The American Dream of rags to riches miracle absolutely without a doubt still exists. But it still heavily relies on hard work and a perfectly timed stroke of luck. Never do we talk about how easy it is to become successful in America. No one is out passing out handouts to the top. No one in any country is doing that to anyone in the general population. Sure there are exceptions to this with people who have rock stars or millionaires for parents but that is not the stereotypical idea of the American Dream. The American Dream, as I understand it, is starting at the bottom or middle, utilizing a skill set of determination, dedication, loyalty, and integrity, taking that skill set and adding it to a whole lot of hard work to get your way to the top. There will always be an unbalance of power in any state that is not socialist. America is by no means the worst country in terms of an imbalance in power. Oil countries and similar industry based countries have an immensely worse distribution of wealth.

Big business America runs our country and most of the world for that matter. Although they cannot always directly impact votes or decisions, with the amount of money they have the ability to just throw away to people, their power is virtually endless. Our country has been conditioned to put all the power and faith behind a green slip of fabric that we give a special name and unwarranted worth. The only difference other countries have is their unwarranted powerful items may take a different form, color, or design but regardless they all have over inflated worth. Even back to the days of the Romans, objects with little practical value have appeared in the form of currency. In the Roman ages, flowers were often used as a form of money.

For example, John Boehner was born to a poor farming family and worked his way to the top. He worked his way through college and law school and now sits in the third most powerful seat in the greatest world super power. Although some may argue he is a white male, another could just as easily argue there is just as large of a stigma on “white trash” and “Redneck” poor white people as there are for black people or other minorities. As we discussed it is even more so the outer shell and dressings of a human than the color of their skin or ethnic background. We stigmatize someone in ratty clothing as compared to another in a business suit more than we stigmatize someone by the color of his or her skin.

I do not think anything would be different if Sandusky were any other race than white. The media has taken complete control over this incident and is responsible for distorting the entire scenario and blaming people who are easy and high rolling targets. Although Joe Paterno was involved in the events that took place over the years, his amount of willing involvement is still in question. Changing the race of Sandusky would not impact the scenario one bit unless the media chose to capitalize on that detail. I find it frustrating that this is even put into question. A scenario in which race has zero impact all of sudden is being distorted even more by this class by trying to create a racial argument with in it. The media has way too much control of our society. A society that has mostly become drones and mindless followers to a series of sounds and flashing colors on glass or fabric in a home living room that transmits what the hosts claim to be “facts.”

What Sandusky allegedly did is wrong no matter the age, race, gender, or sexual orientation of the victim OR Sandusky, being the alleged perpetrator. It is sickening that someone could take a situation like this and try to use it as a basis for or against a racial argument. Why would this even come to mind when thinking of such a horrible series of events? Especially when these events all came into the light less than a month ago.

The media had and still has ultimate power over the opinions of the general public. The only way this situation would have been spun differently according to a different race of Sandusky is if the media chose to capitalize on the situation to increase ratings. That is where the base of this racial and false scapegoats problem lies: the media. They are responsible for informing the public of the facts not speculation like they have been. They speculate and twist reports in order to get more viewers and or more clicks on their links in order to bring in more advertisement money. It is all about the money for the media rather than reporting the facts and truth and allowing the viewers to decide what their opinion on the matter is. If it were not for the media I believe many of our racial problems and the problems behind the bastardization of the Sandusky scandal would be solved. We as a people need to stand up to the media rather than buy into their falsified and exaggerated reporting tactics in order to win over our attention and, indirectly, our money. If we can accomplish this, maybe then we will see the end of the tyrannical rule the media has over our country and its views.

Big business will shape virtually every aspect of our life. That is an inescapable fact of our society. Capitalism has built the world around us and will continue to remodel it to its needs and desires. Unfortunately, when some argue that capitalism is fueled by greed, they are one hundred percent correct. But in the defense of capitalism, what system does not thrive off of greed? Is that not the point of communism, mutual and equal gains? Let us take a look at North Korea and see how that is working out for them. Africa? They seem to have an extremely stable system and distribution of wealth.

Big business America runs our country and most of the world for that matter. Although they cannot always directly impact votes or decisions, with the amount of money they have the ability to just throw away to people, their power is virtually endless. Our country has been conditioned to put all the power and faith behind a green slip of fabric that we give a special name and unwarranted worth. The only difference other countries have is their unwarranted powerful items may take a different form, color, or design but regardless they all have over inflated worth. Even back to the days of the Romans, objects with little practical value have appeared in the form of currency. In the Roman ages, flowers were often used as a form of money.

