Archive

Archive for the ‘international’ Category

Majority of Americans Plan to Give to Haiti Relief

January 19th, 2010

A new Zogby poll shows that 64% of Americans have either already donated or planned to donate to Haiti relief efforts. The full press release can be found here, but majorities of Americans in almost every subgroup plan to help out, including 71% of Democrats, 58% of Republicans, 50% of those between 18 and 29, 65% of those between 30 and 49, 70% of those between 50 and 64, and 69% of those over 65.

Have you donated money or time to Haiti relief efforts, or do you plan to do so? What organizations do you think will do the most effective job in Haiti?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Katy charity, international , ,

Green rollercoaster

December 23rd, 2009

After almost two weeks of discussion, the Copenhagen conference on climate change is over. A discussion over what it accomplished is still ongoing.

Commentators can be roughly divided into those who think that the conference accomplished something significant and those who think it didn’t. Within each group, however, there is a considerable disagreement regarding whether that is a good or a bad thing. As a result, one can find those with radically different views of climate change agreeing that the Copenhagen conference accomplished very little.

What is your view of the Copenhagen run-down? Do you think it accomplished what it set to accomplish and did you approve of what it set to accomplish in the first place? Do you think that the next conference will accomplish more or less in its goal of limiting carbon emissions?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zeljka environment, future, international

More or less

December 12th, 2009

As the Copenhagen conference heats up, a new proposal has been brought to the table: a planet-wide limit on the number of children people can have. The rather straightforward rationale, as explained by both a Chinese official and a Canadian journalist, is that smaller human population could significantly reduce greenhouse emissions. Needless to say, this has sparked considerable controversy.

In our work on socio-economic intutions, we have discovered that liberals and conservatives have a very different understanding of the role that rising population plays in wealth creation. Specifically, progressives and liberals are much more likely to endorse a Malthusian view that growing number of humans decreases  mankind’s wealth, while conservative and very conservative voters are much more likely to follow a Hayekian conclusion that increasing number of humans leads to greater wealth for all. Here are the results, based on a Zogby Interactive poll of almost 5,000 likely voters.

Progressive Liberal Moderate Conservative Very
conservative
Libertarian Total
The more people there are, the more wealth there is 17% 18% 24% 51% 61% 54% 37%
The
more people there are, the less wealth there is
61% 61% 54% 31% 23% 26% 43%
Not
sure
22% 20% 21% 18% 16% 20% 19%


  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zeljka economics, environment, future, global issues, ideology, international

R-E-S-P-E-C-T: Survey Finds Out What it Means to Us

December 6th, 2009

“Though impressions are better than they were when George W. Bush was president, most Americans continue to believe that the United States is less respected by the rest of the world.” So begins a section of a report by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press examining people’s beliefs about how the U.S is viewed in the rest of the world. A majority of those surveyed, 56%, believe that the U.S. is less respected by other countries than in the past. However, the percentage of those believing the U.S. is more respected by other countries than in the past (21%) is the highest number in five years.

Not surprisingly, partisan differences are evident on this question.  7% of Republicans feel the U.S. is more respected by other countries than in the past, compared to 30% of Democrats and 21% of Independents.

Do you feel the U.S. is more or less respected by other countries than in the past? Why?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Katy international ,

Climategate?

November 25th, 2009

Last week a number of sources have reported that thousands of emails as well as some computer codes from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University have been hacked and made public. The email correspondence among some of the leading climate scientists appears to show that they have tried to prevent dissenting opinions from appearing in peer-reviewed journals and prevent their data from becoming public.  The computer code used to analyze the data has also increasingly been subjected to scrutiny and some have raised doubts that data have been massaged to fit the preconceived message rather than assess the truth of the matter. Even a congressional investigation is not out of question.

However, some commentators have stressed that correspondence has been obtained illegally and argued that the thesis that global warming exists and is caused by human activity is not in danger. According to this view, the science in support of global warming is based on theoretical and empirical arguments that are broader and deeper than those of data and papers coming from CRU.

What is your view of the events surrounding revelation of emails and code at the CRU? Our March survey showed majority of Americans supporting the broad outline of the President’s environmental agenda. Do you think recent events will influence this support and did it influence your own? Do you believe that they will have a consequence for the climate science specifically and scientific research more generally?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zeljka environment, future, global issues, international, science

Where in the World..

