24. June 2010 by student.

                  In the workforce in America they are taking a turn for the better. Companies are deciding to hire more people with different ethnicity. With this the companies are hiring more African American’s to the work force even though it is very difficult to find an African American that have studied and practiced in accounting. “In fact, only one percent of all certified public accountants (CPAs) are black, according to an American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) report published this year.” An organization called National Association of Black Accountants (NABA) which started in 1969, has been trying to expand the amount of African Americans that are qualified to become CPA’s.   National Association of Black Accountants helps students from high school till college to help them with becoming leaders and helping them get a degree in either accounting or finance. Microsoft has decided to help the cause by making a one million dollar donation to go towards the National Association of Black Accountants (NABA) to persuade African Americans to decide to major and have careers in accounting.  Since Microsoft has gave National Association of Black Accountants this donation they have become associates. The alliance provides Microsoft with the ability to have employees that are smart and professionals who work as a team they make the company prosperous.                   The reason why Microsoft is helping this organization is to only benefit the company. By Microsoft hiring people of different backgrounds it is showing society that this company is supporting people of all races instead of just one race. So everyone would want to use their products. Microsoft has alliances with this organization which is saving Microsoft money by eliminating the hiring process. If Microsoft needs an accountant they just go to this organization and they already know that if you’re in this organization your smart and you are very thorough.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

24. June 2010 by student.

                  In the workforce in America they are taking a turn for the better. Companies are deciding to hire more people with different ethnicity. With this the companies are hiring more African American’s to the work force even though it is very difficult to find an African American that have studied and practiced in accounting. “In fact, only one percent of all certified public accountants (CPAs) are black, according to an American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) report published this year.” An organization called National Association of Black Accountants (NABA) which started in 1969, has been trying to expand the amount of African Americans that are qualified to become CPA’s.   National Association of Black Accountants helps students from high school till college to help them with becoming leaders and helping them get a degree in either accounting or finance. Microsoft has decided to help the cause by making a one million dollar donation to go towards the National Association of Black Accountants (NABA) to persuade African Americans to decide to major and have careers in accounting.  Since Microsoft has gave National Association of Black Accountants this donation they have become associates. The alliance provides Microsoft with the ability to have employees that are smart and professionals who work as a team they make the company prosperous.The reason why Microsoft is helping this organization is to only benefit the company. By Microsoft hiring people of different backgrounds it is showing society that this company is supporting people of all races instead of just one race. So everyone would want to use their products. Microsoft has alliances with this organization which is saving Microsoft money by eliminating the hiring process. If Microsoft needs an accountant they just go to this organization and they already know that if you’re in this organization your smart and you are very thorough.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

24. June 2010 by student.

For years there has been a debate raging on between U.S. conservationists and CEO’s of oil companies. This being, the timeless old question, “Should Oil be drilled in the Gulf of Mexico?”

For over a month now, eyes across the Earth have been watching thousands of gallons of oil, spill from an under-sea oil rig into the beautiful waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Thousands of fisherman, shop owners, and tourism spots around the Gulf Coast will be hit hard economically in the upcoming months as the spill reaches their shores. As parts of these Southern states are still trying to recover from a historic few years of major hurricanes, they find themselves bracing yet again for another disaster.

After watching our waters get darker by the day, the majority of Americans probably feel that Oil should no longer be drilled in the Gulf waters. But how long will these feelings of negativity towards drilling really last? I believe it will not be long.

Following the basic needs, such as food and water, there is no other resource that Americans depend on as much as they depend on Oil. Without having oil, our country would shut down. No cars, trains, planes, or buses to get citizens to where they need to be, including work. Many people work miles from their homes and commute using gallons of oil a day. If the American government ever did finalize a ban on drilling in the Gulf, it would force us to import oil from other nations and raise our gas prices. This would have Americans forgetting about this tragedy in a matter of a few years. Once the spill is cleaned up, and the public has seen what it will cost again to fill up at the tanks, then there would be a push to reinstate drilling in the Gulf.