Immigration is no different of a policy than any other decision made by our government and business committees or CEO’s. If it is in the financial and economic interests of powerful fortune 500 companies for the government to vote one way or lean another, they will throw money to try and convince them to go that way. Although it leaves the poor virtually helpless in terms of what they want, it is a fact of life. It is no different than a normal citizen ordering pizza. If it were $10 for a pizza and a $5 dollar delivery fee plus tip, why would they not spend $3 dollars in gas and make their kid go to get it. The pizza store is losing money and the citizen is still spending it but the citizen is now saving $2 plus the amount they would have tipped every time they order a pizza. It is a problem caused by simple economics and purging further into the black to keep the books out of the red.

We as a society are too quick to point the finger at others for taking advantage of the system when we would do the exact same thing or something similar if we were in that position. If anyone argues otherwise, I would like to know where he or she get the money to be able to handle such a daunting task because we do it everyday. Even those with little monetary self-control, we still use money management.

Over many decades, America has designed, shaped and molded a societal and governmental system that is highly revered as one of the top systems in the world. The entire system our country revolves around is based on faith and citizenship down to the individual person. While one person not properly contributing to the system as expected may not directly impact the infrastructure as a whole, the idea of the Free Riders Complex, can spread like a wildfire throughout the population leading to the downfall of our structure.
I am in full support of legal immigration. Our country has been founded on the idea that our country is a safe haven for those who wish to escape the troubles of his or her home country to try and achieve success in our country. Our country was literally created to separate from an overbearing and oppressing government attempting to enforce religion and unjust laws on a people who were fed up with the oppression.
While legal immigration is important to the success of our government, illegal immigration is the downfall. Illegal immigration only causes problems for virtually everyone in the country. When illegal immigrants come and work in our country, they are absolutely providing a service to our country. They are willing to do jobs that few others are willing to do. Unfortunately, they are also doing a disservice to our country in two ways. First, they are not paying taxes on the income they are receiving and secondly they are commonly taking their earned money, saving it, and then taking it back to their country of origin to spend it there rather than stimulating the American economy by spending it here.
One argument against illegal immigration, the loss of jobs for good American people, holds little weight when put into perspective. For years and years the economy and capitalistic approach of America has encouraged countless American businesses to outsource every possible job they can in order to save every dime they can therefore decreasing their cost causing a general increase in prosperity, at least for the upper elite of the company. The presence of illegal immigrants being present and working illegally barely accounts for a drop in the bucket of America’s unemployment problem. The fact of the matter is that most jobs the illegal immigrants are taking are the jobs that the unemployed are “over-qualified” or “too good” for.
The major problem cause by illegal immigration, as I stated earlier, is the economic stress they put on our country in terms of benefits without the cost. For example, things like medical bills and other services supplied to tax-paying citizens or even non-tax paying citizens when these people are taking advantage of the system and the holes in our system that they are exploiting.

HBCU’s are quite often over looked in the general society of America. Many do not know that such colleges and universities still exist where virtually the entire student population is consistent of brown or black people. These colleges, in my opinion, do not set its students up for a real American experience of society. Although I see no problem with these colleges and universities existing, students often use college as a transitional period from the typically sheltered childhood experience and full blown independence of life after school including but not limited to a job, career, bills, mortgage and other responsibilities.

The differences between everyday colleges and universities with HBCU’s are even more extreme than the differences from private schools to public schools. Even private schools do not accurately prepare a child for society. In a private school, a student is typically more wealthy and surrounded by even more wealth families with little racial, economic, or idealistic diversity. Like private schools, HBCU’s provide a distorted view on society. They show little racial or cultural differences among the population as compared to an average college or university. Now you may be thinking of private schools having less diversity as the average state school and this would absolutely be true.

One major benefit of traveling away from home to a college or university, even if only a few miles, is that it provides students with an entirely new perspective on the world in which they inhabit and will spend the rest of their adulthood. Do not get me wrong; HBCU’s can be a highly beneficial addition to the educational experience of all who go. It is important to keep our history in mind. It is also important and beneficial to group people together with the same interests in order to promote collaboration and brainstorming. Just like an agricultural based school would traditionally be predominately white people, HBCU’s are predominately black people. These universities play an important role in our society and need to be maintained. It is also important that these universities, although predominately black, still have a world-renowned positive reputation for providing education to developing citizens.

Although HBCU’s do not set the student up for a realistic society-based experience, they certainly serve their purpose in society. There are plenty of other ways in which the student may experience a more realistic societal environment with average diversity through race, economic stand, ideals, culture, and countless other aspects of society. In fact, it may be a good idea for HBCU’s to start, if they do not already, requiring their students to be involved in such experiences to diversify their educational foundation. It would create a more well-versed undergrad student who will be able to acclimate to actual society much easier.

