Is This a True Necessity?

While I was out to lunch with my brother and dad today, I noticed my dad checked his email, updated his business schedule, and let my brother play a game of solitaire all on his phone. I started to think whether or not the ability to do all of this and more on a phone is a good thing. I’m sure the ability to check your email has made life easier for people, but is it really a necessity? I remember when my mom got a new phone over the summer; I had to teach her how to just find the phone book because there were so many other applications. It seems like this ‘advancement’ has just made our life more complicated. I thought that Thoreau said it well, “Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity! I say, let your affairs be as two or three, and not a hundred or a thousand” (Thoreau 73). I thought that this was the problem with new phones; they can do a hundred different things when all you need them to do it two or three. I figured I wasn’t the only one who had noticed this, so I looked it up on the internet and found an interesting article. The writer agreed with me, and even connected the complicating phones to new calculators that are out. Concerning a calculator, she asked an interesting question, “how did we manage to take the same classes in school without all this technology?” I think the fact that 25 years ago, students were able to learn the same thing that we learn today even though we have these $150 calculators proves that maybe they aren’t progress. I mean we had to spend the first week of school learning how to use the new, ‘improved’ calculators. Is that really worth it? Although I have to admit these new phones and calculators have at times made my life easier, overall, they just complicate our lives.

Is Getting Accepted the Most Important Goal?

In class today, we discussed an article from the New York Times about how the first well renowned public high school in the country stopped offering AP courses. Scarsdale, a school in Scarsdale, New York, dropped the AP classes and created a class called advanced topics (AT), which covered less material, but in more depth. This class still offered the AP exam, but made it optional. I was interested by this, and when I got home, I looked up the article online. I thought it was very interesting to see the students’ reaction to the change in courses. The article stated that most students “praised” the elimination of AP courses. I was surprised by this, because I believe looking in on it, one would think it’s a great idea because you’re not learning just to pass a test, you’re learning to learn. Many believe that is the way learning should be. But when it comes down to your own future, I believe people do what is best for them, which is learning in order to pass the test. That obviously isn’t the strategy at Scarsdale, which is why I thought it was interesting to see that the students are supportive of the change. When reading this article, I couldn’t help but think; would Thoreau support this change? The idea of going more into depth of fewer subjects is what made me believe that Thoreau would be supportive of this change. The AT class goes into more depth, which doesn’t let them cover all the material on the AP test, but the students get a better understanding of what they learn. When Thoreau said, “I say let your affairs be as two or three, and not a hundred or a thousand.” (Thoreau 73). In this quote, I believe Thoreau is saying, it is better to do less than more, because when you do less you are able to care about what you do. That is the exact reason Scarsdale changed their AP classes to AT, so they were able to move at a slower pace and learn to have a passion for what they were being taught. I thought it was very interesting how this article related to how we discussed whether or not New Trier should have eliminated its 5 level courses, and how some of the ideas Thoreau spoke of were seen in the reason for changing Scarsdale’s AP classes.

Improvements?

While browsing the internet, I found an interesting article from the New York Times web site. Although we are done studying the Great Depression, I still thought it would be worthwhile to write a blog on how similar the topics discussed in this article were to events taking place during the Great Depression’s time period. This article talks about the public works plan Obama looks to put into effect once he takes office in January. Americans’ have lost 2 million jobs in the past year, very similar to the time period surrounding the Great Depression. Once Obama takes office, he will put into effect a work plan that will create jobs for the middle class. This is very similar to the Great Depression, when FDR created the New Deal to create jobs for the unemployed. The only difference is that the jobs Obama is creating are new-era jobs, such as expanding broadband internet access and making buildings more energy efficient while FDR built highways and railroads. I thought this was very interesting how we have progressed to our improvements consisting of twenty-first century technology. It is thought if he can succeed in advancing our nation in such a way, it will be a major advantage for the United States in the global economy. This made me think about our unit’s topic of ‘Progress?’ I thought that these improvements would be considered progress because it gives the nation an extreme advantage in global economy, which is a major part of how our nation operates.

Advancement or Not?

