10 Things I Think Are Important Issues

1.       The importance of incentive, versus punishment.

2.        Religion and the validity of Evolution.

3.       Predudice based on race or class.

4.       Bullying in schools and how the victims are affected.

5.       The need to reform American government.

6.       Nature vs. Nurture rather or not people are born good.

7.       Corruption of military and police officers, the people we should be able to trust.

8.       College education and the path you choose without it.

9.       Is marriage overrated?

10.   The importance of a connected family.

Proposal: Capitalism and the American Economy

In this essay I am going to focus on the advantages and disadvantages to having a capitalistic economy.  Judging by the disinterest that the people in my small group had when I had suggested this topic to write about, it is obvious that they are ill informed on the subject.  I think that this is an important subject because, let’s face it, the economy (boring or not) effects everyone.  Especially with the recent economic downturn, it is tough to escape the subject in the media.   Although capitalism is only one of many possible economic systems, it is mainly what our economy is based upon.  This is also important when choosing representatives for our country because the way the economy is run is how a lot of political figures choose their standpoint or party.

Capitalism is an economic system in which goods are privately manufactured and sold for profit.  In a true capitalistic society, there is no government control over these privately owned businesses.  The problem that arises with this is that with no government control is that the competition aspect of capitalism, and what makes capitalism so effective, can be taken out.  This occurs when a certain company controls the market of a specific good and in turn raises the price of that good because consumers can’t get it anywhere else.   This is what is called a monopoly.

Another downside to a capitalist economy is that a lot of people say that it is too cruel and they have this belief that the only people who benefit from a capitalistic economy are business powerhouses and it leaves no opportunity for the impoverished or uneducated.  In contrast to this belief, one of the things that interest me about capitalism is that it is one of the only systems where you can go from poor to rich based on how hard you work, or financial decisions you make.  Everyone has equal opportunity. 

One of the sources I am going to note in my essay is the book “The Capitalist’s Bible” by New York Times journalist Gretchen Morgenson.  This book is going to provide good information on what capitalism is and mention some capitalist success stories.  Another book source I am going to use is called “The Soul of Capitalism: Opening Parts to a Moral Economy” by William Greider.  This book I believe will take an anti-capitalism stance and hopefully counter the pro-capitalism stance that my other book source will provide.  I am also going to take a look at a documentary I found by Michael Moore, “Capitalism: A Love Story” which hopefully will have some good information as well.  Other than that I will be looking for a couple of credible websites that can provide logical views on capitalism and economics and I will definitely be taking a look at what the encyclopedia has to say about capitalism.  

My audience intended for this piece is going to be people who are my age.  Hopefully I can successfully explain what capitalism is and what role it plays in our economy and our government.  I want to explore both the advantages and disadvantages and get people interested because I think it is extremely important for people to be informed about the economy.   

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Morgenson, Gretchen. The Capitalist’s Bible. New York: HarperCollins, 2009.

Greider, William. The Soul of Capitalism: Opening Paths to a Moral Economy. New York:

Simon & Schuster, 2003.

Moore, Michael, narr. Capitalism: A Love Story. Overture Films, 2009. DVD.

Response #5

Aside from the impossible vocabulary used in this article and the trouble I had trying to interpret what the author, John Foster, was trying to get at, I'm pretty sure I disagree with his argument as well.  In the beginning of the article Foster sets the stage for arguing against a capitalistic approach to education.  He argues that the capitalist educational system doesn't help you gain knowledge nor skills of any use but rather trains students to conform to the behaviors that lead to success in a capitalistic society.  

Further on down in the article Foster explains how the education system was designed to feed into a capitalist society, and he goes on to explain this doesn't necessarily breed the most educated children.  This I do agree with, I believe that students are taught how to survive in our economy rather than "educated".  However, I don't think this is ineffective because simply educating students by teaching them somewhat empty knowledge would not necessarily benefit the economy.  Foster continues to argue that the school system was designed on factory lines by business men, but what is the problem with that? What is the point of not educating students to function (or perform optimally) in a capitalist economy when that is what we live. Shouldn't that be the objective? 

In the section "Economic Stagnation and Attacks on Public Schools," Foster argues that privatizing schools is bad because it is capitalistic, when in contrast the privatization of schools promotes competition and raises expectations for public schools to perform to standards set by the state.  This was the approach of the "No child left behind" act. Foster goes on to explain that large corporations have a lot of influence on the no child left behind act and wraps up his argument saying that large corporations are responsible for implementing a capitalistic approach to education.  I agree that the large corporations, such as the Dell foundation, do benefit financially from the programs the implement in public schools, however, I do not believe that is their main focus.