October 25th, 2009

We recently included several winning Top Question Tuesday selections on an interactive poll. Stay tuned to this blog as we’ll be releasing the results over the next several weeks! And don’t forget to submit your own nominations for Top Question Tuesday using the box on the right of this blog.

One question asked respondents if they couldn’t live in the US or US territories anymore, which area of the world would they choose for their new home. Overall, 24% of those surveyed selected Australia/New Zealand, 19% selected Canada, 17% said Western Europe, 16% were not sure, and 9% selected the Caribbean. All other options (Central America, Mexico, South America, North Africa, Southern Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Antarctica) received less than 3% of the total.

Age, race, gender, education and whether one lived in a large city, small city, suburb or rural area had minimal impact on the region or country selected. Progressives and liberals were more likely than average to favor Canada, with 36% of progressives and 33% of liberals selecting this country. Conservatives and very conservatives were more likely than average to favor Australia/New Zealand, with 38% of conservatives and 40% of very conservatives selecting this region. This pattern was also seen with Democrats and Republicans, with 30% of Democrats selecting Canada and 36% of Republicans selecting Australia/New Zealand.

If you could no longer live in the US, where would you move and why?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Katy global issues, international , , , , , ,

No Luck to Obama’s Prize

October 15th, 2009

In every crowd, there is always one person that everybody else sees as just lucky. In my neighborhood, that was a boy named Eddie. He was from Brooklyn and only lived in my hometown of Utica, N.Y., long enough to gain that reputation for good fortune.

After he pitched a no-hitter and hit a home run in a Little League game, we dismissed his achievements by saying that the other team was lousy, and that the wind carried his home run over the fence. Our coach would have none of our guff, so he sat us down and said that Eddie did what he did, because he is obviously a talented baseball player. We needed to get over our envy and move on. The same can be said of all those who are now griping about Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

Read all of John Zogby’s thoughts on Obama winning the Peace Prize at Forbes.com.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Paul John Zogby, international, politics , , ,

A dollar bet

October 14th, 2009

During the past several months, the dollar has experienced renewed decline against other major currencies and there’s plenty of talk about it.

Some economists, such as Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman, have argued that the weak dollar is a net benefit that is necessary to put the economy on track by making American exports cheaper abroad. Others have argued that a weak dollar leads to a loss of capital resulting in a net job loss. In addition, the falling dollar raised fears of inflation and the loss of the dollar’s world prominence.

Are you worried about inflation? Have you personally taken any steps protect yourself from it? Do you think that the American dollar will remain the world’s most important currency?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zeljka economics, employment, future, global issues, international

Peace in our time

October 10th, 2009

To the surprise of many, President Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The reaction at home has been mixed, with criticisms being raised not only by conservative but also liberal writers. Reactions abroad appear to be following the same line, with some writers suggesting that the president should not have accepted the prize.

Why do you think the President was awarded the Prize? Do you believe that it enhances the prestige of the President and/or the prize? Do you think it helps sustain and enhance the world’s peace?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zeljka future, global issues, international, peace, politics , ,

Lisbon blues

October 7th, 2009

With bailouts, stimulus and health care reform, one of the issues on the minds of the Americans is a proper role of government. The Europeans have been grappling with that issue for the past several years, as they have had difficulties ratifying the Treaty of Lisbon. In essence, this Treaty gives less power to national governments who will now be able to veto fewer decisions. It also gives more power to European institutions of presidency and parliament.

A few days ago, Irish voters have had their second referendum on the Lisbon treaty, which has resulted in its affirmation. Rather than slamming the door on the Treaty, however, this has created a great European political drama. The lead role belongs to British Tories, whose leader David Cameron has promised to hold a referendum on the Treaty, if the Treaty is, at that point, not ratified by all other countries.

Cameron is expected to be in power in about eight months. And, if this referendum is held it is widely expected that Lisbon Treaty would fail.

However, the Treaty is now almost ratified, with Poland and Czech Republic presidents’ signatures being the only thing missing. However, the president of Czech Republic is Vaclav Klaus – one of the most prominent and outspoken opponents of the Treaty.

In addition, 17 Czech senators have filed a motion with Czech constitutional court, in order to buy time. Not to be outdone, German pro-Lisbon officials have met with the president of the court in order to prevent the delay.

Would do you think the outcome will ultimately be? And, would you rather see EU more or less united (centralized)?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zeljka future, global issues, international, politics , ,