The article “No Job? Get Lost” is by Andrew Higgins. It is from an Up Front magazine ( also found at upfrontmagazine.com. The people in Svalbard Norway are not allowed to live there if they are unemployed. For the past few years if you were homeless, unemployed, retired or cant support yourself, you cant live in Svalbard. Because of this, less crimes were taken place in Svalbard. The main idea of this article is how having to be employed in Svalbard has changed it. The author wants the readers to know that excluding unemployment for places can be a good thing because it reduces crime and will prevent people from getting harmed in many ways. The author supports all evidence in this article and doesn't have a specific bias.
First of all, one part of the main idea of the article is that having to be employed has been beneficial because it has reduced the amount of crimes that can occur. Since everyone in Svalbard can support themselves, thy would not need to commit crimes like stealing, etc., so that they will have things. Since everyone in Svalbard was employed businesses have left there front doors unlocked, and expensive equipment unattended. In addition people leave their keys in the ignitions of their cars. Nobody really worries about things getting stolen especially being that (as stated in the article) “No serious crimes have been reported so far this year...” This makes me feel in shock that having all the people living in Svalbard employed has affected the place so much. It has caused a great change to happen. Also the article briefly stated that crime is not a major priority to deal with and that it is practically non existent in Svalbard, Norway. It is crazy to know that crime is the least of their problems at Svalbard. Crime is very big around the world and it is good to see that Svalbard was able to change that for them. It seems that the author doesn't really state an opinion. He only refers to quotes Governor Odd Olsen Inegro. The author doesn't really include thoughts of people who live in Svalbard. He probably did that so he could keep the evidence to show a more factual side to the article.
Furthermore, another part of the main idea is that it is can still be very dangerous and living in Svalbard. The unusual rule saying that homeless, unemployed, retired or people who cant support themselves is due to the weather in the area (as well as many other reasons). For example, the article states “ ...Svalbard is shrouded in near-total darkness for six months of the year and snowfall continues deep into summer.” Conditions like this can make you freeze to death. It would not be good for especially a homeless person. Also Polar Bears have caused great concern,.For example “Polar bears regularly make front-page news.” This shows that Polar bear attacks are common .This is a scary thought. It can be very dangerous if you live in that area but have no home. You can get attacked and have no where to go. Again the author seems to have no clear opinion. The perspectives that the author adds gives a way for someone to see how they feel about the article (prospectives for how the new law in Svalbard is affective, and bad sides to that).
After reading this article I realized how much of an impact unemployment has on your life, how much it can effect someone. The article makes me think how important it is to be able to support yourself. In the world around me many people are homeless and don't have a job. It seems that it is very hard to make a place where you have to be employed. This makes me wonder what would happen if that law was where I lived. Would anything change? I would like to further look into other places besides Svalbard, Norway that have the same law. I would like to see how that law changes other places.
No comments:
Post a Comment