CHASE that money!

"In no other industry is skin in the game as important as it is in banking." To begin honestly and up front, anything relating to stocks isn't exactly my strong point. Buying, selling, and trading stocks aren't my idea of fun. But learning more about the things I own and use on a regular basis is something I can do research on, and putting money where your mouth is is is something worth looking at.
In Ancient Rome, there was an issue with this when it came to building architectural buildings and bridges. A way to fix this problem, they placed the builders of these bridges stand and spend time under them to ensure just how much faith they had in their own work. Later on, the English saw this method and decided to take it a step further by making that engineers family stand under their bridges as well! Although this was an extremely reliable way of getting what a customer pays for, it's safe to say we have a better way of doing this: with trust, so here's why I choose to invest in JPMorgan Chase Bank.

John Maxfield writes his article on how important it is to have "skin in the game" when it comes to stocks and trades; it is even more vital when using this type of thinking with banks. So why choose Chase? In a nutshell, one of the most important things to look for when working with money is trust. A good way to ensure that is to see how much the executives of these banks trust their own money and risks; and Jamie Dimon, as far as I'm aware, has the most stocks placed into his own institution. As CEO and chairmen or Chase, there is a minimum requirement of owning at least one million shares. Being the over achiever that Dimon is, he not meets that requirement but is almost seven times that amount; see what I mean by skin in the game? The company is doing very well on the market, and due to the people running it, it seems it's on a pretty fair pace. As a customer of Chase, I have full faith that our family has made the right choice with our bank because otherwise I'd be worried if we didn't! I'm confident in my decision to invest in my stocks, not only because it has benefited to my advantage, but also because I have the trust behind it to ensure everyone has skin in the game to reap these benefits.

Adam Smith

Adam Smith. Known for his works of "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" and "The Wealth of Nations". He helped change America's way of economic thinking along with the rest of the worlds; to boil him down to a crash course, we're going to focus on the four main ideas he is responsible for which bettered our way of thinking the long run:
1-Specialization: Modern businesses could make more profit if their workforces are divided and specialized into more little jobs for many people to excel in than one person taking a whole load of responsibilities. signs our world is so rich (example): when meeting a stranger at a party, chances are you won't understand that person's job title- logistic supply manager, packaging coordinator, communications and learning officer- all hard to understand, I know, but these mouthful titles are actually what make America so successful. Thanks, Smith.
The downsides?- people's meaning: small business= everything is available and understandable; large industrial businesses= people feel small and forget the value of their work because of the title they were given; absent- minded people fail to understand work, thus provoking yourself to question the value of your work
solution- authorities, bosses, and leaders of cooperations have a duty to their employees to validate their work and dignity, and remind them of their role and purpose of their work. sounds like snowflake garbage, but as wimpy as it sounds, happy workers, make the best effort.

2- Consumer capitalism: luxury consumerism is needed for a good society, and for us to flourish economically. having a form of ranks and classes seems unfair, but when taken into perspective with history, wealthy people will refuse to let their kin to decline and become poor, thus opening hospitals and education, benefiting everyone else around them. wealth allows societies to look after their weakest members. smith was behind the idea that consumer capitalism does more good for the poor than trying to equal everyone's rank and role to mediocracy.
capitalism is more than fulfilling our basic needs and buying things, but should also create money from goods and services that help with our individual fulfillment.
3- How to treat the rich: how you get the rich and wealthy to treat the rest of society well? keep the money and feed them the honor they want to gain. give a pretty person mirror so they can bug themselves instead of the people around them. Usually, the rich aren't greedy when it comes to money, but are instead obsessed with what others think of them (they want to be liked). So why tax them when you can give them a participation award? Doing this not only ensures their own happiness and garbage but subconsciously makes them concerned about good things a general narcissist wouldn't give a second glance to. (funding schools, hospitals, and treating workers with a decent amount of respect. Smith wisely said, "the great secret of education is to direct vanity to proper objects."
4- Educate consumers!: Big corporations are viewed as evil pits of money, who are trying to ruin our lives and take our money. These are obviously an issue, but however, we seem to gloss over the fact that we are one of the main reasons these issues are happening in the first place; the problem is with ourselves. companies are not the ones who corrupt and "destroy the world", but it is, in fact, our appetites of the world that will always crave something bigger and sweeter; businesses are merely giving us what we are asking (yet we somehow manage to throw such a fit about it). How can we fix this? By consumer education, of course! If we are taught to want better quality things and pay a respectable price for them, we are benefiting those genuine businesses along with ourselves. This is one of the reasons good capitalist societies offer you choices (like which laundry detergent you should purchase at Target) so that you are exercising your option of choice for judicious ways in the future. Smith found that it is indeed possible for capitalism to be saved by changing our thinking of the quality of the things we consume.
Adam Smith is responsible for creating this country'sway of thinking by simply changing the game. Though unfortunately unrecognized, he created a reason for our society to become just as civilized as it is profitable.

