Music

posts >> nikolai > william

_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

“Music just ain’t what it used to be.”  I seem to be hearing that more and more these days.  But is it true?  Styles have changed, yes, but what about the quality of music?  Many people would say that the quality of music has declined.  Especially in the last few decades.  But who decides quality anyway?  I know I don’t, not for the masses anyway.  Do you?  Who am I to put down someone else’s piece of art?  Many would consider the Beatles to have produced some of the greatest songs ever, and though I would agree… how do you think Beethoven would feel about their music?  He might see things differently.  Music is about how you feel.  Whether writing or listening to it, everyone feels something different.  I think its up to the individual listener to decide what music they like to listen to, but it’s not the end-all opinion either.

_________________________________________________________

William

Music is largely terrible these days. The days of Mozart and Muddy Waters are over. In comparison, Britney Spears, Panic At the Disco and New Age ocean sounds are barely listenable. The sad fact is that most of Americans are looking for quick and easy. Terrible music is assessable and so permeates our society that it fraudulently becomes accepted as good music. If you know music and the complex subtlety that makes great music, you are more hard pressed today then ever to find it. Our best days are behind us for now, as bubble gum pop is marketed and sold to a musically illiterate audience. If your favorite artist is Hannah Montana, please don’t bother responding.

Exploration

posts >> william > nikolai

_________________________________________________________

William

When was the last time you were inspired? I can only imagine what it must have been like to be in a family during America’s westward expansion. What would it have been like to be with Christopher Columbus when he discovered the ‘new world’, or to have stood and heard JFK rally us to soar among the stars? It has been far to long since we in America have been inspired to reach out and explore.

Perhaps we have lost a sense of exploration since most of the dry land mass has been explored and largely settled since westward expansion. I believe however, that there is so much more to reach for. The mystique of the deep sea lead to such works as “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea” and our past inability to discover its secrets gave rise to myth and lore. But now we have the technology to go deeper, to understand more, and to reach again for possibility, if only we were inspired to do so.

Exploration is an end in itself. There is no telling what advancements may come, if any, from the exploration of the deep sea, or space for that matter. If past investment in exploration is any clue, we have a lot to gain from such an endeavor. But even more then the technological possibilities, we have a lot to gain from inspiration’s possibilities. It is unifying in a time when red and blue states and have and have-nots divide our nation. It pays economic dividends in a time of economic hardship. But most of all, it ignites the curiosity in a nation founded from curiosity. With so much going wrong, we need to hope for what could be. I’d like to be inspired once again, how about you?

_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

Most people would agree that knowledge is important in the way we live. The way to gain knowledge is to learn, and the way to learn is to explore. Exploring is essential to our existence. Had it not been for Columbus’s journey most of you readers would not be here today. The risk was evident, failure and even death. But the reward was much greater. And luckily for us Christopher Columbus saw the possibilities that lay ahead. He saw the future; he saw the hope for something more.

I feel that the emphasis of exploring is being lost in our lifetime. We’re more concerned about war, famine, poverty, oil prices and perhaps rightfully so, but what if the answer to all of these problems is “out there”, obtainable if someone were to just imagine and take a risk. The fact is we’ll never know what’s out there unless we try to physically explore. We can hypothesize all day long but in the end what good is that? It’s just a guess.

There is what seems to be an infinite amount of space that has yet to be discovered, planets that are unvisited, and not to mention a whole other world that exists below us; the sea. Maybe we don’t know what we’re expecting to find, but we’ll never know until we get there. Perhaps the cure for cancer is in outer space somewhere, maybe an idea for alternate fuel is in the deep sea. The possibilities are endless.

Technology

posts >> bradley > edward

_________________________________________________________

Bradley

I’m very glad I live in the time period in which I do.  I have indoor plumbing, electricity, and Google at my fingertips.  But when you really think about, I’m sure if you could ask Alexander Hamilton if he liked the time in which he lived, he would probably say yes as well.  (Probably because he doesn’t know any better)  Though something as technical as 802.11N has made life more convenient for us, technological innovations of mixed significance have progressed along throughout history.