Drilling in the Gulf is probably necessary in order to keep our economy from weakening anymore. Although it will save many dollars, there is always the chance that it will cause the death of many native animals and Eco-friendly plants of the Gulf. It is a tough choice for any American to have to make, whether to try and conserve the environment or push to get our economy out of debt. What needs to be done if drilling should continue is, there needs to be more safety inspections of oil rigs and there needs be to more accountability held to those who break the rules or fail the qualifications. A healthy environment and oil drilling can co side together if the right precautions are taken to make sure there will be no further oil spills.

The question of “to drill or not to drill?” will probably be going on for years to come. If this issue were to ever hit the voting ballots, how would you vote?

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 3 Comments »

24. June 2010 by student.

North Korea declared it was halting all communication and relations with South Korea. This was in response to the South blaming North Korea of sinking its warship back in March. North Korea denies all allegations of responsibility for attack, but international investigators have found that a North Korean torpedo was responsible for attack. Along with severing ties with the South, the North has also announced it was sending home all Southern workers working at joint-run factory park at border of two countries. The South has been bombarding North with propaganda and other psychological warfare techniques as punishment for attack. The tensions between the two countries is at an all-time high, with the North reading their army for war and the South and its allies, including the U.S., preparing for further sanctions against North, or worse.

The troubles with North Korea are never ending. Until Kim Jong Il is ousted or deposed in some other way I’m afraid tensions will be forever high. I’m not suggesting the U.S. should go after Kim Jong Il, but something needs to be done to remedy the situation. The unprovoked attack on a warship in peacetime is a clear declaration of war, and this is just what the North wants, a justification to attack the South. I’m not exactly sure of Jong Il’s motives for wanting war with the south, in the past it seemed like he just wanted the west to pay him to calm down the rhetoric.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

24. June 2010 by student.

With the rise of infertility problems among young couples today, more and more is expected of scientists and treatment.  Science has allowed thousands of couples worldwide to become parents in mostly unnatural circumstances.  Heterosexual, and homosexual couples and even singles are given the opportunity of parenthood. Often when a couple has been unsuccessful they seek the counsel of an infertility specialist and go through a variety of tests to determine the infertility problem.  Depending on the circumstances, the doctor may suggest different treatments including, intrauterine insemination or in vitro fertilization. The second example is the most popular choice, and produces a surplus of fertilized embryos.  In this procedure, the woman is placed on a follicle-stimulating hormone to ensure both follicles and eggs are produced.  Then the eggs produced are retrieved during an aspiration procedure performed by a doctor. The eggs are then met in a petri dish with the spouse or donor’s sperm.  This is when the multiple eggs are fertilized and determined if the trial produced viable embryos.  Depending on how many embryos were produced, the doctor will determine how many he will implant into the woman’ uterus. Most likely there are more embryos than needed so the remaining are usually frozen and used in a future cycle, donated to science, or discarded. If the couple does not use up all fertilized eggs they can remain frozen until they are inviable or can be put up for adoption. 

Not all couples that go through infertility treatment are able to become pregnant. Many are left with the decision to become parents through adoption or remain childless. Adopting children already born is the most common form of adoption.  With the surplus of fertilized embryos created through infertility many are now adopting these ‘ready’ embryos.  The only thing left to do is adopt and implant the embryo into the woman’s uterus. Along with infertility treatments, the adoption of embryos is highly unnatural. In America alone, there are 500,000 embryos left over from invitro fertilization. Statistics show that about half of the 500,000 frozen embryos in the U.S. would survive being thawed. About 12-15 percent total would actually become babies, so that’s still about 50,000 babies.

