F
rom its inception in 1917,
the debt ceiling has been a
major point of contention
for lawmakers. Since then, the
figure has been raised 78 times
since 1960, each occasion serving
as a flashpoint for debates over
government
spending.
After
much anticipation, we’ve once
again reached the debt ceiling,
now a whopping $31.4 trillion.
This
past
week,
Treasury
Secretary Janet Yellen announced
her department would have to
take
extraordinary
measures
to prevent the country from
defaulting on its debts beyond
Jan. 19, with an estimated default
date in July. If the U.S. were to
hit that point without a deal in
place to raise the debt ceiling, the
results would be catastrophic.
With the American credit rating
downgraded, interest rates would
spike, likely sending the country
into a recession.
Though we’ve been in this
situation many times before,
this round of negotiations poses
unique
threats.
While
both
parties have historically reached
a consensus to avoid a default,
many Republicans in the House
seem loath to raise the debt ceiling
without significant Democratic
concessions.
In
particular,
a
primary commitment that House
Speaker Kevin McCarthy made
to hold out Republicans in order
to win the speakership was to
prevent the increase of the debt
ceiling without corresponding
spending cuts. Because President
Joe Biden has insisted that such
a deal is off the table, we’ve
entered a danger zone where
neither side is willing to budge on
negotiations.
While
the
short-term
ramifications of this situation
are certainly worrisome, even
more concerning is the current
trajectory
of
U.S.
finances.
With a bottom 15 debt-to-GDP
ratio worldwide, the American
government
has
accumulated
high debt relative to the size of
its economy, bringing it close
to a point of no return. Without
systemic changes in government
spending,
the
country
risks
saddling the next generation
with insurmountable debt that
cripples growth.
Though the current debate
over this issue is highly partisan,
as
recently
as
the
1990s,
permanently reducing the deficit
was
a
primary
Democratic
priority. When President Bill
Clinton ran his first campaign,
one of his major proposals was
“Welfare to Work,” which was
guided by his philosophy that
“welfare is a second chance, not
a way of life.” These programs
limited cash benefits from welfare
to two years and tied benefits
to strong work requirements.
Their objective was meaningfully
different
from
most
welfare
programs
today:
to
support
people looking for work, not
extend them an indefinite lifeline.
While
certainly
controversial
in the modern political climate,
readopting this mentality is key to
allowing the federal government
to permanently lower the deficit
and preserve programs such
as Social Security, all while
reforming the social safety net to
support workers.
Perhaps
the
most
logical
way to start such reform would
be by increasing SNAP work
requirements from 80 hours a
month and decreasing the length
of unemployment benefits from 26
weeks. With a low unemployment
rate and excess of available jobs,
the natural unemployment rate
in America is structurally lower
than it has been for most of
the country’s history. Because
of this, individuals choose not
to return to work because of
reasons independent of a lack
of opportunities. By tightening
the welfare and unemployment
requirements
through
an
increase
in
hours
required
to be eligible for SNAP, the
government could drive people
back to work and free up cash
to address the root causes of a
heightened reluctance to enter
the job market. In particular,
by providing tax credits for
government-subsidized
child
care
and
offering
universal
pre-K, the federal government
could take steps to permanently
increase the size of the labor
force and help families get back
to work.
Stirring the Pot with Giselle
is one of The Daily’s biweekly
advice columns.
One of my housemates ran
away with the circus, and now
I can’t afford rent. How can I
convince him to come back?
He said it’s his passion.
-J
D
ear J,
I
am
so
deeply
sorry to hear about
your
unique
circumstances
— it must be difficult to be so
significantly less cool than
your housemate. At this point,
I would recommend that you
pick up a skill and master it,
and then get out of your lease.
Your housemate could perhaps
put in a good word for you
with the circus and then you
could have the adventure of a
lifetime together.
If
you
are
lacking
the
necessary time or skill to
commit yourself to a life of
“circus-ry,” I think maybe
you should start to seek out
a new housemate. I know it’s
hard to find a stranger that
will be both cool and tolerable
to live with, but it’s in your
best interest to start fielding
early-semester
prospects.
I
would also recommend that
you reject any applicants that
have particularly entertaining
interests
or
extreme
athleticism so that you don’t
risk reliving your devastating
past. Either way, I wish you
every ounce of luck, skill
and charisma in the world to
ensure your success.