Been There, Done that

People are causing trouble over and issues that are important, but have perhaps surfaced a few years m- too early for anyone to "take action". The article "'Fight Inequality' is a Poor Rally" focuses on the issue that today's protesters are struggling keep their problems important. Right off the bat, Cowen suggests that based off of recent studies, that once economic controls are involved with the statistics, there is a reduced likelihood that the people taking about it will ever do anything about it. 
The fight for equality has been a raging fire among the youth of America. I mean who wouldn't stand up for what they think is right. The rallies and protesters shook the police, communities, and our government, angering them and in response having hem fight back. But now those forces are simply not caring; ignoring them. What the protesters look for is a fight, something to try and justify their means. If nobody is noticing them, is it even a protest?

The article claims that a study on the concept of economic inequality says that,  "Americans don’t mind inequality nearly as much as pundits and academics suggest." This may raise some questions. Why do people suddenly not care about inequality? Is it inequality towards them or towards other people? Because it's one thing if they do not care about the inequality thrown at them, but when they disregard the lives of others then that in itself is inequality. 

Senior Project

Rachel Garbutt

April 27, 2017

English

Senior Project

Respect of the Blue- Collared Worker

Never follow your passion. Alone, this statement shakes the core of many people who are convinced their dreams are what should control their pursuits.  At this point leading up to my senior year, I have been working my hardest and constantly being reminded by myself and peers, that my future lies in my hands. The journey I walk from this point forward will be determined on the grades which I have earned, the activities I choose to do or not do, and the decisions I will henceforth make. According to the majority of the common mind, I am to do all of this in the hopes of achieving a higher goal; a degree: a piece of paper that will validate my work, give me an entitlement to my achievements, and remind me that I am successful. However, the common struggle our society has, including myself at one point, is the mindset we subconsciously have against the blue- collared career(s).  The automatic conclusion that a degree fits the perfect keyhole to success. My goal is to

By definition, the meaning of the skills gap is ‘the difference in skills required on the job and the actual skills possessed by the employees. With this information alone it doesn't seem this applies to you or me, but instead seems a rather a distant problem for someone else. However the reality behind this problem is closer to us than you'd think. As an example, at a public school rate, the high school graduation rate for students in the 2013-2014 year had around 82%, an all-time high. Out of those students who graduated, about 68% of them enrolled in a two to four year college for the fall. Now with this alone, there are millions of people that are going to go into a profession with a degree to compete for a small slot of opportunities we very politely call “good careers.” But now we run into a real problem, because with these millions of people fighting for a job, employers are still struggling to fill around five point eight million jobs that these students are not trained to do. “Truth is, a lot of well-intended parents still believe that kids who attend trade schools do so because they’re not ‘college material.’ That’s an absurd stereotype with no basis in reality, but for the millions of parents who want something ‘better’ for their kids, it’s reason enough to discourage a career in the trades. Unfortunately, this reasoning is not only faulty, it’s destroying economies large and small.”

According to the U.S. Department of Education, a data point taken students in 2003-2004 showed that 71% of them did not enroll six years later (2009). “The first outcome, employment rate, is the percentage of former students who reported that they were employed at the time of the 2009 interview. The second outcome, employment in a job related to one’s field of study, is the percentage of employed former students who reported that their job was related to their major or field of study. These outcomes are examined for students who did and did not earn a postsecondary credential, and for those who earned a credential (certificate or degree) in an occupational versus academic field of study.” "We've done a disservice in this country by suggesting that there's only one path to success, which is to get a bachelor's degree," says Mark Edwards, executive director of Opportunity Nation, a campaign to increase economic opportunity in America. "There are many good-paying jobs available today that, quite candidly, a four-year bachelor of arts degree does not prepare them for."