Providing a chance of life to an already fertilized egg, and parenthood to a single person or couple seems to be the best option.  Even though fertility treatments are highly unnatural it seems wrong to simply discard viable embryos when thousands of couples long for a child.  Despite any selfish motives or unnatural origins all embryos when given the proper environment will develop into human beings, so the logical solution would be to grant life.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 2 Comments »

24. June 2010 by student.

Millions of people all over the world are connected through Facebook. People of all ages share personal information, but some may be sharing more than they want. Privacy through the online site had begun to get less and less secure. When the site first started, it was a social network tool to connect students, and then it opened up to anyone on the web. With time, things changed and soon not just your ‘friends’, but your ‘friend’s friends’ and people in your ‘network’ or even everyone could view your personal profile information. While some people don’t mind the privacy issue, some are really bothered by it, but in order to make your personal profile more private, many users thought there were a lot of complicated settings choices, which had to be reinforced and reset often. Facebook announced now that they are going to ‘simplify’ the privacy settings. Making it so you can default the privacy you want, without having to go back in a reset it every time you change or add something to your profile. I like this and think it to be helpful. I am glad that so many friends and family members have Facebook. It is a quick and easy way to stay connected with those I want to stay connected to, but I am glad I will be able to easily check and make sure that what I put on my profile will be for my family and friends only, and not everyone in the world.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

23. June 2010 by student.

Researchers are finding that violent video games are actually educational. They are saying that people who play these action games have better cognition. Researchers are also finding that playing the action games can treat the lazy eye condition. People have better vision and better attention resulting from the quick thinking needed to play these kinds of games. People can also “improve peripheral vision and the ability to see objects at dusk” (Associated Press).I think this is quite interesting because while you are playing these video games, you do not really come to think that at the same time you are improving cognition. Although, I do think this is a positive feedback, there are a lot more negative reasons why children should not be playing these games. Even though people do not really sit down, and think about these games, they do affect our society. Violent video games impact young children, and even young adults. Our society usually goes by what is on T.V. ;that is where we get the new styles, the new music videos, what the famous world is wearing, make up in style, just about everything that is in style comes through T.V. first. Children, and young adults act upon these games, what seems to be look, they like to imitate, and practice these actions with friends. From research, I have come to find out that it is not necessary for these games to be shooting, the game just has practice the individuals quick thinking skills. If we were to stop using violent games, it would really impact society. I can almost guarantee that most kids would not be doing he silly things they currently do.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 2 Comments »

23. June 2010 by student.

Do you want someone else to raise your children? Consider that children are most impressionable when they are young. How they grow up and the values they acquire are most dependent upon their experiences during these young years. Unfortunately, while our children are young, parents are usually working extra hard to establish their job careers. It is important for young adults to get good jobs, work hard and maximize their chance of promotion and future career opportunities. It is also an important time for children who all need time with their parents. Who should share their time to spend with these young children? As parents, should it be us, or should we get someone else to raise our children? Dumb question, right?

Look at our society today, chasing the almighty dollar and leaving our children with strangers to allow them to put their moral values or lack thereof, into them and their indifference and lack of warmth that only a parent can give. Examine the typical work day of a young adult parent and their interaction with their children and you will see that very little time is spent with children on a typical work week. ONLY 10 hours out of 80 not counting sleep time!  Weekends can make up for this, but is this enough? We owe our children the weekends anyway and the rest of the week too. That comes under the heading of LOVE.  We all know how a child spells love; T-I-M-E. Obviously we are giving our children to some stranger so we can go out and get a new flat panel TV, new car, I-Pad or other interest that is obviously more important than spending time with our own child.  Who is raising our children? Is it us? Or, is it someone else? Are we paying someone else to raise our children so we can look cool and have the toys and big house and shiny new car? Hire a nanny. Hire a baby sitter. Hire a live-in child care helper. Send our children to day care. Arrange an after school program for our children. Hire a tutor for our children. What are we really doing here? Are we paying someone else to raise our children? In a given week, are our children spending more time with parents or with others? Is it a good idea to have our children raised by someone else? How will our children’s values be shaped? Do we want our children to be shaped by our views or by the views of others?

It looks as though most of society today does not care enough about the little lives they bring into this world at least not as much as the material possessions and status. I cannot emphasize this more. Young children are very impressionable. Spending one hour with a 3 year old can have a substantially greater impact on their ultimate development than spending one hour with an 18 year old. Time spent with your children when they are young is time well spent. What do you think is more important to a child? Supervision by a variety of individuals coupled with material family wealth or supervision and nurturing by a consistently available parent providing quality time. I’d say let your conscience be your guide but thanks to Dr. Spock we don’t seem to have those anymore and it shows in many of today’s youth who were spared the rod and have respect for no-one that’s not carrying an Uzi.