Now that we have iPhones and other media all in our hands, we need to be careful not to forget about people.  There will be many that go hungry tonight that live on the streets, despite the fact that if we wanted to, we could bring everyone in off the streets and even pay for “rehabilitation” of some sort.  Basically, I think it’s astounding that a piece of technology like the iPhone and poverty can coexist in today’s world.  I mean, it’s 2008 for crying out loud!  Obviously there isn’t anything intrinsically evil about new/cool technology, it just feels like with every step technology makes, we end up distancing ourselves from the burden of having to care about people.

Well, now that I’ve alienated all iPhone users, I feel I should explain a bit better.  Technology has accomplished many great tasks and by and large has made life “easier” for us.  Levi Strauss gave us riveted blue jeans, NASA gave us freeze dried food and Velcro, and another genius gave us this.  I’m glad we have people like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates around, but we need to be careful what we spend our money on, and not get caught up in “stuff” that ends up running out of battery power and collecting dust.  Technology has brought many great things to the world, but it’s up to us to remember that only people matter.

_________________________________________________________

Edward

It may seem like a basic assumption, technology comes with responsibility, but unfortunately I don’t think many people make that connection. For example, it has taken more than a decade since the introduction of the cell phone to develop any sense of appropriate use or etiquette (and we haven’t come that far). So what happens when technologies such as human cloning or genetic manipulation get thrown out as the panacea to the world’s problems? How about this one; better technology, not life style changes, is the answer to global warming?

These are questions/statements people make all of the time, routinely without an afterthought. But let’s go back to the cell phone. The butterfly effect (not the lame movie but the scientific theory) of cell phone technology has been immeasurable for both good and bad; people who were once unable to participate in the global economy because geographical barriers now have mobile proximity to markets. Conversely, would be menaces to society now have ease access to networks, information and capital to bring whatever harm they intend to a much broader swath of the worlds people.

Technology inherently is neither good nor evil. It is neutral, but without responsibility has the potential to do exponentially more harm than good. The Manhattan Project is the prime example here, however, with responsibility technology can catalyze the process to bring a better future to the world; the flu vaccine or dwarf wheat. The fundamental point being; no new technology can be introduced without a ripple in the pond, or put another way without unintended consequences. Can we manage those to a minimum or will technology take us places we never wanted to go?

Nuclear Energy

posts >> william > nikolai

_________________________________________________________

William

The times they are a-changin’, truly. Going ‘green’ has come in vogue amidst some very real energy hikes and crisis’ that have spurred alternative energy’s profitability and highlighted some of its attractiveness. It is time that we take what we’ve learned about our environment, new technologies, and invest in a sustainable future of renewable energy. It is time to revisit one of the best ideas the U.S. ever had, nuclear energy, and move on from an overblown scare that happened at Three Mile Island nuclear facility 29 years ago.

The scare which stalled, if not intermittently ended, our civilian nuclear energy program which was begun under Eisenhower, has left us a country that is dependent on coal for half of its electricity. Coal is obviously not the answer since coal-fired power plants actually release more radioactivity than a nuclear plant and since they release tons of carbon and sulfur (etc) where nuclear power is clean. Other renewable sources of energy are not the answer either: an example of this point is that the Indian Point Energy Center creates the same amount of energy produced by 385 square-miles of wind turbines.

Ultimately we need to decide, how safe is nuclear energy, and what are the costs and benefits. Well first, the benefits. A small amount of uranium, smaller then a baseball, is equivalent to a 5 story buildings worth of gasoline. France is a prime example for the effectiveness of Nuclear energy, getting over ¾ of its energy from nuclear power. On issues of safety, the U.S. Navy’s shows critics an accident-free record in powering its 80 ships for over 5,400 reactor years without emitting any greenhouse gases.

On issues of safe removal and storage of nuclear waste, I would steer you to research Yucca Mountain and it’s approved capacity to store the pellet-form of waste in a safe manner away from civilization. Ultimately, the times they are a-changin’, France is peddling its Nuclear capabilities to other countries and stands to win big contracts and political capital all why we pay our homage to OPEC and a technology of the past. Times they are a-changin’; but are we?

