What is the social problem?
	Boeing violated WTO rules in terms of receiving illegal subsidies by the U.S. which can affect the overall sales in aviation over the next 20 years.
How is it affecting or impacting the people’s environment or community locally?
	Well if you look at this argument from the aspect of Boeing and the U.S. government, the rulings done by the WTO could possibly affect Boeings ability over the next 20 years in aviation.  This could indirectly affect the workers at Boeing, which then could affect the ability within our country in terms of air travel. Boeing is Americas Ford of the skies. With the born instillation of made in America, I would rather ride in an airplane that is American made rather than one that is imported. One of the biggest outlooks mentioned in the article is the fight with the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. for a 35 billion dollar contract offered by the Air Force for aircraft used to refuel Jets. In terms of foreign relations, if we were in a situation where we used aircraft from another country, what is to say would happen if we weren’t in good standing with them?	 In terms for our country, the company and its workers, our reputation in the aviation market is important with the expected next 20 years to be worth over 3 trillion dollars.

Why do you feel this is important to discuss?
From my perspective it is a finger pointing argument between two powerful countries for doing something they both are going to do regardless. Power is corrupt and if you have a company in your country that has the ability to research and produce the best of the best in their field, why not push their funding. With it being on such a large scale who is really going to step in and do something? Are the Universe police going to come down and tell the United States to stop or else? Even in the article it states, “The WTO body can’t force countries to eliminate subsides, but it can authorize retaliatory tariffs against products from countries that fail to comply with rulings.”  Rulings for such things can take years to come to an answer, especially in this case; both sides can continue to keep pointing fingers and making excuses to change who is the bad guy. One would think that just sliding over 20 billion dollars to a company would be a big deal, but when you are a vital important to America’s position in air travel and the American military is okay (even though Boeing receives billions for government projects already).

What makes this a sociological issue?
I feel this is a sociological issue because a billion dollar company is receiving billions of dollars from the government through subsidies. 20 Billion dollars to a company from various places like NASA, the department of defense and 3 states, such as Washington, pops a flag in my mind. I can’t imagine why states would be giving billions of dollars illegally to an aerospace developing country. I can think of plenty of other legal uses for billions of dollars within states such as education, roads, and city improvements, the list is endless. One of the biggest aspect is where is this 20 billion dollars coming from? Unless Boeing is finding a way to use airplanes to make magical money growing tree, my most logical thought is through our taxes. If various government agencies are subsiding illegal funds to one company, the odds they are doing it with more companies, which mean more magical money trees. In blunt terms we as a society need to be more aware of what our government is doing with their/our money (the source of the money used in the subsidies is not stated) and who we are voting or allowing into offices to take advantage of this money.





What is the social problem?
	Boeing was accepted for a $1.6 billion dollar contract by the U.S. Navy to produce aircrafts.
How is it affecting or impacting the people’s environment or community locally?
	Well this topic goes much deeper that what is seen on the surface. There is also a multitude of different perspectives on the top that allow for it to be a very controversial topic in regards to the government. From what is seen in most of the general public eyes is the direct information provided to them, in this case it is the jobs and benefits it has. More specifically it is the money by the U.S. Navy that is being provided to over a thousand workers in Seattle who work on the project.  Sure billions of dollars being pumped into company production of a thousand workers is very beneficial to the local community in terms of jobs and publicity; but does this really have an effect on any actual boost in the communities’ overall economy? As stated in the article there will be no addition jobs required for the 20 year project. Those who need jobs are not receiving support, but those making money already are moving up while the rest stay at the bottom. Although having very positive aspects for the company and workers, in the broad aspect of the community others are being left in the dust.
Why do you feel this is important to discuss?
	For me personally I have a very controversial point of view on the Military Industrial Complex.  The military is a very important aspect of nation’s security, but the government is drastically taking advantage of our insecurities. I do not know specific justified numbers other then what is in the article, but the overall focus is fueled by the media which does what it needs for coverage. We might have freedom of Speech and Press, but who is going to take the risk to stand against their own nation. A good example of someone who took the risk is the man who released the information on WikiLeaks. If governments say there is a threat, the media will act on the subject. In these caseses the media shows what the people want to see, not the good or bad things that actually happen. In the case of the War in Iraq, you only saw reports of bombings and when we were supposedly attack, not the civilian’s we killed or real happiness that some of them felt. Back to the main point, the Military Industrial Complex is run by our insecurities. We feel there is a threat by something leaked by the media; we say we want a strong military. With our feelings of needing to be “safe”, we allow government agencies to throw money all over the place for the best of the best. In the case of this article, Boeing states that the total cost over the next 20 years will be over 40billion dollars. This doesn’t include other projects by other branches of Military, 40 billion dollars for 117 aircrafts that will be easy outdated in technology in 5 years. (Just think about your laptop analogy of technology)

What makes this a sociological issue?
	Well overall I say it affects many different parts of our society as a country. 40 billion dollars is quite a bit of money. If we take into consideration this 40 billion and other money that the military is taking advantage of just too continuously update our defenses, it would be amazing to think of the things we could do with the money in terms of applications that directly affect and boost our society. It is amazing to see the many things in our society that have holes and flaws in them, but what it comes down to is, how can the rich get richer? Although there has been a lot of attention to changes recently, one example being health care, there needs to be a revolution in the degree we are spending on military funding. An argument that can arise is, “Well there are people out there who don’t like Americans! What have I ever done to them?” The problem is, you have done nothing, but the odds are the country we represent has. Referring back to the WikiLeaks, there is a lot of behind the back work not only in our government, but between other governments. When push comes to shove, that’s just how it is but we shouldn’t let the government we represent turn a blind eye on benefits for us as a society so they can profit.