If you chose the first one, then you believe that both parents should work hard to develop successful careers. Material wealth follows with a comfortable home, nice cars and a more generous budget for the children’s college education. If you picked #2 above, then you believe that at least one parent should be available at home most of the time. The benefit of this is obvious and the disadvantage is a lower income, less material wealth and a lower budget for a college education. The correct choice is not exactly clear, well if you’re an idiot. Each choice has a substantial tradeoff that must be sacrificed. It basically boils down to sacrificing your income/career versus sacrificing time with your children (your career versus your children). Some say this is not an easy decision to make. These types should probably not consider having children if that’s the case.  While your children are young, your time spent with them is critical. This is when they need you the most. Full time workers, overtime workers and especially workers who take work home with them, are given preferential advancement/promotion opportunities over part time workers and workers who frequently attend to family matters in preference over their jobs. Again who is more important?  When you are old will your boss be holding your hand when you are sick?  Neither will your child if you dump him/her on strangers all their young lives and later turn them into latch-key kids. Then it will be the strangers caring for you just as you did to your children.

There has been a paradigm shift in our society over the past few decades that needs to be reversed and possibly the recession has become that vehicle to reunite us with our families, enjoy having sit down dinners together and knowing each other again like Grandma and Grandpa did. I certainly hope so for the future of our country and the family unit where our strength originally came from. When child care and baby sitters are needed, use blood relatives. Grandparents are the most ideal. Hopefully, you’ve treated your parents well and have a good relationship with them. If you are lucky, you may have four grandparents available. Rotate the children between them on a set schedule. Aunts and uncles can be helpful. It would be advisable to trust blood relatives more than others. For example, using your sister is less risky than using your sister’s boyfriend. The availability of grandparents is so important. It makes the task of juggling your work schedule and child care substantially easier. The only care taker coming close to a parent is a grandparent.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

23. June 2010 by student.

The ongoing debate about stem cell research is often misunderstood.  I want to begin by stating that I am in full support of research of stem cells to provide potential cures for life-threatening or debilitating diseases.  The stem cells that should not be used for research are those that are embryonic. Simply because embryonic stem cells have the potential to develop into any other cell does not give license to researchers to use them. Given the proper environment for growth all embryos will develop into human life.  If we want to foster the development of the human race and the continued growth of society, then why would we disassemble a human embryo for research that has not proven to be fruitful? The reason so many are interested in researching embryonic stem cells, is that they have the ability to become any of the two hundred and twenty different kinds of cells we have in our body.  The zygote, which is a fertilized ovum, is known as a totipotent stem cell.  Totipotent stem cells have the ability to develop into an entire organism, thus has the capability to divide into all the different kinds of cells found in a human.  Pluripotent stem cells are able to divide into a multitude of different cells but not all of them. They can, however divide into multipotent stem cells that can become more specialized to carry out specific roles in the body.  Although embryonic stem cells are the most naïve and have the potential to become all cells in the body there is no research to date of any successful clinical trials.  On the other hand, adult stem-cell research, has been involved in more than 1,000 successful clinical trials. If there are animal activists against testing beauty products on animals because of inhumane treatment, then why would we permit the destruction of our own species for research that has not had any successful clinical trials?  If we are able to cure life-threatening diseases with stem cells from a fetus that died naturally, tissues from an adult or from the umbilical cord blood that illicit no harm to a person, then why continue with embryonic stem cells? Embryonic stem cell research is not illegal in the United States, which brings up the argument that even though something is legal doesn’t always make it right.  Abortion is legal, although many would argue that this is not an appropriate practice. Others would argue that whatever is not harmful to anyone but yourself, and is permissible by law, should be acceptable.  In the case of embryonic stem cell research, you are indeed harming the fruition of an embryo.