The discussion of race and gender would certain be a tough task to surmount. They are entirely separate beasts within themselves and provide a difficult task to address. Each one on its own is a tricky situation that cannot be underestimated or under valued for their inherent respective issues and potential solutions. While it is important to see the impacts these two outward appearance defining characteristics have, it may add too much to the evaluation that will begin to cloud the results of investigation when Sam is limited to a strict time schedule and class instruction layout.

Race plays a huge impact in our world, whether it is consciously or sub-consciously. Gender is the same way but when we explore in regards to gender, some conflicting interests come into play that are not present when dealing with racial discrimination. Many can attribute the way they act and treat the other gender streams directly from their grandparents and through the parents. Well, our grandparents were raised and lived through very different times and general opinions than us. Simple things like chivalry can now be taken as a conflicting act rather than just the gentleman thing to do, like it was fifty to sixty years ago. Women are rightfully demanding more equality and more rights but where does that lead in terms of simple things like holding a door open for a woman? I realize they can do it by themselves but if I can, why no make the small easy gesture? I do not mean to diminish them or take away from their rights when I do so, it is just a simple act that I would like to do and be, as my parents and grandparents taught me, polite.

Although discussing the two together would be tough, I do not think it would be past Sam’s capabilities but perhaps just the time limitations on the class. Sam’s example of a fish in the water is a great way to put this problem into perspective. We cannot hope to permanently solve a problem, even on a tiny scale, if we simply make changes and fixes on the surface. We must get to the root of the problem and make changes at the infrastructural level to have any chance at a lasting solution. To further complicate things, we cannot even fathom the root cause of an issue if we are constantly looking at a problem from one perspective. Taking in the world through one perspective may even prevent us from seeing the problem at all let alone the underlying causes of the problem. Linking race and gender together is an important objective but may not necessarily be the best way to investigate the individual problems each facet of discussion has.

Many people will argue racial versus gender inequalities are disappearing slowly but surely. Although there are new forms and resistors of the change here and there, in general, society is much more accepting of both than they were 50 years ago, even 20 years ago. The question now is which will disappear entirely first. Persuasive arguments can be made both ways in this heated debate, but that is what makes it such a difficult question to address. In today’s society, people are afraid of change. Many withstand change as long as they possibly can whether it is a direct opposition or subtle behind-the-curtain battle.

I think the battle between the sexual orientations will subside long before the differences of race. I believe society is significantly less likely to discriminate against gays or other orientations in terms of job opportunities and similar situations simply because the differences can seem minimal to some. When a closed-minded individual is looking between applicants they are more likely to mistake the person who has a different sexual orientation for being more like them. Although the two applicants could easily both be qualified for the position, the person with the different sexual orientation can have a much easier time hiding their differences than the person with the different race and/or skin color.

You might be saying something along the lines of “This does not prove anything. It only shows that people will continue to discriminate and the only reason they chose the individual with the different sexual orientation is because the person couldn’t tell the applicant was different.” You would have a valid argument but my point comes into effect after they are hired and begin working with the closed-minded individual. I believe that once this applicant gets his or her foot in the door, he or she is provided with the opportunity that he or she can work just as well or better than the next qualified “normal” applicant. When the closed-minded person comes to the realization a gay person is producing as well or better than he or she hoped, hopefully the misconceptions and biases will begin to crumble away under the weight of the truth.

All people need to prove themselves is that initial shot. Unfortunately, to get your foot in the door, sometimes you need to resort to measures such as appearing “normal.” Something someone of a different race can unfortunately do virtually nothing about, leaving them in the slow lane for advancement in society and the eventual complete abolishment of racial discrimination. On the other hand, the people of different sexual orientation have the ability to mask their true identities allowing them to attempt to expedite their acclimation to society and eliminate sexual prejudices quicker.

The United States of America has a very tricky role in terms of assisting other countries when in need. As a world super-power, we are expected to help countries out when they are suffering but to what extent are we truly responsible for their well-being? How much help are we really providing by throwing a few dollar signs at the problem? Especially with poverty-stricken countries rather than natural disaster needs, it is extremely important to focus on where this money is going and how it is being applied to the problem. When the United States goes to write a plan on how our government plans to effectively aid a fellow country or nation that is failing, they need to take many factors into special consideration.

In virtually every case of poverty-stricken countries, just throwing money at the problem will not help in the long run and may even backfire, causing more harm than help. It is crucial to research methods of assistance that are sustainable and long term rather than a temporary “Band Aid,” if you will. An ancient proverb says it best with “Give a man a fish and you will feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you will feed him for his lifetime.” We really need to look into methods that apply this proverb to the way that we hope to improve these deteriorating societies.