Sources:
http://www.nei.org/
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/uranium.html
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j9kbCdss47gaPin6xZeeLKqBXnLg
http://www.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power.htm
http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

There is no doubt that nuclear energy has been very beneficial to our society. Through this technology we have been able to decrease our dependence on foreign oil by about 12 billion dollars a year, and we aren’t releasing as much green house gas into our atmosphere. It’s also true that uranium goes a lot further in use than that of oil, coal or any other fuel that is used for making energy. If the information stopped there, deciding whether or not to use nuclear energy would be a “no brainer.” Unfortunately that’s not the case.

There are a few problems when using nuclear energy. The first being the waste it produces. What do you do with literally tons of nuclear waste? Nuclear waste remains toxic for thousands of years. Most of the plutonic waste is being stored in underground and water-filled basins or containment centers. Just because this method is seen as the safest way to store nuclear waste, does not make it safe. I would hate to think what could happen if this waste got in the wrong hands.

Another alarming issue with nuclear energy is the overall safety inside the plants while producing the energy. On March 28th, 1979 the plant located on Three Mile Island, PN experienced a partial meltdown. Nuclear emissions were released into the air when multiple safety features such as bypass valves failed to fully activate. It appears that the fallout was minimal but the problem is still relevant. There is no doubt that we as a country have learned a lot from this experience, but with that being said nuclear energy is far from perfect. We need to decide once and for all if the reward is worth the risk. Is energy more important than human life itself? We should be spending our efforts finding and creating safer and more natural energy.

Sources:
http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_6424
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/nuclear.htm
http://www.etsu.edu/writing/3120f99/zctb3/nuclear2.htm
http://www.solcomhouse.com/nuclear.htm

Education

posts >> bradley > edward

_________________________________________________________

Bradley

What do you want to be when you grow up? This question is commonplace in schools across the United States and it is being asked of students at an increasingly younger age. It is expected of our youth to have a solid handle of what they would like to make of themselves in this short life of ours. The typical answers we’ve all heard before: astronaut, fireman, doctor, pro athlete. But as a student advances through the grades and into the final years of high school, that same question rears its head. This time with a bit of a twist. What to do about college, not to mention a subsequent career. If this student has not been taking AP courses in high school then they are already at somewhat of a disadvantage. Feeling unsure of the future, and a bit indifferent, this student may elect to enroll in a Jr college with the intent to complete the GE requirements at a relatively inexpensive rate. This student is unknowingly making a tradeoff that could possibly have profound effects. Many Jr colleges have classrooms that are overfilled with both students and apathetic mindsets. This does not always create the best learning environment for the student. After a few semesters of average grades, the student may even begin to wonder what they are doing with themselves. Would it have been worth it to pay a little or a lot extra in order to have a different college experience and education? Obviously the choice is case specific, but it seems as if Jr colleges have become the default of many new high school graduates. I’m definitely not suggesting attending a college or university because of its name, but there is something to be said about the quality of the human products of a quality collegiate educational institution.

_________________________________________________________

Edward

Education is the most important aspect of building a strong society. It is the golden ticket for the well off and the down trodden alike. If you stay in school and earn a college degree, regardless of your families history you can provide a better life for yourself and your family.

So when we talk about the failure of public education we are talking about the failure of our society. Education is the foundation up which everything else is built. When we fail to educate we fail at the only important thing we have to accomplish.

This is no clearer than in our urban high schools and our community colleges. Statistics recently released in a study, published by USA Today find, “Fourteen urban school districts have on-time graduation rates lower than 50%; they
include Detroit, Baltimore, New York, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Los Angeles, Miami, Dallas, Denver and Houston.”

As to our community college system, while there are many reasons to attend a two year university, (too many of them to get into in one post) one of their primary functions is to transfer students to a four year university. At this task we are failing as well.

(click to enlarge)

Citing the report, Community College Transfer Rates to 4-year Institutions Using Alternative Definitions of Transfer, we are struggling to transfer half of our community college students to four year colleges and Universities.
Couple this with the graduation rates in our major urban areas and we get a grim picture of affordable public education and its success in our society.