One thing that we forget to remind ourselves is that the product of being successful is not the same for everyone, yet millions of students choose the path society says you should do, but only few of them will succeed. The trouble with the skills gap starts at the beginning, meaning we need to change the mindset of students beforehand and adults who have already set their minds on it that middle class work is not “middle class.” These type of jobs are the ones that need more than the high school education, but perhaps not as much as a four-year college degree; and they are the most in-demand jobs with quite an appealing paycheck. We are just refusing to see and take them from the start.

During a Fox News interview with Mike Rowe in December, it is brought up that during the airing and peak of his show “Dirty Jobs”,  Donald Trump’s support and campaign  rates soared upward. The reason for this? Perhaps because the advocates Trump specifically spoke to are those similarly, if not the same, with those who have ‘dirty jobs’. Many Trump supporters have been accused of being racists, bigots, xenophobic, and even uneducated; but these titles are not the people nor reason why he won this year’s election. Like the show “Dirty Jobs”, “It didn’t become popular because it was fancy or funny, but because it was authentic.  it was decided by millions of disgusted Americans desperate for real change. The people did not want a politician. The people wanted to be seen. Donald Trump convinced those people that he could see them. Hillary Clinton did not.”

    “There is a mismatch between skills being taught in the U.S. and the labor pressure in the market. Psychology, history, and performing arts account for 22 percent of degrees earned in the U.S., but the corresponding professions don’t appear in any top rankings for labor demand,” he says. “Of the top majors granted in the U.S., only 5 percent fall within the high-demand areas of engineering and technology. Compare that number to India, where the number of technical enrollment is five times that amount.” Employers in California are continually facing four main challenges that their employees or future employees tend to be lacking: technical skills,basic literacy and numeracy, and most importantly, experience or qualifications. This common struggle is not only growing, but it is also not helping our economy. If we are a country founded on freedom and independance, how are to be free if we are so dependant on other countries to make and manufacture our things? There is a solution to this. Though it may seem an insignificant need now, the best problems are to be solved before they become out of hand. We need to place the life skills classes back into the education system so that young students are prepared for the life that lies ahead of them, trade school or not. In Fitchburg, Massachusetts, high schools seem to be on their way to fix this problem. Montachusett regional Vocational Technical School had a program designed to teach each student a skill or trade of their choice, such as plumbing, masonry, cosmetology or engineering, along with completing the academic core requirements. With vocational schools like this, not only does this prepare students for ensured employment after graduation, this fills the the jobs for employers who are lacking their required skills and knowledge for their workers.

In the Catholic church, research has shown that this issue is found important, and that bringing attention to the skills gap is greatly needed. Much talk about the career advice circling the phrase “do what you love” is not only hurting the economy, but is also putting a heavy amount of self focus on many dreamers. This mindset has done a deal of negative effectiveness on one’s duty and responsibility, to the community and families. It reads is Psalm 90:17, “May the favor of the Lord our God rest on us’ establish the work of our hands for us-yes, establish the work of our hands.” Regardless of what you do, your work matters to God. Which is why in the church, we need to remember that we are one body in Christ; it is not our right to judge a brother’s character and success by the work he does or the paycheck he receives. To bring this back to my main point, I must make it very clear on what I believe: your passion is something to be valued, and should always be apart of you, but that does not justify it enough for countless opportunities to pass by. You being happy with your job has a great weight of importance, but it has seldom to do with the work itself. Having an open heart for Christ’s light to shine through whatever you doaz is what will effect our work the most.  This brings me to a quote that has stuck with me, and has helped shaped me to the decisions I make today and for future days to come: “Never follow your passion, but always take it with you.”

Works Cited

Hurst, Alyssa. "‘Dirty Jobs’ in Danger? Mike Rowe Weighs in on America’s Growing Skills Gap."SmartCEO. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.

Rowe, Mike. "Off The Wall: The Right of Free College." Mike Rowe Blog. N.p., 28 Mar. 2016. Web. 2 Mar. 2017.