            There is still hope when it comes to the development of new and moral research.  There are new studies that show stem cells in the red bone marrow of adults are pluripotent, and have the ability to become cells of the liver, skin, kidney, heart, skeletal muscle, and organs of the gastrointestinal tract. Many would not be willing to argue that the current economic crisis is the reason that the government is withholding federal funding to increase embryonic stem cell research. Although in difficult times like these I believe it is an important consideration, since thousands of Americans are more concerned with where their food or money will be coming from after losing their jobs or their homes.  Dealing with the economic recession by helping people with their most basic needs is more important at this time than spending federal money on the destruction of human embryos through research.   

            A breakthrough study conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles showed significant results in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. The lead author the report, Michael Levesque stated, “We have documented the first successful adult stem cell transplantation to reverse the effects of Parkinson’s disease and demonstrated the long term safety and therapeutic effects of this approach.” This study showed that for at least 36 months the patient’s motor skills improved by over 80%, five years after the operation.  Since the team was able to use the patient’s own brain cells and multiply them in vitro there was no use for immunosuppressants. This groundbreaking discovery is encouraging news to those afflicted with Parkinson’s, and could potentially reverse the effects of it.  More studies are needed to prove its safety and reliability, but by using a person’s own stem cells it would eliminate the ethical debate of embryonic stem cells. 

 By reducing the need for such medications, this will increase the person’s immunity against bacteria, viruses, and toxins our bodies must fight against daily.  This is why before any major surgery some patients are required to give their own blood to bank, in case of severe blood loss where their own blood can be given safely without risk of rejection.  The same holds true with the storage of umbilical cord blood.  Umbilical cord blood stem cells have saved countless child’s lives and holds cures for illnesses such as leukemia and other cancers.

            In keeping with all this new and enlightening research, the use of embryonic stem cell research should now become obsolete.  With the outcomes of so many positive trials, and those of embryonic stem cells continuously failing, it is clear that it is not just morally wrong, but fruitless.  Hopefully, this will be recognized by the scientific community and government financial officers who facilitate such research so this wrong will be made right.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

23. June 2010 by student.

When conducting my “old person interveiw”, a change was pointed outthat seemed troubling to me- the way children are raised “these days”.My mother, who I was intervewing, spoke about the manners of childrenthese days in comparison with her childhood. I am a nanny for twoyoung girls, ages 4 and 7, and I see some of the aspects she spokeabout in them. While I think parenting methods have vastly improved inmany ways, in some ways it is going in the opposite direction.Due to increased awareness of child psychology and good parenting, wehave begun to treat our children almost as equals, allowing them tomake their own choices and speak freely. While I think independenceshould be promoted, I think these children lack the appropriate amountof respect for adults.  My mom explained tht when she was young if anadult asked you, or told you to do something you complied without anyhesitation or whining. The children I babysit for routinely tell meflat out “No.” when asked or told to do something. My little cousinsoften interrupt their parents while they are speaking on the phone, orwhile the adults are standing around having a conversation. Thechildren have a sense of entitlement to their parents undividedattention.Many parents give this to their children, along with constant praise,and accomadations. Parenting books promote giving your children agood, healthy, self esteem, but I believe many parents take this toofar. I recnty read an article that discussed this. Whn kids receivepraise for everythingthey do, even mediocre acts, it leaves them witha life-long sense of entitlment and expectation of this praise whichleads to dissapointment and lack of ability to receive critism. Whenyou accomadate every whim, want, like or dislike of children theydon’t learn to compromise. I’ve seen a rise in parents giving theirchildren more and more unhealthy foods because their children don’tlike foods other than pizza and chicken fingers. While I don’t believein sending kids to bed hungry if they don’t eat their vegetables, Ibelieve they should be forced to eat things that nourish them.The other change is the dependence of modern children on technology. Iam all for advances in technology, but I believe a balance should bekept. The girls I babysit don’t like when I pick them up from schoolin my car because they can’t stand the 15 minute rise without theirindividual DVD players. When I show them tv programs on PBS, they askme to fast forward the commercials, because they are used to their DVR.I am aware that this is not the case with all children, and these maybe extreme examples, but I believe these are general trends thatshould be changed.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »