Victoria- I completely agree with your blog regarding finance. We are constantly spending money and it in a sense has become somewhat a part of our nature. You did a good job of explaining finance and how it is becoming more and more important in everyday society. Moving on to your next blog, I think you brought up a lot of valid points. Deciding whether we should have less government is definite political stance. Also, I agree that there should be laws limiting the type of Cryptography. Good job!!!!
Megan- I enjoyed reading both of your blogs. They were very informative and flowed nicely. You explained valid points in regards to finance and did a good job of explaining the historical aspect of it. I especially liked your response to the discussion of government. You did an excellent job of informing the reader of the issue at hand but also incorporated your own views and I loved your stance on the two party system. Great job!!!!
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Thursday, November 12, 2009
The New Science of Finance
If randomly asked to define the term finance, my guess is that most of us would simply say “money”. We often associate any type of finances with money either being borrowed or spent. Although part of this is true, “The New Science of Finance” written by Don Chance and Pamela Peterson, explains finance as an actual science. In their article they define finance as “the study of how money is acquired and invested” (447). They continue by saying that although we are just now acknowledging finance as a “recognized academic discipline, it roots go back centuries. From the days when bankers were called money changers, financiers have had to perform tricky computations, borrowing frequently from higher mathematics” (447).
The idea of finance originally emerged as a result of World War II and has since “evolved into a critically important pursuit, as evidenced by the influence it has had on so many people and institutions” (447). Since then finance has experienced social, economic, and technological changes that allowed such practitioners of finance to develop themselves. Being largely associated with risk, finance is combined with scientific characteristics. “With the advances in computers and the development of increasingly powerful statistical techniques, finance has become a truly empirical science, demanding that its various experiments be as objective, accurate and repeatable as those in particle physics or microbiology ” (447). From an economic stand point, “economists studying finance have taken the body of knowledge about how human beings behave when faced with uncertainty and translated into mathematical descriptions of the way people obtain and invest funds” (447). As a result finance has developed into much more than producing money. It is now seen as a science or academic study. It involves not only numbers but scientific and behavioral aspect of how people invest, spend and react to money
The idea of finance originally emerged as a result of World War II and has since “evolved into a critically important pursuit, as evidenced by the influence it has had on so many people and institutions” (447). Since then finance has experienced social, economic, and technological changes that allowed such practitioners of finance to develop themselves. Being largely associated with risk, finance is combined with scientific characteristics. “With the advances in computers and the development of increasingly powerful statistical techniques, finance has become a truly empirical science, demanding that its various experiments be as objective, accurate and repeatable as those in particle physics or microbiology ” (447). From an economic stand point, “economists studying finance have taken the body of knowledge about how human beings behave when faced with uncertainty and translated into mathematical descriptions of the way people obtain and invest funds” (447). As a result finance has developed into much more than producing money. It is now seen as a science or academic study. It involves not only numbers but scientific and behavioral aspect of how people invest, spend and react to money
Monday, November 9, 2009
Week 11 Blog Reviews
Victoria – Both of your blogs from last week were great. You provided good detail when you discussed Italian immigration. Your blog was informative and interesting and I loved how you were able to write about your grandmother’s response to this issue. I also liked your thoughts on materialism. You made exceptional points by stating that materialism is really on a individual basis because what might be viewed as a material thing to someone may be different to another. Great job!!!!
Megan – Your blog on the issue of immigrant workers was great!!! You really did your research and provided your reader with incredible detail. I liked that you discussed the Irish and everything they brought t o America. Your materialism blog was just as good. You brought up points referring to the countries debt as well as how we define others by what they have. I liked that you summarized your overall idea by concluding that we need to find a happy balance between having things and depending on them. Great job!!!!
Directed Free write –
For centuries the role of government has been a constant debate. There are those who view our system of government as a necessary part of life and are convinced that without it our society will cease to exist. On the other hand, there are those, like Sameer Parekh who is identified as a “libertarian of a new sort” (435). Using what is known as cryptography or “the science of scrambling messages so they cannot be read by prying eyes” (435), Sameer attempts to challenge Washington’s authority. “For the libertarian set, today’s encryption technology is the best thing to come along since the right to bear arms” (437). This libertarian thinking involves the idea that with cryptography, there is no paper trail. “Bad news, of course, for the Internal Revenue Service and its 3,570 page maze of a tax code” (437). Libertarians, such as Sameer, are thrilled that they have managed to hide from big brother and that they have the freedom to operate without paying the U.S its cut.
Bottom line, people like Sameer Parekh see the government as an intrusive hassle. They want citizens of the U.S to truly be free from the strains of the system and think “all government control should be stripped away” (443). But like any controversy, there is another side to this argument. Some argue that government is the only way to maintain society. With government comes rules and with that comes the enforcement of these rules. So these same people proclaim that a society lacking government would consist of utter chaos. They feel that a system of government has been put into place to act as a protector of the people not to intrude on the lives of individuals.