Gas Prices

posts >> Edward > William

_________________________________________________________

Edward

As we continue to slide, or freefall, into a recession our dollar doesn’t seem buy what it once did. Food prices are on the rise across the world, and so to are fuel prices—and on top of that our wages are staying they same, which means in the end we are giving ground. All this would seem to be repudiation of deregulated industries and markets in favor of government assistance as times get tough.

But, I argue, even in the face such problems the hands-off approach is best. Now is not the time to regulate industries heavily or cap prices. No where is this harder to do than with gasoline. We are paying more in both percentage of our incomes and in sheer numbers than we ever have before for unleaded gas. Even so, government should not step in and control prices with a cap or subsidy.

Such a measure would be short-sighted and would not address basic concerns. Instead, consumer will/should make difficult lifestyle choices based on inconvenient fuel prices. Only when consumers stop purchasing gas at the same rate, or when they start making alternative choices, will the political/corporate will arise to change the way we travel.

If we put off these inevitable changes with some band aid measure they will only be more difficult to face in the future. There is never a good time to deal with the transition from gas cars to alternative fuels or from natural gas to wind energy—or from coal to nuclear. But lest we do it now, we may very well wait until it is too late. The best way to induce these changes is to disincentivize wasteful habits, high gas prices surely do that.

_________________________________________________________

William

Gas prices are outrageous and the government has a mandate to do something about it. Let me bring you back to a little episode in history aptly named the Boston Tea Party. I submit that as American’s with affinities for cheap goods of all kinds, we will likely revolt before we cut back consumption.

We demand cheap tea, and oil, (and cake), of which we will drink, deplete and eat! Though not perfect, there are a few very analogous points between tBTP (the Boston Tea Party) and UOP (unreasonable oil prices). One is that we are completely underrepresented in the pricing of oil (a side note: I realize we have contributed 10-15% of the price of gas by voting for taxes, but when the price of crude oil barrels doubles in the last 8 months, forget the 50 cents that pave roads). In the same way, Americans were not represented when the British (instead of OPEC, Canada, BP and the future market traders) were undermining good old fashioned, smuggled, colonial tea by basically subsidizing a British tea company.

Now when it comes to oil, we (the joe-shmow making it with an SUV, 2.5 kids and a little bit of debt) are indeed snobbishly and foolishly consuming at a rate that only drives up the price, unwilling to change our lifestyle to decrease it. We buy it like addicts of crack with nothing stronger then complaints about the pricing. The only reason we do such, is because we have no alternative. We are given our crack-oil and not even our escapades in Iraq have increased our ability to affect the price.

When those with a monopoly on a commodity set the price and inflate it so plainly over such a short period of time, it is exploitation of our addiction. Our government has a right to protect its consumers just like it does its farmers. And it is in its interest to do so, because it will keep its culture of consumers spending and fueling economy and industry.

So what will we do ultimately in the face of oil-tyranny? We will either invade Iran, or whomever else, until we find this oil revenue that Bush claimed would fund the cost of war, drill Alaska, or dump it all straight into the harbor of OPEC countries and Canada – Boston Tea Party style.

Taxes, Taxes, Taxes

 

posts >> publuis > nikolai

_________________________________________________________

Publuis

It is important to understand the concept of money as a foundation to build tax structures. Currency is a value store. It is exchangeable at a given rate for a good or a service. A dollar then is nothing more than a potential good or service. With more dollars you have the potential to acquire more goods or services. Fundamentally important to this exchange is the actual value of money. How many goods or services it is worth? In these terms wealth is measured in possibilities or potential, not in the actual stockpile. Or put in other terms, money lost is opportunity lost, so a lot of money lost is lots of opportunity lost. Or lastly, if money loses value against the worth of goods and services opportunities for commerce are lost.

For example, in Russia during Soviet rule money’s value declined against actual goods and services. Therefore a consumer needed more money to buy the same good compared to its actual worth. Money lost value.

Therefore, taxation needs to adequately manage a nation’s revenue as well as maintain consumer purchasing power. If a majority of the tax burden is focused on those individuals with concentrated wealth, then the overall ability for the exchange of money for goods and services is limited. So to facilitate more robust spending, and in turn economic growth, sound tax policy is to reduce taxation on those who have the most purchasing power. To compensate for the reduction in tax revenue government spending must be tied to income, or the pay-as-you-go model. This can be done by cutting non essential government programs or shifting them to private sector services.