Chasmar, Jessica. "Mike Rowe Explains the Real Reason Donald Trump Won." The Washington Times. The Washington Times, 11 Nov. 2016. Web. 1 Mar. 2017.

Bidwell, Allie. "Vocational High Schools: Career Path or Kiss of Death?" The Return of Vocational High Schools. U.S. News, 2 May 2014. Web. 9 Mar. 2017.

Freifield, Lori. "Bridging the Skills Gap." Training Magazine. Lakewood Media Group, n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2017.

College Completion.” College Completion. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2013. Web. 23 Mar. 2017

Colborn, John. "What Will It Take to Close California's Skills Gap?" California Economic Summit, 20 Jan. 2015. Web. 9 Mar. 2017.

Freifeld, Lorri. "Bridging the Skills Gap." Training Magazine. N.p., 07 July 2014. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.

Darling, Daniel. "Do Blue Collar Workers Fit Our Theology of Vocation?" Christianity.com. N.p., 22 July 2014. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.

Ryan, Liz. "The Most Serious Skill Gap Of All." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 18 Aug. 2016. Web. 19 Mar. 2017.

Pannoni, Alexandra. "Vocational High School Programs an Option for Teens." U.S.News, 20 Oct. 2014. Web. 21 Mar. 2017.

"Employment Status of Postsecondary Completers in 2009: Examination of Credential Level and Occupational Credentials." National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a Part of the U.S. Department of Education. N.p., 15 Nov. 2016. Web. 21 Mar. 2017.

Why We Work

In today's day and age, our reasons for our work are much different than when they were at the beginning. When you think of why we work, thoughts generally go to the reasons of survival, shelter, and provisions for ourselves. So when we go out to our jobs with a just a goal of, "I need to have just enough," it's hard to deny that there's going to be room for slacking. 

When we live in a country where our basic needs are most likely always going to be at arms reach, why try harder? While reading an article on what the definition of "poverty" in America is, it not only made me think of what I have but also how much our perspective and theology of work really needs to change. It has been reported that around 30 million of Americans were living in "poverty" each year; but what exactly does that look like? Well to sum it up, the average "poor" person or family owns a car, air conditioning, one to two color- TVs, and a DVD player. They also reported those typical families did not go hungry and were able to receive medical care when needed. Now, let us go back to our definition of work, meaning trying to survive and find shelter for our needs; aren't we surviving plenty?

A common mistake made by Christians is that work and labor are products of the fall in the Garden of Eden, as a way of punishment. But in reality, it reads in Genesis 2:15, "The Lord took the man and out him in the Garden of Eden to work it and keep it." This was before the fall, which if I remember correctly, the world was still perfect. God had created man to work to glorify Him and to bring man joy in doing so. After all, God does his work and makes beautiful things out of it, and if it's our job to be christ- like, we are to work just like he does. It wasn't until after the fall where God had then "cursed the ground which provides for you, and from the sweat of your brow you will eat from that ground until you return to it." Unfortunately, like many other things, sin has stained our view of work as punishment instead of a gift given by Christ. Phillip Holmes makes some very key points when writing in his blog about why we really should work. "Since God is ultimately our provider, our motivation and understanding of work must change. This honorable, meaningful labor is done as an act of worship, not unto man, but unto the Lord."

We our encouraged to remember the real reasons why we should work, and our attitudes towards it. Slacking is one the easiest temptations today with all that we have at our disposal, but great is the reward when we consider our labors a gift.

Does Money buy (Economic) Happiness?

Are you happy today? How are you feeling? Do you enjoy your life? Do these questions even matter? Well, according to the the newly released "World Happiness Report 2017", these questions matter a lot economically. This world happiness report is based on surveying 1,000 countries in 150 countries who are to rate their happiness levels on a scale of zero to ten. The goal of these surveys is "to redefine the growth narrative to put people's well-being at the center of government's efforts". Surprisingly, the results of the happiest countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark, have been more slow to grow than the world in general. Comparing this to the U.S, we don't exactly look like the cheeriest people out there. To be fair, comparing us to economically and population-wise small countries such as these isn't a fair enough fight to bash us unhappy Americans. Even as different as we are in size, our economies are fairly similar. This new way of determining which countries are flourishing by broad surveys on how happy someone feels today is not only giving false ideas, but its teaching us that economic growth is just about attaining more and better things. It's also about how rising prosperity can create a deeper and more flourishing life for the future.
Economic growth may not be sufficient to creating a better world for more people, but it sure seems necessary."

"Snowflakes" Graduate to Title of Cupcakes

 https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/06/middlebury-engages-soul-searching-after-speech-shouted-down-and-professor-attacked
About a week ago, Middlebury College in Vermont broke out in outrage from the appearance of Charles Murray who was supposed to speak on their campus. "What transpired instead felt like a scene from Homeland rather than an evening at an institution of higher learning." Says Allison Stanger, a political scientist who is a professor at Middlebury College. She was called to moderate the lecture from Charles Murray. These frail, easily offended "cupcakes" had mustered up their strength to cause so much of a riot, they surrounded Stanger and Murray, and physically attacked Allison by yanking her hair to the point of her requiring a neck brace the next day. Many from Middlebury claim that this behavior was shocking from their students to a guest speaker; this information got a pretty good chortle out of me, that this is a surprising behavior from the same students that are holding puppies in their safe spaces, calling any passerby a bigot for not agreeing with them. In another article by Bernard Goldberg, had much to say about these students and their immature behavior. He also touches on the exact reason these students are so opposed to Charles Murray's speaking is because of a book he wrote, "The Bell Curve", in 1944. the book's context itself had some controversial writing, because it linked intelligence levels to "heredity and briefly brought race into the discussion," says Goldberg. With this information alone, Murray is labeled a racist to said cupcakes.
All of this outrage and temper tantrums have very meaningful reasons behind them, I'm sure, but when push comes to shove it boils down to one word i can think of that summarizes this: exhausting. Yes, we understand the upset and mourning people have over Hillary's loss of presidency, and that some will go as far as they see fit to go against everything our current president says and stands for. But personally, I find that resisting mercilessly will get you nowhere, leaving you exhausted and the only one in tears at the end.

Honest Abe, Wrong on Trade

“The first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, warned that the ‘abandonment of the protective policy by the American government [will] produce want and ruin among our people.'" This week during his address to Congress, President Trump quoted Abraham Lincoln, America's first Republican President, on international trade. Now as honest and as Lincoln was, and as strong as a supporter he was of keeping hold the union, his thoughts and actions on trade weren't as correct as he wanted them to be. 
Comparing trade issues then to trade now has some drastic differences; one of them being that America's economic growth relied on free trade within the states, not international trade. Our "toddler" of a country was growing- fast. From crawling on all fours to teething, we were growing  at rapid paces, meaning our resources were growing and adding to the national economy.  However, free trade within the country is not our major issue anymore. Granted, there's always going to be hat one successful Shark Tank of a business that will only trade and manufacture in America, but as a whole, our job is to keep up with the fastest growers; even if that's not us. In order for our economy to grow at its best we need to trade with the parts of the world that is growing fastest.
Lincoln most likely saw the best in our situation then, seeing a fine job in the marketplace and holding our own. This probably hindered him from seeing the need or benefits of working across national borders. Unfortunately, he failed to see David Ricardo's concept of "comparative thinking", meaning you should never be a 'jack of all trades but master of none.' Meaning it's not effective to attempt to be a self sufficient country (or person) because you just can't be good at everything. As harsh as it sounds, there's always going to be someone out there who is better at you at something; but if you can't beat them, join them.
 I personally have struggled with the mindset of being self-sufficient, thinking and convincing myself that I'm capable of doing everything on my own; part of it being an issue of pride, and not wanting the dependency of another individual. However, the outcome of my stubbornness was a loss for myself. You may think you're strong if you can do it on your own, but there comes a time where having an ally can make you stronger. Did Lincoln have the same thinking about our young country? That we didn't need anyone else's help because we were managing on our own? Perhaps he was right for a moment, but when push comes to shove, finding someone who has different strengths as you to team up with can build you up even more. President Lincoln's intentions for our country truly were for the best, and if he were here today, his thoughts on trade likely would have evolved to the economic experience of the coming years. "Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken." (Ecclesiastes 4:12)