Another thing to keep in mind is that many of these peoples are and have been working long hard days to barely survive. They are extremely hard working by any standards. They understand the rewards of truly earning every last bit of their “salary.” These people do not want our “Hand outs.” They simply want the ability to provide himself or herself with a job or career that will give them the ability to work a somewhat “normal” work day and work week while still earning enough to comfortably provide for the needs of their families.

The United States must be careful as to not waste our money, as it is already so precious to us in a declining economy let alone waste our money on something that is not sustainable and insults the people of whom we are giving. While quick and decisive action would be in the best interest of these nations, it will not provide the needed long-term help if it is a poorly concocted plan. It would better benefit the poor nations if our government took the time to devise a plan to stimulate the fellow nation’s economy enough to get them above the poverty line while spending as little money as possible in the most efficient manner. Only when we achieve such ideas, should we begin to allocate money to these certain causes.

I have never been a huge fan of donating my or my country’s hard earned money to charities or similar organizations. Before you write me off with that comment, hear me out. I find a lot of charities waste a lot of money through administration costs and other similar wasteful expenditures. This on top of poorly planned monetary donations makes for a mix that will only cause more problems than it sets to correct. This is the exact problem the Haiti project looks to solve. The stories of these hard working people who are trying to better themselves along with their community are extremely inspiring. These entrepreneurs bring hope to a failing economy and society. Haiti has been struggling through countless hardships, especially with the most recent severe weather events occurring. The recent storms brought havoc to a country through the countless deaths of people but the destruction of most of their infrastructure from buildings and businesses to homes and personal buildings.
I’m curious to see the outcome and progression of this project. It is one of the most real-life applicable projects I have done up to this point in my educational career. While helping out people who are less fortunate is important, it is even more crucial to assure that the way we help these people out is a way that sets them up for continued long-term financial success for everyone including their business, family, and community. These select few examples have already proven their drive and dedication to the betterment of Haiti and their direct communities. With just a little bit of help from us, they will hopefully be able to take this idea and run with it. All of these candidates that are exemplified here seem to be extremely credible and prime candidates for the little bit of financial aid these people need to take their business to the next level of competition and greatly expand their consumer base. The expansion of the consumer base will only increase income, increase demand, and create more jobs for the community as a whole. While helping out the general population is important with third world countries like Haiti, it is important to focus on where one’s money is going and how this is creating a reusable, dependable and self-sustaining source of income and work. This best follows the well-known proverb “Give a man a fish, and you will feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you will feed him for a life time.” There are times in life when we need to stop worrying about how it will benefit us and just begin to help other people because it is the right thing to do not because it will somehow continue to benefit us in the future.

Is welfare holding back progress? I would venture to say welfare, in its current design, is not only holding some back from progress, but it is actually encouraging people to continue to feed off the system and take advantage of the good intention programs our government has set up to get people back on their feet.
Welfare certainly has many good uses and helpful features to it but sometimes these aspects of the Welfare system are a bit too helpful or at least misguided in the efforts. In some situations welfare will actually pay better than a full-time minimum wage job. Once a person on welfare takes this lower paying job, he or she will almost immediately stop earning welfare benefits therefore putting them in a worse position than when he or she started, not to mention he or she is now working forty plus hours a week to get less money. Who would that make sense to? Who could blame a person for not getting off welfare? At that point, it is not even a matter of taking advantage of the system or leeching from the government. It is simply a miscalculation and misguided effort to help those in need back on to their own two feet.
We need to reevaluate the system at hand and redesign it so that it encourages people to get jobs. Perhaps allow people to receive full or next to full benefits for the first six months of their new job and then start a steady decline in welfare benefits. This would allow the person to get some time under his or her belt and hopefully a raise in salary so as the benefits of welfare are retracted; they are already making more money than they were sitting on welfare benefits not contributing to society in the appropriate manner.
Why has this system stayed like this for so long when it seems many think it needs to be revamped? How did a policy like this even make sense in the first place? Pay a civilian money when they do not have a job and pay them better than they would get from a basic starting position. This system can benefit many people in a good way. There are plenty of good, honest people in America that are on welfare and just need that little boost. But if a newly widowed mother of two can better support her children on welfare without a job than getting a job and being away from her kids for 40 plus hours a week, who could blame her for choosing the “wrong” choice?
Our politicians need to look over the policies and regulations that comprise the Welfare program. With proper technique we can help out the government, government deficit, and people in need.