The notion that good tax policy is taking away wealth from those who have the ability to exchange their money for the goods and services that provide jobs is baseless. Rather, the wealthy need to retain a larger portion of their income so that they can in turn spend or save it. This will keep the value of the dollar high, and our economy moving forward.

_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

One of the most heated debates between the Democratic and the Republican parties is tax structure. When you take out the fancy words and phrases you’re left with two choices; raise taxes, or lower them. If we looked at those two options just as they are simply presented we’d be fools to think that raising taxes is the better option. Who wants to pay MORE money to the government? The answer is nobody. However, it’s not as simple as raising or lowering taxes. Think about what taxes pay for. Most if not all of the things it pays for are necessary to the lives we live today.

The Sixteenth Amendment in the US Constitution states, “The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” As much as we do not enjoy paying taxes, they are a must. I believe that those who make more money should have to pay a higher percentage of tax. The wealthy are able to afford to pay more taxes than the working poor, or working middle class. An argument can me made saying that the richest people should be paying less taxes because they are responsible for more of the spending which in return boosts the economy. This is true but unfortunately it will not solve America’s debt problem. There may not be a short term or even a long term solution to paying off our country’s debt, but raising taxes seems to be a step in the right direction… unless of course Visa is willing to offer us a credit limit of 3 trillion dollars with a low fixed rate!

Abstinence and Sex Education

posts >> nikolai > bradley > publuis > william

_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

For years there has been a battle between schools and organizations over what type of “Sex E.d.” should be taught in schools if any. They cover both ends of the spectrum challenging the sides of abstinence vs. safe sex. Why can’t we have both? A more comprehensive curriculum is the way our school systems should be teaching about sex. However, abstinence needs to be at the top of the priority list. Not because of religious or moral beliefs, but rather because science has proven that abstinence is the only 100% way to prevent unwanted pregnancy as well as sexually transmitted diseases. The schools that are not teaching this form of abstinence are missing the mark and are robbing our children of the truth in sex education.

When it comes down to it each student is going to decide for themselves whether or not to engage in sexual intercourse while in high school. Parental advice and school curriculum might influence the student but ultimately they will make that decision on their own. Because of this schools should be required to teach how to practice safe sex. Schools should also take more time teaching about sex in the classrooms. Programs can be extremely rushed; spending less than 2 weeks on the subject in some cases. In today’s world sex is becoming more of an issue at an earlier age for our children. It’s time our schools started doing everything in their power to educate their students.

_________________________________________________________

Bradley

I think (assume) most of us can agree that teaching one viewpoint on a subject can often leave out beneficial bits of information. In the case of sex education in public schools, there is a disservice being done to our nation’s youth. Many schools currently teach the standard sex ed course, and leave it at that, without any mention of something that can prevent hardship later in life. Abstinence is the only way to be sure that you’ll not contract an STD or become pregnant. Why isn’t something that makes so much sense taught more consistently across the U.S.? Seems like a no-brainer right?
Now, of course I’m not saying I want an abstinence only lesson plan, but rather a so called “comprehensive” sex education plan. Basically, it’s the best of both worlds. Students can obtain the knowledge of their physiology and how contraception works, and also be presented with the concept that simply waiting until you’re married can solve a whole host of problems before they happen.
Let’s face this sad reality. Teens are having sex whether or not they receive any sort of sex ed class. In preparation for this post I read a few different research articles and was shocked to read that the age many teens begin their sexual activity at age 15. Some 25% of 15 year old girls have had sex along with about 50% of 17 year old girls. W-O-W.
Now, of course the question of “Where is the parental responsibility?” can and should be asked, but it’s a sort of “Pandora’s Box” question and worthy of its own discussion.
Our teens need to be informed, and they need to know that it is absolutely ok and actually preferred to abstain from sex until marriage.

