http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20111206,0,1228881.column?page=1
In a far more social article, Lazarus addresses the popularity of the many new kinds of gadgets that have found their way into numerous households in recent years. Lazarus talks about the many ways the gadgets can function, for families, children, or adults. They serve as tools and resources to new worlds of applications, games, and other productive outlets. Lazarus, however, plans not to invest his money this season on the new technologies we're so infatuated with. Lazarus explains many of the very tempting prospects he's considered, but also explains why it isn't the time to invest. He is particularly interested in the gadgets for portable reading. However, after experimenting with a few of the items on the market, he is unsatisfied. The Kindle, he believes, lacks powered processing. On the other hand, the Nook is not as versatile and does't have the same access to the many applications offered in the iPad and the Kindle. Lazarus plans to wait until something more ideal is developed, he believes it shouldn't have all of the unnecessary features that drive up the prices of the iPad, but will combine the positive elements of the Kindle and the Nook. Until then, Lazarus believes that the tablet craze just isn't worth the hype.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Columnists Ahoy 2
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20111202,0,966733.column
David Lazarus addresses a very interesting new policy created by Chase for credit card users. The new policy changes the traditional Credit Card limit to an "access line." This line increases the availability of money to the credit card user and features a more "adjustable" limit. Lazarus' perspective on the policy is that its a tool to manipulate the credit card users. As the economic conditions take higher and higher tolls on consumers, they become more cautious in their spending. With so many more people reigning in their debt, the banks are taking a hit. Lazarus believes that this new "access line" is Chase's way of trying to make spending more "attractive" to consumers. By removing some of the penalties that come with overcharging, people are more likely to throw themselves further into debt. Although Chase's spokesperson, Paul Hartwick, denies the claims and states that this new policy is not intended to be an incentive for consumers to come into more debt, but merely to encourage consumers to bank with Chase, Lazarus asserts that if that were true than there were other, more logical, ways to do that, such as lowering interest rates.
Lazarus outlines his argument by first putting the policy in an economic context. He explains that with the constant economic strains on consumers, they have "become savvier at managing their money." Then, Lazarus clearly states his opinion that banks are "making it easier for people to run up balances on their credit cards." Because Lazarus began by explaining the pressures put on the banks to compensate for the losses due to the consumer's digging themselves out of debt, his assessment seems fairly logical. Lazarus continues to develop his point by explaining the policy and the trouble it can cause spenders, saying that people are more willing to overspend because "a credit access line probably would allow you to do so without any difficulty or penalty." By using two sources in his opinion, David Robertson and Paul Hartwick, each supporting either side of the argument, Lazarus' argument gains credibility. Lazarus addressed Chase's obsequious intentions by quoting Hartwick's claim that, "'We simply want customers to choose to do more of their spending with us'," and then refuted his argument claiming that "If that were the case, though, the bank could have offered other incentives, such as lower interest rates.''
David Lazarus addresses a very interesting new policy created by Chase for credit card users. The new policy changes the traditional Credit Card limit to an "access line." This line increases the availability of money to the credit card user and features a more "adjustable" limit. Lazarus' perspective on the policy is that its a tool to manipulate the credit card users. As the economic conditions take higher and higher tolls on consumers, they become more cautious in their spending. With so many more people reigning in their debt, the banks are taking a hit. Lazarus believes that this new "access line" is Chase's way of trying to make spending more "attractive" to consumers. By removing some of the penalties that come with overcharging, people are more likely to throw themselves further into debt. Although Chase's spokesperson, Paul Hartwick, denies the claims and states that this new policy is not intended to be an incentive for consumers to come into more debt, but merely to encourage consumers to bank with Chase, Lazarus asserts that if that were true than there were other, more logical, ways to do that, such as lowering interest rates.
Lazarus outlines his argument by first putting the policy in an economic context. He explains that with the constant economic strains on consumers, they have "become savvier at managing their money." Then, Lazarus clearly states his opinion that banks are "making it easier for people to run up balances on their credit cards." Because Lazarus began by explaining the pressures put on the banks to compensate for the losses due to the consumer's digging themselves out of debt, his assessment seems fairly logical. Lazarus continues to develop his point by explaining the policy and the trouble it can cause spenders, saying that people are more willing to overspend because "a credit access line probably would allow you to do so without any difficulty or penalty." By using two sources in his opinion, David Robertson and Paul Hartwick, each supporting either side of the argument, Lazarus' argument gains credibility. Lazarus addressed Chase's obsequious intentions by quoting Hartwick's claim that, "'We simply want customers to choose to do more of their spending with us'," and then refuted his argument claiming that "If that were the case, though, the bank could have offered other incentives, such as lower interest rates.''
Columnists Ahoy 1
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20111125,0,1228881.column?page=1
In this article, David Lazarus explains the importance of giving during this time of year. He discusses the growing need for contributions at aid organizations for those who cannot afford basic commodities. Lazarus outlines that the need is even greater now than it has been in the past due to the economic crisis in the country today. With more people being unemployed or underemployed, there are more people who find it difficult to purchase basic needs for their families. Not only is the demand for these commodities and charities increasing, but the supply is substantially less than it has been in years passed. Economic strains have caused fewer people to donate, and the department of food and agriculture has cut a significant portion of their subsidies to these charity groups.
Lazarus' purpose is made clear in the development of his argument towards donation to charity. He uses specific statistics to reinforce the statements he makes about why philanthropy is more important now than ever before. For example, Lazarus states, "A record 330,000 residents are being served each month at the 600 pantries supplied by the L.A. food bank, up 73% from the start of the recession in 2008." These statistics support his reasoning, and he follows them with appeals to logic. Lazarus explains the amount of food generated from holiday parties and how easily the leftover food can be donated, "with so many businesses holding holiday parties, is that leftover prepared meals can be donated to charity."
In this article, David Lazarus explains the importance of giving during this time of year. He discusses the growing need for contributions at aid organizations for those who cannot afford basic commodities. Lazarus outlines that the need is even greater now than it has been in the past due to the economic crisis in the country today. With more people being unemployed or underemployed, there are more people who find it difficult to purchase basic needs for their families. Not only is the demand for these commodities and charities increasing, but the supply is substantially less than it has been in years passed. Economic strains have caused fewer people to donate, and the department of food and agriculture has cut a significant portion of their subsidies to these charity groups.
Lazarus' purpose is made clear in the development of his argument towards donation to charity. He uses specific statistics to reinforce the statements he makes about why philanthropy is more important now than ever before. For example, Lazarus states, "A record 330,000 residents are being served each month at the 600 pantries supplied by the L.A. food bank, up 73% from the start of the recession in 2008." These statistics support his reasoning, and he follows them with appeals to logic. Lazarus explains the amount of food generated from holiday parties and how easily the leftover food can be donated, "with so many businesses holding holiday parties, is that leftover prepared meals can be donated to charity."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)