The Moocher with a Purpose

http://www.aei.org/publication/the-dignity-deficit-reclaiming-americans-sense-of-purpose/
We all know the feeling: when you see the pity and sadness in another's eyes, wishing there was something you could do to help them. So, giving in to those tear stained eyes, you give them exactly what they're asking for; you give your dog the bacon from under the table. And how does that sweet pup thank you in return? He begs for more. This endless cycle of pity and regret is something we have all been guilty of at one point or another, yet we know the better and ask ourselves, "why should I give in?" However, the biggest culprit of this problem comes from our government and its funds.
In April, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson went to Martin County in eastern Kentucky to pay a visit to a Tom Fletcher, one man out of many who lived in a typical Appalachian town. At the time, the term "typical Appalachian" meant a place of suffering of education, money, and dignity; a town considered woefully inadequate to live in. Johnson paid a visit Tom Fletcher to learn more about his life and family. He was 38 years old, unemployed, and had eight children. “Fletcher never finished elementary school and could not really read. The places where he had labored—coal mines, sawmills—were closed. He struggled to support his wife and eight children.” Seeing the struggles Fletcher had from a day-to-day basis, along with most of their community, President Johnson went to action by declaring "a national war on poverty", and the objective was total victory. Tom Fletcher henceforth received welfare benefits, and found employment with the help of government programs. Johnson's spark of helping the lower class has lived on, with the government spending over $20 trillion with programs like food stamps, Medicaid, and much more. The goal of all of this hard work and effort was to better our country and the people in it by giving them the essentials and ground for them to succeed, and hopefully move up in the world. however, like I said before, be careful giving that bacon under the table. It is mans natural instinct to want more than they have.
The outcome of Tom Fletcher was a very short success, if any success at all.  Since he had received help, he could never keep a steady job, and did not make it out of poverty. Granted there was slight improvement, but never enough to live of life independent of the government. Johnson's dream of a poverty-free world was never fully seen, and today, Martin County has risen materially, but the money the government has given has not reduced the the poverty rate today. Do you see the problem here? Our country has been (efficiently) working for over five decades to raise the middle\ lower class with assistance and funds, but there are seldom results of it being extremely effective. The sad reality is that bacon is good for a moment, but its difficult to stay satisfied  once they've given into you. Our government has given us so much bacon that we rely on them, and them alone, to sustain steady jobs, income, education and more. Don't get me wrong, I believe that having people willing to help and support those in need like Hillary, but when push comes to shove, we need to face our responsibilities and take charge on our own.

Villainous Business (Hamilton)

$20.1 trillion. This is the estimated cost of our country's debt at the end of FY 2017. Does this number scare you? does this number on a page give you a sense of worry, or lack of hope for our country? because it's just a number; not only has it made us one of the most succesful countries out there, but has given us a sesne of responsibility. After the Revolutionary War ended in 1783, America's public debt was in huge trouble from what it looked like. As Alexander Hamilton's job as Treasury Secretary, he had a plan.
First, let's go back to our current $20.1 trillion debt number. Given that most Americans today can't read an article regarding our President without rioting and theowing a tantrum, I think it's safe to say that there's a number of us who speak without knowing what we're talking about; especially when it comes to debt. If our countries debt was such a problem, and if we divided this by the total number of tax payers in America, (which currently is 243 million people) that would cost the average American tax payer around $6,893.04 a year to pay that off. In my high school-thinking mind, that number still seems like a lot, but granted, I get excited when I can get paid $20.00 from time to time. $6,000 is not a lot of money to pay off people, and if our country were really that afraid of our debt, it would have been fixed, but it's not. Simply because our country is better for having it. Hamilton thought that we should honor our countries debt. And as much as the states hated the idea to tax a "tax free" war, they went with Hamilton' idea to borrow. During this argument, Hamilton says, "It is a strange perversion of ideas... that men should be deemed corrupt and criminal fro becoming proprietors in the funds of their country. Yet I believe the number of members of Congress very small who have ever been considerably proprietors in the funds." what our country had seldom considered was that in order to have or make money, ou have to spend it. And by doing so, and expanding the public debt like the British, it strengthened them instead of weakening them. America hadn't much liquid capital, and by furthering our shortage on that, we'd be on the right track.