_________________________________________________________

Publuis

There are basic truths in life, which bring with them basic responsibilities. For example, sexual intercourse is requisite for reproduction and to, an extent, a romantic relationship with the opposite gender. The responsibility attached to that truth is not as straightforward. Many believe the responsibility of intercourse is waiting until marriage to engage in sex, and to do so with a single partner. Still, others believe the responsibility of intercourse is to have “safe” sex whenever it is you choose to have it.

While abstaining from intercourse until marriage is the only full-proof method to ensure safe sex, it is the least popular method. People as young as 15 are choosing to have sex, and by 17 there are as many people having sex as aren’t.
Another truth is public education teaches sex education. The responsibility attached to that truth in my view is to ensure the highest percentage of students engaging in “safe” sex. Abstinence should not be left out sex ed. programs–as it is the best safe sex method– more energy should be put into educating the already sexually active.

The reality is people are choosing to have intercourse at a young age, the public health risks related are huge. Unwanted teen pregnancies are directly related to abortions, adoptions, and general strain on social services and public health outlets. Statistics on this subject do not bear out much clarity other than students are having sex. Effectiveness of “safe” sex education versus abstinence-only versus comprehensive sex ed. is almost impossible to determine. What is possible is equipping the sexually active with education to have “safe” sex.

_________________________________________________________

William

The fact of the matter is that abstinence is not a singularly religious doctrine. It is, however, the number one, scientifically proven method to prevent teen pregnancy, HIV infection, and the startling rates of STD’s. I realize that the religious right, mainly conservative, evangelical Christians, have hijacked this issue and helped create outlandish polarization akin to that seen with abortion. In reality, however, it is far more absurd to assert that abstinence has no place in the schools, then to fight for its inclusion among a non-preventative curriculum of sex education.

First of all, do not let anyone sell you on an idea that parents are ultimately responsible and the school has no business teaching abstinence. If that is true, the schools have no business giving sex education – and you might make the same argument about math and science too. We can all agree that there is a problem when 1/4th of 15-year-olds have had sex and by the age of 18 it jumps to 50%. When teen pregnancy endangers future education, life choices, and career choices, the schools have a responsibility to inform students of the risks and the options when it comes to sex; as an educational institution, they have a mandate. Abstinence is a verified option, available to all, religious or not, that may or not be given as an acceptable choice by parents or peers.

Thankfully a majority of schools (60+%) practice comprehensive sex education (a mixture of abstinence education with curriculum aimed at the sexual active). I do not believe abstinence only is a responsible educational choice considering the activity levels of so many young teens. The needs of our current crisis warrant a comprehensive sex education that is truly comprehensive – from curriculum to scope. We aught to talk more often, starting younger, and work especially on educating parents to help them become more positively involved in that aspect of their child’s education and life.

The Here and Now

posts >> publuis > william > nikolai > bradley

_________________________________________________________

Publuis

October 24, 1648 is relevant once again this week. The Treaty of Westphalia, the primordial formation of the nation-state, has come to its maturity in Kosovo. The region, which has been ruled since the N.A.T.O. involvement of the late 1990’s by the United Nations, became an independent nation on Sunday February 17, 2008.
Kosovo is the cultural center of Serbian society but is predominately inhabited by ethnic Albanians, whom Serbians loath. Tensions reached their climax under Slobodan Milošević, President of Serbia from 1989-1997. Milošević undertook a campaign of ethnic cleansing and genocide to rid Serbia of ethnic Albanians and Muslims centered in Kosovo. This lead to the systematic killing of tens of thousands of people.

It has been a long road for Kosovo, through many unwanted circumstances, in the end though this is the only acceptable solution. I commend the Untied States, France, Great Britian and Australia for recognizing Kosovo diplomatically immediately. Surly, this does not spell the end of conflict in Kosovo, it may simply open a new chapter, nonetheless, now Kosovo is equipped to handle its problems on its own.
America needs to strongly support this new state. In the coming years Kosovo’s legitimacy will be challenged by countries like Spain and Russia who have their own problems with separatist groups, America and others through diplomacy must uphold the right of Kosovo to exist, and if needed call on N.A.T.O to once again come to its defense.

