Wal-Mart: Embodiment of the Capitalist Spirit

Everyone knows that Wal-Mart is one of the largest and most powerful corporations in the market – but just how much influence does Wal-Mart really have? Senior writer of Fast Company, Charles Fishman’s article, “The Wal-Mart You Don’t Know” discusses the extent to which Wal-Mart affects the capitalist system in America. My personal opinion of Wal-Mart is that I believe its size and influence is too great. When one corporation has so much influence that it can use the term of “competition” in order to further profits for themselves and pressure smaller companies and business to conform to their rules it boils down to an overlord playing with pawns on a chessboard. But while, Wal-Mart is closing down “Mom and Dad” stores due to their inability to compete – which proponents of Wal-Mart argue that is fair in the eyes of capitalism – the fact of the matter is that Wal-Mart presents jobs for those of us who were unable to qualify for high end jobs that require thousands and thousands of dollars to fuel a college education and for those who simply don’t fit into the capitalist society. Let’s face it, some of us are just …”weird” and can’t function well in certain environments. But the negatives outweigh the positives for me, with such power in the economy selling products earning 244.5 billion a year (Ackley 535) and with that being a relatively old piece of information, who knows how much Wal-Mart’s profits are. What struck me as the most outrage was a statement by an executive Paul Kelly, “‘If Wal-Mart takes something the wrong way, it’s like Saddam Hussein. You don’t want to piss them off,’” an example of the extent how much Wal-Mart has its partners in leash and cage. Ultimately, things are going fine the way as it is now (on second thought, maybe not with the recession) but sooner or later I believe one of two things will happen: either Wal-Mart will have to face massive government regulations and its power will be toppled, or Wal-Mart will grow unchecked through loopholes and government head turning and become a monopoly – a repeat of history in America.

Modern Reality

To be honest, I laugh at the title “I Need My Space!” only because of its failed attempt at clever humor and attempt at word play. Written by Cindy Long, an author of technology related works and education, Long overviews the pros and cons of popular networking sites, which several years ago was MySpace, but is now Facebook.  In her article, Long focuses on a particular group of users of MySpace: teenage girls illustrating with “Caitlin”. On the side of the cons, Long regurgitates what many other s have already stated to be dangers: predatory stalkers that use information on social web pages that are not privatized to locate their victims, web pages of individuals that were not created by the said individual but another signifying the threat of identity theft (and perhaps humor). And as well as the measures MySpace has gone through in order to ensure safety and the privacy of its users such as hiding online status, location, age, etc. Stylistically, Long provides the cons first to inform the reader, but in turn provides the pros to show that they are stronger than the cons. The main pros being that social websites allow for creativity (ironically, facebook, the current largest social networking site only has one layout with colors blue and white) and will eventually be an important tool for valuable social connections that go beyond the category of only friends. I believe this analysis is correct, but the fact that Long exemplifies internet lingo as,”NAUSETGIRL (5:09:55): WOTZ ^? WNT 2 GO OUT? WARRIOR08 (5:09:56): yS, whr do wnt 2 go? NAUSETGIRL)5:09:57): How bout the chocl@ Sparrow n Olreans?” is an incredibly inaccurate and stupid representation of internet ling. It just simply isn’t that terrible. The abbreviations and unnecessary capitalizations with random symbols make reading it actually irritating to read. That is not the goal of internet jargon. The goal is to merely simplify and shorten the typing input but to have the outcome to be still readable; we want to save the fancy-shmancy for something like a formal essay and what-not. J

Aid If Possible

            Peter Singer writes on world poverty in his essay “The Singer Solution to World Poverty” and the steps that the American people have had to help end world poverty but have not taken. Beginning his article with a summary of the movie Central Station, Singer uses it as a transition to state his thesis, “…so much of our income is spent on things not essential…that money could mean the difference between life and death for children in need” signifying his ideology somewhat of a progressive.
            Something that I commend to Singer’s article is his use of all three modes of persuasion: pathos, logos, and ethos. Singer’s description of the main character in “Central Station” and her conscience ultimately intervening in saving a boy who she had sold off unknowingly to organ harvesters attempts to make a connection with our own consciences and remind us that we have the ability to take action. For ethos, in what makes him a qualified authority on the wrongness of poverty, Singer says in passing, “…a utilitarian philosopher like myself…”  And Singer’s use of logos stems from his reasoning that after the American people use their income to pay for the necessities, the remaining money is spent on luxuries. Singer argues that the spending of luxuries is the same as looking a needy child in the face and choosing to look the other way for the sake of greed. And in my personal opinion this is true, as a people with such a high standard of living, we should be able to sacrifice more for poverty among other things. But Singer’s claim that the sole use American’s have for their money not spent on necessities is for luxuries is a logical fallacy that needs to be addressed.
            Singer’s claim that all money remaining from necessary expenses (i.e. housing, groceries, gas, insurance, utilities, and taxes) is used on luxury items and entertainment. However, Singer does not take into account other factors such as the uncertainty of the future and wisdom of saving money for unforeseen circumstances. There are also family responsibilities such as caring for your elders and children and especially with tuition for education. Also on the list if you are a religious Christian or Catholic, you tithe ten percent of your income. One thing to note is that the people Singer addresses are the well off middle class people who seem to have money left over for their use, but the reality is many people even in the middle class struggle to meet ends meet.
In the end what sticks out the most is the idea of tending to one’s own before others. It is a selfish reality, but that is the reality we live in.