I do?

In Mark Regnerus' article, Freedom to Marry Young,  he has a rather interesting view on the time the average person should settle down and find a partner. For men today, the average age of marraige is 28. since 1970, that number has certainly gone up, but for women as well. with the narrowing age gap between spouses, and the thought of "throwing your life away" before you already have one is becoming more of the norm of thinking. But do we still believe that choosing between a substantial lifestyle and an education have such drastic conseqences?
Most women today will not give much serious thought of marriage until their late 20s (AKA after college). A lot of this thought however is the jump of equality for everyone today, such as "womens education is just as important as mens"; with this kind of popular mindset, are we really surprised people are focusing less on a wife/husband and more on themsleves? Like Regnerus wrote, "we are sending mixed messages. I understand where Regnerus is coming from, but again, the weight of society's want and what our "common sense" or what our parents want, its a little confusing.  Now don't confuse my confusion as an excuse. 

Inauguration Speech banned from Fourth Graders

Brett Meteyer is a fourth grade teacher in Michigan who has gotten lots of comments for the actions he chose to take charge of regarding the inaugural speech yesterday. On Monday, Meteyer sent out an email to his students' families giving notice he was going to show the inauguration ceremony, but refraining them from viewing Trump's personal speech. Part of his email wrote,  "because I am concerned about my Students and your children being exposed to language and behavior that is not in concert with the most conservative social and family values, I have decided to show the inauguration of Donald Trump this Friday, but we will not view Mr. Trump's inauguration speech,"...
"I showed  the speeches of Presidents Obama and Bush in 2009 and 2005, respectively, but I am anxious about showing Mr. Trump's inaugural address, given his past inflammatory and degrading comments about minorities, women, and the disabled. I am also uneasy about Mr. Trump's casual use of profanity, so I sought and assurance that as their teacher, I would not be exposing children to language that would not appear in G- or PG-rated movies."
After this email was sent out, many parents were found upset and even angry for it, taking it to Facebook, unleashing even more comments. Now many people are questioning whether Meteyer was doing a righteous act to protect his students, or if he's a snowflake- loving Hillary advocate, using his position of "power" by keeping his students from viewing a turning point in history. "What kind of message does this send to our kids? 'This president is a bad guy and kids should not watch him?' This is a piece of history and the kids should be allowed to watch," says Steve Grindr, a conservative radio host who posted Meteyer's email to Facebook. Given the responses this has received, I do understand where this teacher is coming from. As someone who is responsible for the well being of young students, I would want someone who is doing so in the best judgment. However, as much as he is disliked, I have faith in my country's leader to not make stupid remarks about "women" or "racism" during his speech. He has history of saying stupid things, but not enough to make him stupid. This man, as "unfit" as some say he is, had to be qualified to even be in the running. Our president may say things that will offend you, by don't put that off by saying he didn't work hard and think smart to be where he is now.

Social Media's Response

First things first, I have to admit that this was not my first choice for a blog topic. I was prepared to give a weekly review on our economy, but this week I went home, turned on the TV with my family, and watched a pretty ballsy episode of the show 'Blackish', a show our family enjoys together. The episode was titled "Lemons", featuring the response of the Johnson family post- election. With the children's school taking the day off for "reflection", only to invite the students for a healing rally when returning, and tension in the workplace for main character Dre Johnson. The family being portrayed as strong democrats, they wonder what went wrong with their country, making a rather mocking scene when one of Dre's female coworkers admits she voted for Trump. You can watch the clip from People Magazine's article here.

A Nation of States

I'm reading Mark J. Perry's article, I had found out some fairly interesting statistics about our nations economic output. Now with everything that has gone on politically, I think it's safe to say that a great number of Americans think that our country is a disappointment, a joke, and even not worth representing. And I understand that we, the people, are not a perfect people. In fact, this country is full of mistakes, but it is our job to try and fix that, not watch from the sidelines and cry in our safe spaces. Looking at the graph shown by Perry, America, and even our state's GDP (including California, Texas, Florida and New York) are the leading runners on the globe. That's saying quite a bit for a "disappointment of a country".