_________________________________________________________

William

Black history month is a time to reflect on the accomplishments and contributions of an important group in United States history. Africans first arrived in Virginia, as slaves, just under 400 years ago. Since that time we have seen incredible change in the world and within the United States. Sweeping policy changes towards African Americans included their right to vote, own land and be free. Cultural changes were seen through sports and pioneering athletes such as Jesse Owens and Jackie Robinson who helped turn popular sentiment away from racism. Also, many incredible contributions were made by African Americans to the U.S. by the likes of scientists Benjamin Banneker and George Washington Carver, as well as inventors like Thomas Jennings. And while the changes have been significant, seeing a move from slavery to our first black Secretary of State in 2001, and a prospective presidential nominee in Barack Obama, those changes have also come slowly – to the tune of hundreds of years.

Enough can not be said, or be known, by we the people four-hundred years after participating in a slavery system of exploitation that to this day has not fully ended even with major strides during the Civil Rights era. The legacy of slavery is seen in statistics like this one: By the late 1990’s, black families were earning 62 percent of the median family income of whites. Our history and legacy demand that we counteract the years of unjust systems, unfair policies, and physically harmful social environments. One small way is through recognition for the struggle and contributions of African Americans. Black History Month is a month of remembrance and affirmation by a country that did much to damage the lives of our African American ancestors with effects that are still seen today.

Interesting online looks at Black History: (also content sources)
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/bhm1.html
http://www.history.com/minisites/blackhistory/
_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

Touch Friendly

The Japanese have done it again. They have come up with a form of technology that could revolutionize how we live our day-to-day lives. Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corp (NTT) will be releasing a special card that employees will carry in order to enter buildings. You might be asking yourselves, “Hasn’t this technology existed for years?” Here’s the twist: You can carry the card anywhere on your body, pockets, purse, shoes, etc. and never have to take it out. No more swiping, no more scanning. The doors will now open by touch. Your body will be used as a bridge for transmitting data. NTT reports this is just the beginning in touch technology. Engineers say that we could be seeing this technology used in cars, security systems, medicine, air travel, and even the way financial transactions are handled.

It’s a wonder how the world will change if this type of technology keeps advancing. Let’s not forget that we already have similar technology available. Recently Visa and MasterCard revealed their “Pay Wave” and “Pay Pass” programs where card holders are able to purchase items without ever showing their card to the cashier. This is done without any type of I.D. check. It seems to me that with this technology, we will face a whole slew of personal security issues. Fraud, break-ins, and identity theft are just a few problems we could face. With criminals being as intelligent and conniving as they are, there’s no telling what could happen. It will be a sad day when comfort outweighs our safety and security.

For more info, see: http://www.physorg.com/news122793751.html

_________________________________________________________

Bradley

An admittedly very short comment on the science of astronomy.
It seems like just yesterday when Galileo was under house arrest for his astronomical beliefs. Look at how far we’ve come. We’re now able to tell when galaxies screw with the light coming from other far distant galaxies. Now this may seem like a trivial thing to study, and well, I think it is. I’m not sure who’s getting paid the big bucks for this study, or why they think humankind needs this information, but I think there are some issues here on earth that should be taking a precedent over topics like this.

For more, see: http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/02/21/galaxy-hubble-stars.html

Immigration

posts >> publuis > william > nikolai > bradley

_________________________________________________________

Publuis

There are two essential functions of a sovereign nation; (1) the rule of law and (2) established borders. No person foreign or domestic can be beyond reproach of the law. In addition without enforcement laws provide only guidelines. Clearly defining where legal jurisdiction extends is equally necessary. Without laws or borders no government, of any kind, can employ sovereign order. Consequently, illegal immigration calls into question these basic principals.

When an immigrant crosses an established border illegally (s)he challenges the fundamental pillars on which a nation is built. Its laws are called into action and its continuity is compromised. There exist established avenues for legal immigration, for myriad reasons. Legal migration upholds the rule of law and border continuity.
Therefore, migrants who break the established law and compromise borders should be held in account for their actions. Moreover, those who have evaded enforcement of established law need to be rooted-out and accountable also. Enforcing immigration law is not about xenophobia or elitism. Rather it is paramount to preserving a nation as such.

