Diabetes can be controlled in African Americans through a diet Research Paper

Diabetes can be controlled in African Americans through a diet - Research Paper Example There is also a wide range of diabetic types which totals more than 30 different types of diabetes. The classic symptoms of diabetes are characterized by the 3-Ps, which are the polyuria (frequent urination), polydipsia (increased thirst) and polyphagia (heightened hunger). Scientific research has not pinpointed the exact causes of diabetes but several factors have been identified as possibly contributory to the development of diabetes which is a life-long chronic condition once it sets in. It means diabetes can be controlled by adequately and properly monitoring blood sugar levels with the use of insulin but it cannot be cured. Type-1 diabetes, for example, is suspected to be due to infection from a Coxsackie B4 virus although genetics plays a part in a persons susceptibility. Type-2 diabetes, which is the most common type of diabetes, is caused also partly by genetics but primarily from lifestyle factors such as smoking and obesity. It is therefore very important to observe lifestyle modifications to avoid this type of diabetes. This paper tackles how diet can be used to control widespread diabetes incidence in black Americans. Incidence (new cases) of diabetes is increasing rapidly worldwide due to the lifestyle changes in modern society. Along with hypertension and obesity, diabetes is considered as silent epidemic because many people afflicted with it are not even aware they have diabetes already. It is estimated that 172 million people worldwide have diabetes (approximately 3% of population) while some 26 million of Americans have diabetes (with 90%-95% of them with Type-2) with an estimated 7 million of them unaware they have diabetes (undiagnosed). The rapid rise in number of diabetic persons is ascribed to urbanization and a Western-style diet composed of mostly fast-food which are very high in cholesterol (poly-unsaturated fats), a more sedentary