Your song recommendations
are: Come On Home by Lijadu
Sisters and Homesickness, Pt.
2 by Tsegue-Maryam Guebrou.
I am about to move in with
my boyfriend (together for
over a year), and I am feeling
nervous
about
it.
Do
you
have any general advice? I’m
worried that he’s going to be
messier than me and I will end
up cleaning up after him.
-L
Dear L,
Did you intentionally ask
me this question? I will try to
give some genuine advice: do
not assume the worst before it
even happens. I also find that
there is a difference between
“messy” and “dirty” (yes, I do
leave my trinkets and personal
possessions everywhere), but I
understand the hesitation.
Remember that this is not
just your roommate but also
your
long-term
boyfriend.
Intentional
and
caring
communication is the most
important consideration when
experiencing a big life change
together. Do not clean up
after him for months and let
your resentment simmer —
tell him how the mess makes
you feel. This is not a “you
versus
him”
situation,
but
instead a problem that you
must approach together as a
team because you want one
another to feel comfortable
and at home in your new place.
Try to set a cleaning schedule
in the first few weeks. You can
also wait to see how messy he
is when he lives with you — his
habits could have been built
from the environment he is
currently in and he may try
harder to be clean in order to
impress you.
Whether he is messy or
the mess is never a problem,
remember that he is probably
a little nervous too. It’s okay
to be nervous about moving
in together, but it doesn’t
mean that you are doomed
before you begin. Anticipate
the best and speak up for
yourself, without putting him
down or getting defensive —
prioritize kind communication
and expect that he tries just
as hard to meet you in the
middle. If all else fails and you
have been cleaning for months
with zero communication or
acknowledgment
from
him,
start wearing really filthy
shoes to bed. That will surely
assert your alpha status.
Your song recommendation
is: Optimism by Jana Horn.
Went to rick’s last Thursday,
was asked if I would wanna
hookup with a random girl
and her boyfriend. I was
so inebriated that I don’t
remember what either of them
look like? Guess I gave the girl
my number and she has texted
me since which I responded to
pretty politely. I’m in a really
happy relationship and don’t
actually want to hookup with
these people – nervous I might
run into them again and not
know that it is them. Please
advise: should I pretend it
isn’t me if they see me again
and talk to me or should I text
something now that I’m not
interested. Or should I just
forget about the whole thing?
-E
Dear E,
This is a tough one. I can
see why you’re a little scared
and why seeing them could
be
potentially
awkward,
especially as you are in a
relationship. Yes, you could
text now and say, “Hi, I am
sorry that my intentions were
unclear before, but I am in
a relationship and I do not
want to meet up. I am really
flattered by you and your
boyfriend’s interest, and it was
nice talking to you!”
If that is not satisfying
enough, I think it would be
best that you start wearing
disguises
in
public
spaces
or make a drastic change
to your appearance. As a
sort of parallel example, I
am severely farsighted and
need to wear glasses to read
anything
within
two
feet
of my eyes. The eye doctor
said to wear them as much as
possible, which has destroyed
my ability to see faces more
than 10 feet away. If you are
afraid of seeing them in public
and not recognizing them,
wear a pair of reading glasses.
I cannot identify anyone or
anything with my glasses on,
and Ann Arbor finally seems to
have a population of more than
200 people. Sometimes, the
blurriness feels like freedom. I
hope that helps.
Your song recommendation
is: Can You Get To That by
Funkadelic.
*redacted*
-L
Dear L (No. 2),
Please do not send questions
like this to The Michigan
Daily.
It
shows
a
certain
confidence that scares me. You
know what you did.
Your song recommendation
is: It Takes Two by Rob Base &
DJ EZ Rock.
X-ing and O-ing in a “Gossip
Girl” way,
Gilly
I
n recent months, George R.R.
Martin’s fictional world has
returned to the silver screen
and cultural zeitgeist with “House
of the Dragon.” The new series has
risen from the ashes of the eighth
season of “Game of Thrones,” and
with it has come a returned love
for actor Matt Smith and his role
as Daemon Targaryen in the show.