Deportation of those currently living illegally within a nation’s border is not a sound solution, neither is jailing them. Instead, holding them accountable to the law through financial penalty, forfeiture of certain privileges and or a probationary period under the supervision of law enforcement are better solutions.

Equally, strategies to reinforce the integrity of a nation’s border must be implemented while at the same time prosecuting law breakers. It is not enough to build a wall of deterrence.
_________________________________________________________

William

It wasn’t that long ago that the first immigrants to America, fleeing religious persecution, landed in Plymouth. In fact the larger part of 400 years of American immigration policy have consisted of merely proving identity within a greater context of expanding borders. The French summed up what was the American immigration policy when they wrote on the Statue of Liberty: “give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free…”

Until recently, it was recognized that the U.S. was a society of immigrants. But those days are largely gone as our borders are now fixed and quotas along with application processes establish who may and may not enter. Over the last few hundred years, the main influx of immigrants braved harsh conditions to escape deplorable conditions in their respective homelands. From the potato famine to dismal Latin American economies (of which we’ve had a hand), the search for opportunity in America has come at a great social and personal price – even costing some their lives.

Our current immigration predicament is important to see in light of its historical context. Our borders have not been well enforced, and too often have we looked the other way when in need of crop pickers. The solution aught to be a mix of grace and truth. Grace extended in the form of guest worker programs or a road to amnesty for those who are already here. And truth in stronger borders and penalties paid for illegal entry. If those two things were to happen, subjects like drivers’ licenses, social service strain and unpaid taxes wouldn’t continue to be issues. We have a responsibility to these people in light of our history, our own culpability, and our proclaimed motto.
_________________________________________________________

Nikolai

In 1918 Theodore Roosevelt said, “Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or leave the country.” It’s become apparent that illegal immigration is a major issue in the upcoming presidential election. All of the candidates believe there needs to be a better way of protecting our borders. What to do with those already here and what to do with the current process of making immigration legal is where the difference lies. Some say that illegal immigrants should be allowed complete amnesty, and others believe in immediate deportation.

Action needs to be taken regardless of how the immigrants end up in our country. I agree with President Theodore Roosevelt’s quote saying immigrants should be required to learn our native language. If they’re looking to call the United States their home, then they should be making the extra effort to complete the naturalization process as quickly as possible. I also believe that the government should be aiding as much as they can. Providing either free or affordable education for the immigrants is one way of achieving this. How are we expecting immigrants to learn our language and history if nobody is there to help them along the way? Immigrants should be given the same rights and responsibilities as birth citizens. They also need to take the bad with the good, i.e. be held accountable to our laws and pay taxes! To most countries around the world the United States is known to be the land of opportunity. Its time we started acting like it.

_________________________________________________________

Bradley

So, what ever happened to personal responsibility?!

EGO sum conscius lex, tamen EGO sum sumo ut effrego is usquam. It’s Latin, yeah I went there again. In English it translates to, “I am aware of the law, but I am choosing to break it anyway.” Think about it. Take it in. Swish it around. Gargle it. Spit it out. Then take another drink.

Let’s say I wanted to go to Russia, because that’s where all the good begging jobs are. I couldn’t just hop on a plane or boat and simply arrive in the mother land; there are certain protocols that need to be followed that are set up for a reason. (mostly so I don’t get myself owned by the KGB) The same is also true for those that want to come to The U.S. If one makes the transition legally, it will absolutely pay off for all parties involved. The U.S. gov’t will get it’s taxes and the parent won’t be deported and ripped away from their 5 year old.

Of course I’m aware that there are already thousands of illegal aliens here in the states and our economy “relies” on them. But this most certainly does not excuse the fact that they are here illegally. Meaning, against the law.

The United States needs to crack down on employers who hire these aliens, and penalize them for breaking the law. The U.S. should also provide a very strict, zero tolerance path to citizenship. Clear guidelines for the aliens to follow and qualifications they need to meet, or be deported. Amnesty would be saying, “Our laws mean nothing, do as you please.” (then again, laws are only made valid by those that follow them)

So give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses, but let’s do this legally.