attempting to combat this extensive issue. They were internally conflicting, and worryingly irrational and non inclusive.
Candidate Bobby Gnocchi was the lesser of two evils during this crisis, also directing attention to workers rights. However, at the beginning of his statement, he refers to the paper industry´s “awfully wasteful practices.” Gnocchi is not yet to be disregarded with that statement, yet later on he asserts that “The paper industry is a vital part of our economy.” Is the paper industry beneficial or detrimental, candidate Gnocchi? Currently, there is no clear answer.
Candidate Samuel Buck nevertheless seemed to have a worse response to the nation's issue. Buck disclaimed his statement with a comment about his abundance of wealth and disconnect from the shortage, simply reinforcing his arrogance to the citizens and blatantly causing Americans to disregard everything that followed.
“Households will be limited to 15 pages of printing paper and one book with a length not exceeding that of the bible. Violations of this new policy will be under penalty of deportation,” Buck said.
His call to action is discriminatory of religions other than Christinaity. In a nation so religiously diverse, this behavior is quite practically searching for a low approval rating.
Also, Buck states, enthusiastically, that he plans on invading the Amazon rainforest, “such that the Amazon is a desert by the month’s end.”
This statement is controversial, but at least he sticks to his narrative, right? Incorrect. Buck also mentions that his administration is “committed to protecting and preserving vulnerable ecosystems across the globe,” yet is seemingly eager to decimate the Amazon. This response, and campaign, is easily distinguishable as unstable and impractical.
Leslie Knorp
11/17/21
コメント