The Real Issue with Grade Inflation

           Grade inflation is an interesting topic for anyone related to education. There is a significantly sized belief among the people of the United States that grade inflation is running rampant and unchecked among the U.S. education system. Where that belief stems from, I do not know, but in the article “The Dangerous Myth of Grade Inflation” written by Alfie Kohn, Kohn credits this opinion due to unreliable self investigations he deems as extremely sketchy in their credibility and in turn offers his opinion of a more reliable source on grade inflation, a research conducted by a senior research analyst of the U.S. Department of Education. The results show marginal change in the rise of grades over the years.
            Kohn conveys several important ideas to the audience surrounding grade inflation. First, the claim that students in modern times do less work than that of students in the past is nearly impossible to soundly back up. Second, the standard definition of grade inflation belongs to the critics. Personally, I believe that it is better to grade by a standard so that grading will be fair and can be referenced across the board rather than based on every single teacher’s opinion of how the grading scale should be. 
            Kohn addresses the topic in an informative tone based on an attempt at logos unlike in Harvey Mansfield’s article “Grade Inflation: It’s Time to Face the Facts” where Mansfield makes an attempts at ethos by placing his credibility in his position as a professor at Harvard. In my opinion, Mansfield is a believer of grade inflation due to his position as a professor in one of the most prestigious schools and arguably the number one in the world, and as such, he would naturally have high expectations of his students. 
            But unlike Mansfield, Kohn addresses the other side of the argument, where he assumes grade inflation is real and what its implications would be. This makes Kohn’s argument much stronger that Mansfield’s. However, what impressed me the most about Kohn’s article was the way he used the subject of grade inflation and weaved his article together so that he could address one final point that was linked to the education system in the United States and that is that our education system is fundamentally flawed down to its very building blocks and suppresses the true potential of the rising generations. Rather than encouraging learning for the sake of learning, grades put the emphasis on results and churns out excessive stress as a byproduct.

Shield or the Sword? "Violent Media is Good for Kids" by Gerard Jones

            Every person has something about themselves they keep locked up, quiet inside themselves; to name a few: passion, anger, humor, personal perceptions of the world, and violence. Cartoonist and screenplay and comic writer Gerard Jones defends the violence of media as a beneficial tool for inner aggression in “Violent Media is Good for Kids”. Jones does not outright state his position as a proponent for violent media in a single sentence, but instead does so through a retelling of his life and how violent media has been a good influence throughout it.
            Jones’s main defense for violence in media is through presenting cases in which youth with fears and personal issues overcome them through the help and presence of violent media in their lives. However, these cases are very specific and cannot be regarded as general application to the population. In his examples, he includes himself who overcomes his social awkwardness through the Incredible Hulk comics, a little girl whose violent tendencies were due to her tomboyish nature and circumstances which involved divorcing parents channeling her violent tendencies into writing and drawing, and a teen surrounded by gang violence and a rough family situation turning to rap. His one example that was did not include extenuating circumstances involved his son overcoming his fear of climbing trees through Tarzan comics, but is not a truly significant accomplishment if Jones wishes to continue in his stance as a supporter of media violence.
            In, his argument, Jones attempts to make concessions by addressing the general argument of those against media violence by claiming, “…it’s helped hundreds of people for every one it’s hurt” which is simply a ridiculous claim that does not have any hard evidence. Furthermore, what Jones claims as the benefits of media violence is in actuality a mistaken belief for an outlet for inner personal issues. The only reason that Jones is able to claim in these particular examples that the said examples are being helped by media violence is because of their situations the reflect violence and chaos. (The Tarzan example does not hold much merit as it is simply about his son resolving to climb a tree.)
            Perhaps Jones is right in saying, media violence benefitted his son and himself, but in those instances the violent media acted as more of a creative outlet. But in other cases, violent media can be a triggering key for those who are surrounded by violence and do not have the option or good influence to take up a hobby or activity like Jones suggests. In the end, violent media can be considered as having two sides: a shield that can protect you from harm or a sword which can harm others and yourself.