Categories
Catch-All/Student Discussion Questions

I Need 300 More Words

Over the course of this semester, we have discussed many topics: the origins of American culture, new influences from the immigrating populations, sexual relations and their devaluation, and our current political climate including the current president. If there is one thing that is obvious is that our country is on track to continue becoming more openminded to cultural taboos and previously unheard of technologies will assist in this process. It will soon be 2020 and there will be even more influences that should gradually adjust the social lifestyle of our nation, whether it be more nuanced romantic relationships or a continually progressive political landscape. This American culture will change music, media, cinema, and social media it should be very interesting to see where we can go from here. Our technological advancements will aid in this process and even make changes by itself. The smartphone which has been around for less than 15 years has made an incredible difference in the lifestyle of almost every American just as far as convenience. But more than that it has allowed more communication and especially that over longer differences. This will surely lead to influences from other regions of the world besides the USA and might create new and expanding cross cultures that are more similar than we have ever realized. One aspect that will contend with this, however, is the rise of nationalist sentiments from Americans as well as other nations across the world. It can be seen that many European nations are also falling into these nationalist sentiments as well. This is most likely due to both regions of the world experiencing high levels of rather unwanted and economically stressful immigration. Overall, I am very curious to see each and every one of these exciting developments.

Categories
Reading and Film Presentations and Discussion

Apollo 11

This Film is a timepiece as well as a thrilling adventure that the entire American people have remembered as a truly “Giant Leap for mankind”. In the fascinating real-life events that Apollo 11 documents on it is seen just how NASA and the three brave astronauts overcame what looked to be all better odds due to poor take-off conditions and technical difficulties. However, Astronauts Neil A. Armstrong, Michael Collins, and Edwin E. Aldrin Jr. persevered placing their lives on the line to make history as the first nation to ever set foot on the moon. The Awestruck faces of every spectator observed that day represented the face of every American listening across the country who saw the bravery and courage it took to complete such a task and been one of the proudest moments our country has had in the last 100 years, if not ever. Scientifically the documentary explained the basic concepts and intended plan that Nasa had set out for the expedition and how the team allowed for the astronauts to scientifically be able to travel through space and back in a very compelling manner. Overall this film should inspire every American with a feeling of patriotism and remind those how our ancestors have felt, especially during a time of major concern with the cold war looming over everyone’s heads, It was just as much a spiritual victory as well as a scientific one. The finishing speech by John F. Kennedy was just also incredibly meaningful and was personally highly regarded by my grandparents as they often told me about it when I was younger, I would not be surprised if many could say the same, It’s status in American culture has reached a legendary level and was a large reason for the unprecedented amounts of American Patriotism in the decades after the event. Overall, this documentary shows a great time for our country and people that stands to be mirrors for the foreseeable future.

Categories
Catch-All/Student Discussion Questions

Era Trump Chp 3

In this chapter titled Modern Day Presidential, Trump’s tactics to gather attention and win the presidency where discussed in detail, and specifically how Trump and only Trump could have gotten away with the crude and unprofessional demeanor that he became known for. Trump, unlike many of the other presidential candidates that ran in 2016 had a media persona that he had developed over a long career of his celebrity status. He ha gathered over his career what worked and had not worked in his outrageous and school-bully like behavior to please audiences and entertain the crowd, unlike many before him he used this strategy on a political scale to gain the edge over his political opponents who if they shot back, in the same manner, would be acting contradictorily to their political backbone. His unique accent was also discussed and how he used it unapologetically in contrast to others who situationally attempted to change their accents to appeal to more regionally biased crowds. This is one example of how Trump was regarded as a blunt and more “real” than his opponents. Furthermore, many saw Trump as a form of “Chemo to the cancer of politics”, a poison that may be painful but necessary to rid the disease. This theory is seen in his immature and often ridiculous and remarks that often bring others down while promoting himself, the attacking behavior was well known and apparently generated him a ridiculous amount of media coverage. Overall Hanson has very flatteringly shown off trump in his most appealing light to provide rhyme and reason to the culmination of the election while ignoring many of the other aspects of the election that allowed him to win and often gave trump way to much credit in knowing how his actions affected the crowd.