Arrogant and skilled in combat,
Daemon Targaryen is a far cry
from the quirky doctor that Smith
was known for during his time in
“Doctor Who.” Now, the attention
for his new, darker character has
sparked various edits and fancams
that plague my For You page. Take
a look at these comments, and,
beyond the heart-eye and drooling
emojis for Daemon or Smith, you
might find a similar phrase again
and again along the lines of: “He’s
not handsome, but attractive.”
Smith’s face is not likely to be
deemed
something
classically
handsome. Though teased for a
lack of eyebrows, he often takes
the jokes aimed at him in stride
and instead lets his persona
and acting abilities speak for
themselves. Beauty is ultimately in
the eye of the beholder, something
subjective
and
varying
from
person to person, and for many,
his kindness and charisma are a
stronger magnet than any sharp
jawline or piercing eyes could
ever be. And this isn’t the first
time women have prioritized
a man’s personality over his
physical appearance: There’s a
distinguishable pattern of women
being attracted to so-called “ugly”
men, Smith being one of them.
Shortly following the end of
the first season of “House of the
Dragon,” TikTok’s attention was
drawn to Strange Kevin, a man
considered perhaps unhandsome
but attractive in the eyes of many
female viewers. Participating in
a trend where a man smolders
at the camera to demonstrate
how they might attract a woman,
Kevin’s short video captivated the
attention of many women on the
app, who often commented that
this was the female gaze that’s
rarely captured in the media —
which is largely preoccupied with
satisfying the male gaze. Coming
from feminist film theory, the
term “male gaze” describes the
way women are often viewed
in film and media as objects of
desire from a male point of view.
The “female gaze,” on the other
hand, serves as a gender-swapped
counterpart in which men are
instead viewed through a female
point of view and, as we see it
gaining traction now, perhaps
stands to counteract the long-
established male gaze.
Larger
criticism
also
accompanied
the
fawning
over
Kevin’s
video:
Beyond
condemnation
for
past
misogynistic content, the true
lack of female gaze in his original
TikTok was additionally pointed
out. Criticism for the misogyny is
much more easily understood and
agreed with, while omission of the
female perspective has sparked
conversation that further distills
the meaning of the “female gaze.”
While true that some women
consider Kevin to be attractive or
say that Kevin is shown through
a female point of view, the viral
TikTok
was
created
through
Kevin’s own perspective of what
he supposes women find attractive
— which is still a product of the
male gaze. While female audiences
of Smith and Strange Kevin have
similarly swooned over these two
conventionally unattractive men,
it’s at the level of creation where
the female gaze — or lack thereof
— lies. Whereas Kevin creates a
supposition of the female gaze,
it’s the often female fans creating
edits, fancams and the like that
position Smith as an attractive
man.
Though Kevin’s aim at the
female gaze was perhaps more
accurate
for
some
women,
frustration or even just confusion
has long circulated over why
women
find
certain
men
attractive. Similar to Smith, men
like Pete Davidson or Jack Harlow
have been considered unattractive
by some and attractive to others.
For one reason or another, these
men continue to get attention
seemingly out of nowhere when all
“attractive” men across film and
television are tall, muscled men
like Chris Evans’ Captain America
or Henry Cavill’s Superman. But
when it comes down to it, these
characters
were
not
crafted
in consideration of the female
gaze, but instead with a male
ideal for the male body in mind.
As explained by actor Richard
Madden, these standards are hard
to achieve through “a kind of barely
eating, working-out-twice-a-day,
no-carbing thing,” and are often
unreflective of what heterosexual
women generally look for. From
these men considered perhaps
“ugly” or those that have a “dad
bod,” we can see a growing
appreciation
for
a
charming
personality and are expanding
our ideas of what’s considered
to be attractive. Although the
heterosexual female gaze is not
singularly supplemental to the
male gaze we’ve seen so much of,
it provides just one of many gazes
that diversifies media created now
and into the future.
Opinion
Why the female gaze loves “ugly” men
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
10 — Wednesday, February 1, 2023
Design by Edith Hanlon
It’s time to rethink the social safety net
Stirring the Pot: Off to the circus
AUDRA WOEHLE
Opinion Columnist
NIKHIL SHARMA
Opinion Columnist
GISELLE MILLS
Advice Columnist
Read more at MichiganDaily.com
Read more at MichiganDaily.com