Foster begins to form his main argument towards the end of the article where he states that the problem with standardized testing is that it is not testing the students as much as it is the teachers' conformance to meeting the expectations set by the corporations.  He says that these corporations are getting a say in what is put on these standardized test that are supposed to guide a teacher’s teaching when that is not the way it should be.  He argues that the standards that are set by these large corporations that manufacture standardized tests are only meant to advantage the corporate world and not the teacher profession at all. 

Although at the beginning of this article I thought he would be taking a different stance on the issue, he did make a valid point towards the end.  I do think that standardized testing has flaws, that is certain, but I also think they can provide a semi-accurate way to place where a student is in comparison to other students.  This being said I do agree with Foster’s argument that corporations should not be allowed to determine what is taught, and they certainly should not be able to evaluate the effectiveness of a teacher based on students test scores.  I think business and capital should be taught in schools, but I don’t necessarily think it should dominate what is being taught. Teaching should be left up to the teachers, parents, and administrators.

Foster, John Bell “Education and the Crisis of Capital.” The Monthly Review (2011)

Response #4: Problems With Public Education

Public education and the way we educate our children has been the same for years, we send them to school and no questions asked, they come out 16 years later as educated, respectable, ready-to-take-on-the-world young adults, as if it’s as easy as baking them in an easy bake oven.  Unfortunately breeding a successful generation to take on an unpredictable economy is not an easy task, at least, not that easy.

Years ago when people went to school they were taught that if they did well and made it through college, you would have a job.  Of course, we know that with the economy the way it is now and the increasing number of college graduates, the unemployment rate is as high if not higher than it’s ever been.  This in turn makes people question the credibility of the education system and wonder why they should go to college in the first place.  The problem with public education is that it was designed with a particular view of the mind.  There are only two types of people, that is, people who are smart and people who are not smart.  Unfortunately this tells some people that just because they don’t understand or do well with the specific material given, they are not capable when they could in fact be brilliant, even if not by the standards of public education. 

This idea that certain people aren’t “smart enough” to do well or obtain commendable grades is bogus.  How can you judge someone’s academic ability and compare it to the next persons?  One student may have incredible artistic abilities and lack in math, while their peer can be a distinguished math student but have no imagination.   How can you judge who is capable and who is not?  Of course they have standardize tests, but not only do those have a terrible tendency to limit the subjects a student is tested on but also almost put a target on where a child should be at a particular age, which brings me to another flaw in the public education system.

Educational institutions are more or less organized on factory lines.  Students are from the beginning separated into age groups where they are expected to keep up with their peers, as if the most important thing that kids have in common is their age.  These kids are then told to learn a series of subjects, the “important subjects.  Math, Science, History you know the drill.  These are the subjects that students are tested on throughout and at the end of the year to determine who stays and who moves on.  To make matters worse, children who do not perform in the selective subjects are considered “slow” almost as if they are marked with a scarlet letter.

Seeing that standardization can be very limiting, I agree with the idea of moving in the exact opposite direction.  Rather than making things more and more narrow, why not give stretching it out a try?  Why not let students practice what they are good at and feel good about their learning.  Rather than teaching that there is one answer to a problem, why not accept encourage the idea divergent or abstract thinking?  This could be a good way for students to make the most out of what they are learning, and hey, if we’ve tried everything else, we’ve got nowhere to go but up.

Response #3: Someplace Like America

From reading the first couple pages of this book I can tell I’m going to like it.  I know I will take an interest in the “little people” who make up this great country we live in.  The writer of this book, Dale Maharidge, begins the book with an excerpt from Bruce Springsteen, a great American singer songwriter, who pays tribute to some of Maharidge’s other works and the reality he captures in his books.  The way he focuses on not only the Politicians and Businessmen in America but also the working class.

United States history has always been written about the game-changers, the people that everyone remembers, from Presidents and Generals to major reformists such as Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony, and Rosa Parks.  The difference with this book is that it puts the spotlight on everyday people, and how they react to the changing economy and world around them.  The everyday struggles that people go through just to put food on the table, the tragedies among the less fortunate and even homeless. 

From the journeys that he takes with his photographer, Michael S. Williamson, Maharidge gains personal insight to what goes on among the people of America much like you and me, a sort of unwritten history.  He begins the book reflecting on one of his experiences living among homeless people in Santa Barbara, California.  Maharidge briefly tells us about traveling alongside the “tree people” of Santa Barbara which somewhat shows his determination to get these people’s stories out there and the length he went to document them.  He then proceeds to tell us about his view of America, from the iconic landscapes to the tough times, in his words “the places of lost dreams and hard-live lives” and how we can take a deeper look into America through the eyes of the people. 