Categories
Catch-All/Student Discussion Questions

ERA Cheap Sex Chp 3

In this chapter, Regnerus discussed the relationship between dating apps and the frequency and devaluation of sex. The first point that is made is how dating apps create a free market economy for sex, and for sex in heterosexual relationships typically men demand more casual sex for women. When these apps exist this creates a supply of “cheap sex” that is available to meet the male demand, therefore, men are less likely to look more long term relationships or pursue more traditional courting methods in favor of a cheaper alternative. While it was originally assumed that the female supply of sex would never meet the demand or would reject the option altogether, contrary to that belief women began supplying the opportunity for sexual encounters and this has lead to more and more women using these apps in order to have any sexual opportunities at all. Regnerus’s overall point is that dating apps have become a sex delivery system which has reduced the number of individuals who pursue more traditional relationships.

The next series of questions discussed are the dynamics between sexual frequency among different demographics. Regnerus discusses how the frequency of sex effects joy and risks as well as how men and women report different demands for more sexual encounters. In addition, the dynamics between married and single relationships are compared as well as both straight and lesbian relationships to heterosexual relationships. The most obvious points are that different groups have different needs and deal with separate struggles. And finally, the types of individuals who are having the most sex are actually having almost all the sex. The example is that 20% of the population is having 80% of the sex and furthermore this group actually suffers from more issues such as higher divorce rates, infidelity, more STDs and a high chance of unwanted pregnancy as well as less overall happiness.

Categories
Short Essays and Responses Uncategorized

Short Essay #5

Borjas’s claim that a “significant segment of the American population is economically harmed by mass immigration” however this is a necessary evil as “benefits reaped by others, as well as the unquestionable value of increasing cultural pluralism, outweigh those negative effects” is most certainly well-founded and the tradeoffs should be taken into account as the American government dictates its immigration policies. The dynamic places the American working class against the more powerful corporations and business owners who employ not only the working class but also illegal and legal immigrants that will typically work for lower pay and in inferior conditions. It is completely understandable to see why this is problematic for working class citizens who have incrementally worked for safer and more reasonable conditions and a fairer pay. This is why Borjas’s statement is flawed, because it does not have any conditions of governmental regulation to ensure the existing safer working conditions as well as it indirectly advocates for illegal immigration which is problematic due to the absence of a minimum wage for these individuals.

The direct impact to the labor market of unregulated immigration is staggering for the native working-class individual who is depending on their occupation to support his or her family.  The reasoning for this is instead of taking whatever wage and position is offered out of desperate need native workers are “more likely to complain about working conditions and aggressively assert what they believe to be legal pay and workplace rights”. This is not to say that immigrants are not as skilled in negotiation or are weak willed but rather their legal status or lack of savings places them at no place to negotiate and leaves them vulnerable to whatever agreement that they can take to edge out their competition. And although this increase in the labor pool is great for businesses it is also very harmful for the American working class who take a hit to their wages, specifically a “10 percent increase in the size of a skill group probably reduces the wage of that group by at least 3 percent”. This is a clear downside to immigration that will affect a large portion of the lower class in America.

It is also clear that the vast majority of benefits of this immigration surplus profit at the expense of the less fortunate. For example, Borjas states that a 50.2-billion-dollar immigration surplus will cause a 515.7 billion dollar loss to native workers while the native firms gain 565.9 billion.  This exchange, while overall profitable for America is debatable when those who are profiting are more fortunate and those who are losing are the less fortunate. While America is a capitalist society that is accepting of this trade off, government officials need to be asking if the turning of a blind eye to all of the illegal immigration for profit is worth the losses for native workers who depend on their wages. Borjas may be overlooking the fact that this acceptance of a norm may actually be harmful to America overall even if there are business profits.