While I was on my home page today, I saw an interesting article titled, No email soon for web- savvy Obama? Interested in why he will not have an email, I clicked on the link. The article went into depth about how Obama will most likely have to lose his beloved blackberry once he takes office. Once I got a couple paragraphs into the article, I realized how much it related to the discussion we had in class on Wednesday. As the article progresses, it talks about how Obama is inseparable from his blackberry because it lets him stay connected with his acquaintances via email. And because of security measures, Obama will have to lose the cell phone once he takes office. This made me think back to our discussion on whether technology advancements that spurred in the last decade are good or bad. I thought that this article showed a little bit of both sides of the argument. Many people believe the advances are great because of the ability to communicate easily through email. But the internet also causes many security risks. Identify theft has sky rocketed since the internet has became popular. The article addressed a form of this risk, people hacking into Obama’s email and sending emails that could cause controversy. The Presidential Records Act would make this very harmful because it makes emails that the president sends available to the media. This would create a huge controversy if a hacker was able to hack into Obama’s personal email on his phone and send suspicious emails. Any false information about the stock market that would scare the buyers into selling is the last thing this country needs right now. I believe with every advancement comes a setback. The internet and email show the great progress this world has made, but it is impossible for it to come without a negative aspect, and this just happens to be it.

Just a Speculation?

While talking to my dad a couple days ago, he brought up how much the stock market has dropped from Tuesday (when Obama was elected president) to Thursday. My dad thought it could have possibly been because Obama’s economic plans don’t favor big businesses. Investors know this, and if they think the businesses will falter because of this, they will sell their stocks. I wondered if this was the real reason why the stock market’s 1,000 point crash, the worst in a two day period since 1987, happened. I found a very interesting article that discussed speculations of the stock market’s crash linked to Obama. The article gives quotes and video clippings of people discussing their beliefs that the stock market crash is directly linked to Obama. One quote, from Fred Barnes, summarized my dad’s feeling exactly, “We have seen the stock market go down over 800 points the last two days. There is great uncertainty out there about [Obama’s] policies.” The validity of this statement was exactly what I was wondering. But the last paragraph of the article answered my question. It said that “the recent market plunge has absolutely nothing to do with Obama”. It used New York Times as support, “There were no clear catalysts that spurred the sell-off”. I was pleased to read this, because I was excited and happy to see Obama elected president. I thought it was interesting how Obama is already being the scapegoat for issues in our nation, though he isn’t even the president yet. This event made me wonder if it is foreshadowing how critics and news reporters will treat Obama in the four years to come.

True Promises?

Tonight at the dinner table, the topic of discussion was appropriately the election, seeing how America voted for a new president today. I was asking who my parents voted for and why they chose that candidate, which led to the topic of candidates positions on certain issues. After talking about Obama’s and McCain’s position on certain issues, I asked my parents how realistic they thought these plans were. My dad made a very interesting point about how he thinks that many of the tax and economic plans will get “watered down” because of the checks and balances that take place in our government. He thought that any plan would be leveled out because of the fairly even split in Congress. I thought it was interesting how closely related this comment was to what we have been discussing in class the past week. Last week we went over the Constitution of the United States, and discussed the checks and balances in the United States. For a bill to pass, it must receive 2/3 the vote in both houses. If a bill favors one party’s ideas more than another, it would be hard for the bill to get passed. This is why the bills would have to get “watered down” in order to be put in effect. Both my parents thought that their economic and tax plans were very idealistic because the bill they proposed would be modified and redrafted in order to get passed through congress. The chance that the final bill will be similar to what they propose is very slim. Overall, I thought it was interesting how much my dinner conversation related to what we’ve been discussing in class.

Is a 'Guarantee' Really Guaranteed?

While I was on my home page, I saw a headline that said, “McCain ‘guarantees’ Election Day victory in close race”. The first thought that came to my head was how optimistic that statement was. Being curious, I clicked on the link, and it brought me to the article. During Sundays interview with “Meet the Press” on NBC, McCain discussed his chances of winning the presidential race, which has become surprisingly close after Obama’s 12 point lead as late as Thursday. McCain said that “We’re going to do well in this campaign…we’re going to win it, and it’s going to be tight”. His headlining, and most optimistic quote, thought, was that McCain can “guarantee” a win on November 4th (Election Day). I was stunned by how bold and idealistic these statements were. Polls have showed that McCain has decreased his deficit to 5 points, a major change from Thursday’s polls, which showed him 12 percentage points behind. This gaining ground is thought to be due from McCain’s focus on the economy recently. Nonetheless, the polls still show that McCain is LOOSING! I believe he is in no position to discuss how he will win what he believes to be a close presidential race. Personally, I think he should focus on making the polls a little closer before he brags about how is believes he is going to win. I also wonder how McCain’s supporters feel after McCain has “guaranteed” them a victory. And will they would feel lied to if McCain ends up losing the presidential race. Although it’s good to be optimistic and have dreams, sometimes you have to know what dreams to keep to yourself, that way you won’t be letting so many people down if you fail to fulfill your dreams.