Maharidge also collected a lot of research dating back to the 1930’s about the economic downfall and marks the similarities between the one we are going through now, how one man’s recession is another’s depression.  He commends the drive that American’s have to rise to each and every challenge rather it be single motherhood or the falling economy.

This book not only records a bit of American history (from 1980-2010) but captures it in a way that hasn’t been done before.  Following a specific group of people rather than the people who are high in ranks, such as the president, is a great way to create a sense of unity.  This book will go through a number of stories told by the American citizens themselves, the hardships, the struggle and the good times that we all go through.  I’m excited about this book because I think through these people that Maharidge selected to follow, it will reflect a bit of every American and give us someone we can relate to and sort of share the pain with.

Response #2: Society's Unrealistic Expectations

Throughout most of history, women typically had fewer legal rights then men.  Generally, a woman’s responsibility was to find a husband and pursue their biological role as a mother.  Along with motherhood, women’s duties included domestic chores such as cleaning, cooking, and doing laundry leaving the men to do the heavier labor and make a living for the family.  During this time, women were often considered intellectually and emotionally inferior to men.  With lack of opportunity and little respect from men, women were forced to rely on their husbands for food, property and income.  Since the women’s rights movements in the mid 20^th century, gender roles have significantly been reevaluated; however, women empowerment and high expectations from society now are affecting men more than ever.

From an early age we are taught the differences between a man and a woman.  We are categorized into gender roles and taught what is acceptable and what is not.  By observing our parents and our environment we learn to conform to social norms.   We are told that certain behaviors are not acceptable, that women are supposed to act like a lady, and that real men don’t cry.  We are given a set of ideals that defines masculinity and femininity, and are taught that if we can‘t reach those goals then there is something wrong.  As if there is a model way that we should act and look in order to be considered a reasonably attractive person.

With help from the social media, expectations for what it takes to be a respectable man or woman are absolutely absurd.  The way the depict people and their lifestyles on television and in magazines can only make you want to dream big.  You can’t tell me that the smooth powerhouse business man with the washboard abs, who just so happens to fix up cars in his spare time (and is not to mention gorgeous) doesn’t make you turn away from the movie screen, look at your man and think “so what happened to you?”  Or the gorgeous models in the magazines with perfect bodies don’t make you a self conscious about your own?  I mean come on! Look at what we’re up against. 

The problem is that we are taught to strive for flawlessness, that we can do anything if we put our minds to it, that we can achieve perfection.  We are bombarded with messages that say that if we do this or try that we can, in fact, be the way we want to be.  What they don’t tell you is that NO ONE is perfect, it is impossible to be perfect.  We say to ourselves “if I could just lose ten more pounds then I would really like the way I look.”  When in all reality with that mindset, it is likely that you’ll never truly be satisfied with yourself.  So when does it stop?  As soon as you reach your next goal? Do you think perfectionists ever reach a point where they step back, look at all their work and actually appreciate the way it turned out?  People that reach for the unreachable are always going to setting themselves up for disappointment.

So, rather than striving to be perfect, it is important to work on what makes you happy.  Once you accept that it is impossible to meet society’s standards you may look at things in a different light.  No longer will you feel the need or the want to conform to the society’s endless requests.  Stop caring about what other people think and you can learn to be content.

A Little Bit About Me...

1. Where do you come from?

As far as where I was born, I'm from Lexington.  I did a little bit of moving around when I was pretty young for my dad's job but in 2nd grade we came back and I've been living here ever since.


2. What are your experiences with writing?

I don't mind writing in general, however, english has to be my least favorite class.  It is proven fact that no matter how many times I sit down and try to work on a paper, I can't focus until hours before it is due.


3. Something that is seriously important to you.

Over all probably the most important thing in my life is my family.  I come from a large family of five siblings (three older sisters and two younger brothers).  They are extremely important to me because they are probably the people that have the most influence on me and I really appreciate all they have done for me.


4. Why are you in college?

I'm in college because I hope to one day have a respectable career and I think that can be a difficult thing to accomplish if you don't have the paper to show.

5. What kind of culture do you consume?

I consume all kinds of culture.  I love all kinds of movies, music and sports.  As far as movies go some of my favorites are Pulp Fiction, 10 Things I Hate About You, Braveheart, Blow, Memento, Fight Club, Pinapple Express, Pretty Women, and Shawshank Redemption, but that list can go on forever.  I listen to all kinds of music but mostly Classic Rock, Indie Rock, Alternative, Acoustic, Hip-Hop, Raggae, selective Country, 80's, 90's and pretty much anything that is good.  Some sports I enjoy watching football, soccer, and basketball and I like to play sports like soccer, tennis, and basketball.

My Political Compass