Seeing as how I am currently taking a justice theory class, I found this article to be particularly interesting. A major issue constantly discussed among theories, is the concept of too much government. How much is too much? Where do we draw the line between the government serving a purpose and being a nuisance? It is my personal belief that we do need and always will need government. In order to maintain a sustainable atmosphere there must be a central power of some sort. People being able to go and do as they please would ultimately wreak havoc on everyone. It is human, more often than not to act responsible if there are consequences for our actions. Take away these consequences and you are left with a lot of problems.
Megan – Your blog on the issue of immigrant workers was great!!! You really did your research and provided your reader with incredible detail. I liked that you discussed the Irish and everything they brought t o America. Your materialism blog was just as good. You brought up points referring to the countries debt as well as how we define others by what they have. I liked that you summarized your overall idea by concluding that we need to find a happy balance between having things and depending on them. Great job!!!!
Directed Free write –
For centuries the role of government has been a constant debate. There are those who view our system of government as a necessary part of life and are convinced that without it our society will cease to exist. On the other hand, there are those, like Sameer Parekh who is identified as a “libertarian of a new sort” (435). Using what is known as cryptography or “the science of scrambling messages so they cannot be read by prying eyes” (435), Sameer attempts to challenge Washington’s authority. “For the libertarian set, today’s encryption technology is the best thing to come along since the right to bear arms” (437). This libertarian thinking involves the idea that with cryptography, there is no paper trail. “Bad news, of course, for the Internal Revenue Service and its 3,570 page maze of a tax code” (437). Libertarians, such as Sameer, are thrilled that they have managed to hide from big brother and that they have the freedom to operate without paying the U.S its cut.
Bottom line, people like Sameer Parekh see the government as an intrusive hassle. They want citizens of the U.S to truly be free from the strains of the system and think “all government control should be stripped away” (443). But like any controversy, there is another side to this argument. Some argue that government is the only way to maintain society. With government comes rules and with that comes the enforcement of these rules. So these same people proclaim that a society lacking government would consist of utter chaos. They feel that a system of government has been put into place to act as a protector of the people not to intrude on the lives of individuals.
Seeing as how I am currently taking a justice theory class, I found this article to be particularly interesting. A major issue constantly discussed among theories, is the concept of too much government. How much is too much? Where do we draw the line between the government serving a purpose and being a nuisance? It is my personal belief that we do need and always will need government. In order to maintain a sustainable atmosphere there must be a central power of some sort. People being able to go and do as they please would ultimately wreak havoc on everyone. It is human, more often than not to act responsible if there are consequences for our actions. Take away these consequences and you are left with a lot of problems.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
American Dream
In the article “Economics of Being Hispanic” the author describes the hardships of being a migrant worker in the U.S. he provides statistical evidence stating that “According to the U.S Department of Labor, median weekly earnings in 1988 for a full time worker 16 years of age or older were $572, or about $30,000 a year. The median for a Hispanic worker, in contrast, was $398, or about $21,000 per year” (421). He goes on to explain some of the factors that are currently harming Hispanic earnings, lack of education being a primary source. “And as improved living standards become more dependent on education and skills in an informative- base economy, immigrants (half of them Hispanic) are falling further and further behind” (422). The author sums up the article by proclaiming that despite people’s negative attitudes towards migrant workers, Hispanics are “actually a net revenue generator and not just a “fiscal burden”.
Another ethnic group that faces these economic controversies is Native Americans. Despite the fact that they have been pushed to reservations, people still often view them as a threat to the “American economy”. They feel they take jobs away from “American born citizens” by working for cheap labor and neglect to see the individuals who contribute to society. The reservations themselves generate jobs through the casinos and restaurants. Although these are just two groups of the immigrants mentioned, all ethnic groups face economic scrutiny at one point or another.
I feel the major issue associated with immigrant workers is that a lot of times they are treated as if they are illegal even when they are not. What people need to realize is that, when an immigrant worker is a legal citizen and they are paying taxes, they are contributing just the same as everyone else. It is ridiculous to blame the falling economy on immigrants, just because they are working cheaper. Instead we should look at the business owners who are paying illegal immigrants under the table in order to save money. I really enjoyed John Maggs article and felt he portrayed a real problem that particularly effects a western state such as Arizona.
Another ethnic group that faces these economic controversies is Native Americans. Despite the fact that they have been pushed to reservations, people still often view them as a threat to the “American economy”. They feel they take jobs away from “American born citizens” by working for cheap labor and neglect to see the individuals who contribute to society. The reservations themselves generate jobs through the casinos and restaurants. Although these are just two groups of the immigrants mentioned, all ethnic groups face economic scrutiny at one point or another.
I feel the major issue associated with immigrant workers is that a lot of times they are treated as if they are illegal even when they are not. What people need to realize is that, when an immigrant worker is a legal citizen and they are paying taxes, they are contributing just the same as everyone else. It is ridiculous to blame the falling economy on immigrants, just because they are working cheaper. Instead we should look at the business owners who are paying illegal immigrants under the table in order to save money. I really enjoyed John Maggs article and felt he portrayed a real problem that particularly effects a western state such as Arizona.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
WEEK 10 Blog
Megan- I really enjoyed your story about the awful cream. I can totally relate to being in high school and feeling uncomfortable in my own body. Your failed consumer product was really creative. In regards to your music blog, I loved how you mentioned the companies not being held responsible and being completely driven by money. You made excellent points about society buying into the idea of the empowering woman. Great job Megan!!!!
Victoria- I loved the title of your blog regarding the music lyrics. It was creative and very true. I liked how you talked about people having the choice whether or not to listen to lyrics that are insulting to women. Your story was just as great. I really enjoyed how you told it and really ejoyed how detailed it was. You have a great writing technique and I can’t wait to read more.
In his article, James Twitchell defines materialism as “the belief that one’s physical possessions constitute the greatest value in one’s life”. In his opinion materialism is nothing more than a human expression. He goes on to say that because it plays such an immense roll in our lives we should all accept it for what it is instead of associating it with negative connotations. He states “Of all the strange beasts that have come slouching into the 20th century, none has been more misunderstood, more criticized and more important than materialism….Yet the fact remains that while materialism may be the most shallow of the 20th century’s various-isms, it has been the one that has ultimately triumphed” (389).
Materialism as a whole has both positive and negative effects on American culture. On a positive note materialism represents our freedoms throughout society. “We live through things. We create ourselves through things. And we change ourselves by changing our things” (389). Another positive perspective is that “it frees us from the strictures of social class. The outcome of material life is no longer predetermined by coat of arms, pew seat, or trust fund. Instead it evolves from a never- ending shifting of individual choice” (396). Twitchell’s overall argument is that materialism allows us a source of happiness as well as gives us the liberty to express ourselves. He describes materialism as “liberating and democratic” (397). Buying a new car for instance doesn’t define us but it allows us freedom and enjoyment.
On the other hand many view materialism as negative and disastrous to American culture. Twitchell states that the belief of these people is that “Our commercial culture has been blamed for the rise of eating disorders, the spread of “affluenza”, the epidemic of depression, the despoliation of cultural icons, the corruption of politics, the carnivalization of holy times like Christmas, and the gnat-life attention span of our youth” (390). With materialistic ideas comes the clash of status and classes. If people have more things than us we see them as being better and if they have less with see them as being beneath us. Instead of seeing a person for who they are we label them dollar signs. These mentalities are negative effects on the American culture.
I disagree with James Twitchell. Although I am the first to admit I love my things, I do not think they define me in anyway. Materialism is a freedom to be enjoyed but people have taken this to a whole other level believing things like love, friendship, satisfaction and happiness can actually be purchased. We as a society need to find a happy medium between enjoying the stuff we have worked hard to earn and thinking that we are consumed within the product.
Victoria- I loved the title of your blog regarding the music lyrics. It was creative and very true. I liked how you talked about people having the choice whether or not to listen to lyrics that are insulting to women. Your story was just as great. I really enjoyed how you told it and really ejoyed how detailed it was. You have a great writing technique and I can’t wait to read more.
In his article, James Twitchell defines materialism as “the belief that one’s physical possessions constitute the greatest value in one’s life”. In his opinion materialism is nothing more than a human expression. He goes on to say that because it plays such an immense roll in our lives we should all accept it for what it is instead of associating it with negative connotations. He states “Of all the strange beasts that have come slouching into the 20th century, none has been more misunderstood, more criticized and more important than materialism….Yet the fact remains that while materialism may be the most shallow of the 20th century’s various-isms, it has been the one that has ultimately triumphed” (389).
Materialism as a whole has both positive and negative effects on American culture. On a positive note materialism represents our freedoms throughout society. “We live through things. We create ourselves through things. And we change ourselves by changing our things” (389). Another positive perspective is that “it frees us from the strictures of social class. The outcome of material life is no longer predetermined by coat of arms, pew seat, or trust fund. Instead it evolves from a never- ending shifting of individual choice” (396). Twitchell’s overall argument is that materialism allows us a source of happiness as well as gives us the liberty to express ourselves. He describes materialism as “liberating and democratic” (397). Buying a new car for instance doesn’t define us but it allows us freedom and enjoyment.
On the other hand many view materialism as negative and disastrous to American culture. Twitchell states that the belief of these people is that “Our commercial culture has been blamed for the rise of eating disorders, the spread of “affluenza”, the epidemic of depression, the despoliation of cultural icons, the corruption of politics, the carnivalization of holy times like Christmas, and the gnat-life attention span of our youth” (390). With materialistic ideas comes the clash of status and classes. If people have more things than us we see them as being better and if they have less with see them as being beneath us. Instead of seeing a person for who they are we label them dollar signs. These mentalities are negative effects on the American culture.
I disagree with James Twitchell. Although I am the first to admit I love my things, I do not think they define me in anyway. Materialism is a freedom to be enjoyed but people have taken this to a whole other level believing things like love, friendship, satisfaction and happiness can actually be purchased. We as a society need to find a happy medium between enjoying the stuff we have worked hard to earn and thinking that we are consumed within the product.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)