The role and effect of culture jamming

The role and effect of culture jamming Culture jamming can be defined as activities to resist consumerism, globalisation, and corporate advertising, which based idea of liberation, in order to affect and change advertising saturation society for better (Sandlin Milam, 2008; Barber, 2007). The development of mass medias technology, especially internet technology, supports different pathways for culture jammers to extend their opinions, such as Adbusters magazines, Anti-Pearlman Permanent Poster League on Facebook, and Reverend Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping (Sandlin Milam, 2008; Nomai, 2008). Culture jammers provide another way to understand the world and critical analyse the modern commercial culture. First of all, consumers could have chance consider the other side of advertisements via culture jamming movements. Products providers claim the best aspects of their products, sometimes consumers are encouraged to purchase the products which may harm for their healthy and not very environment friendly, such as alcohol, cigarettes, and some eco-cleaning products (Hickman, 2010). Therefore, culture jammers insert their ideas in existed advertisements to show the other side of truth. For example, as picture 1 shows, culture jammers try to warn people stop drinking and keep health with changing Absolut Vodka advertisement. Picture 1 Secondly, culture jammers against consumerism to protect human well being, based on the idea of liberation (Sandlin Milam, 2008). According to Rumbo (2002), in 1996, American people were exposed to 3600 advertisements per day, culture jammers believe these advertisements will change consumers daily life and beliefs (Behr, 2010). Kasser and kanner (2005) argued that advertisements encouraged people more materialistic because they want to compare with images of wealthy people. Results from this, culture jammers appeal anti-consumerism campaign to opposite advertisements and logo of brands (Rumbo, 2002). Picture 2 shows that culture jammers resist corporate advertising and screaming for more personal space. A video from Youtube showed similar argument of culture jammers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJTCWtcAewsfeature=player_embedded). Picture 2 (Picture from internet) Furthermore, as results of some mainstream commercial advertisements have negative moral effects on citizens, culture jammers try to persuade people to be better. Take an instance, advertisements of violence against women have influences on high rape criminal rate in US (Capella et al, 2010). Culture jammers reject these legal but effective advertisements, for example, there is a video on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp6gjxCRuxs) to appeal people. Another problem is advertisements contains violent criminal relate to peoples attitude because violence pictures can be captured and memorised easily (Scharrer, 2004; Soderlund Dahlen, 2010). Under this situation, culture jamming activities have positive affects. However, ethical consideration in culture jamming activities should be reviewed as well. For example, putting leaf posters on public facilities is hard to clean and make city dirty, as Picture 3 shows. At same time, culture jammers applied similar advertising method as other mainstream advertising, for instance, there is a video on Youtube for culture jamming Facebook (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR5gEy3HkzE), and however, the facts which were stated were not persuasive but seem like in purpose. Picture 3 (The picture was taken on 24/02/2010, in Liverpool) To sum up, activities of culture jamming have positive effects on re-building commercial life and explore a different way to understand the hidden meaning of advertisements. On the other hand, the formations of culture jamming could be considered because of negative aspects. Leaf posters and illegally advertisements which posted by culture jammers would give bad impressions on these good activities. 2. Does our fascination with celebrity add value to our lives? Celebrity is a social phenomenon today. Celebrity could be described as people who are well known by others, much talked about, and notoriety (Pendfold-Mounce, 2009). According to Rojek (2001), celebrities can be classified by status, including ascribed (blood relationship), achieved (talented people and hard workers), and attributed (who are created instantly) celebrities. Modern mass media support the development of celebrity industry, numbers of celebrities are created and the amount of obsessions increased dramatically (Pendfold-Mounce, 2009; Cashmore, 2006). Particularly attributed celebrities are benefited from mass media, such as celetoids who become famous by public scandals, celeactors which are fictional roles originally (Rojek, 2001). The effects and values of celebrities in our life should be critical analysed, because this depends on personality of celebrities and the way of advertising by medias. Michael Jackson will be used as an example in this essay. Negative effects of celebrity, especially attributed celebrities, are concerned for decades, and it is still a problem of society which should be solved. This means there are harmful impacts if celebrities perform as bad example in their products or daily gossips. Penfold-Mounce (2009) embodied celebrities relate to criminal and ethical challenges today. Celebrities who have criminal records or moral considerations, for example, Michael Jackson was accused of sexual abuse in 1993, will have bad affect on attitudes of people, especially teenagers (Daily Mail, 2009). Additionally, celebrity culture also influences the career choice of students and their academic achievements. For instance, over 30% of pupils claimed want to become famous as who they adored (BBC News (a), 2008). Meanwhile, adults cannot avoid the effects of celebrities as well. Take an instance, some marketers try to infantilize adults via celebrity advertisements and other visual products (Barber, 2007; Boon Lomore, 2 006). Under this situation, celebrity is useless for add value on our lives but only make troubles. On the other hand, celebrities could impact people positively if they perform well and mass media advertise good aspects. Furedi (2010) stated that celebrities gossips may represent peoples daily lives and give them psychological comforts. At same time, celebrities promote healthy lifestyle and attitude to people. For example, Michael Jacksons Beat it is very exciting and encourage people to face difficulties. Because of the appeal of celebrities, they contribute a lot in charities and other aspects of society, such as Michael Jackson were awarded result from his contributions in Afrcia (BBC News (b), 2009). Indeed, celebrities procedure of achievements like Michael Jackson could encourage people fighting for dreams (Cashmore, 2006; Furedi, 2010). In addition, the creation and commodification of celebrities TV shows (e.g. X-Factors) encourage ordinary people to achieve their dreams. Especially the players in these shows could share their ideas to public and make it as recognitions (F uredi, 2010). Additionally, this may close the distance between celebrities and ordinary people (Cashmore, 2006). Picture 4 (Picture from internet) Overall, celebrities and celebrity culture have effects in our daily lives. It is hard to say which side is more, just like the case of Michael Jackson. However, the problems which are made by celebrities or celebrity culture could be solved if mass media and celebrity industry select more disciplined players. Meanwhile, journalists and media companies disclose more positive news but not only gossips, the celebrity culture is worth for our well being. 3. Marketers who target children are no better than paedophiles. All marketing to kids should be banned. Purchasing power of children is not only affect on children but also their families. Children market was worth $24 billion and encouraged another $500 billion in family consumption indirectly years ago (Moore, 2004). Therefore, marketers target to children and wish to make more profit. However, debates on ethical considerations about advertising to children via mass media are argued for a long time, because there are negative effects in these advertisements. At same time, result from some positive implications of marketing to children, advertising to kids could not be denied at all. Advertisement for children has negative effects on lifestyle and attitude of children, especially food habits and materialism. First of all, large proportion of TV advertisements targeted children is food and drinks, particularly sweets and convenience food which are less healthy (Gunter et al, 2005; McGinnis et al, 2006). Otherwise, some advertisements contain violence or contents are not suit for children (Truman, 2004). This implicates lifestyle of people for long and may influence on social problem today. For example, approximately 16% of children and adolescence in US have problem on obesity (McGinnis et al, 2006). Additionally, advertisements carry marketers bias which may affect attitudes of children. Indeed, children have less ability of judgement when they receive the information which is included in advertisements (Hofferth, 2010; Pettersson Fjellstrom, 2006). Under this situation, children may fall in materialism and consumerism (Barber, 2007). Take an instance, advertisements for Christmas may encourage children to ask more gifts from parents (Gunter et al, 2005). In addition, children would like to ask for payments if their parents want help from them (BBC News(c), 2011). Due to the negative effects of advertising to children, some countries limit this kind of commercial activities, such as Australia has time limitation for childrens advertisements, Sweden bans all advertisements which aimed at children below 12 years old, and UK has detailed regulations for advertisements as well (Gunter et al, 2005). Control the contents of advertisements for children via National law are important, because media companies do not want to take risks to post unethical advertisements. Beyond national codes, education of acknowledging advertisements from parents and school are as equal important in this field. Result from children become more important in family consumption life, consumer education for children is essential for avoiding deceives from marketers (Pettersson Fjellstrom, 2006). Children may not know the meaning of advertisements, therefore, how they understand the advertisements are rely on explanations of their parents (Gunter et al, 2005). Another path for pupils understanding advertisements is school education (Gunter et al, 2005). For instance, it is legal to advertising to children in schools in England (Clark, 2004), and this is chance for teaching students how to judge advertisements. On the other hand, advertising to children appropriately may have positive influences. Similarly as mentioned above, advertisements could be inserted the information which is good for children, such as help children to recognise and memorise some culture issues, for example, the meaning of Christmas festival (Gunter et al, 2005). Meanwhile, advertisements are supposed to send healthy lifestyle and attitudes to children and that will have positive implications if there are enough detailed codes for the media companies (Hofferth, 2010). Some companies did advertisement which contains contents good for children, for example, PG Kids Winter Olympics commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGgwfjA0V14). Overall, commercial advertisements have negative influences on children because marketers want to sell more products. However, the power of advertisement should be admitted and use it for the better. National laws are effective on this subject and detailed codes will let companies create better advertisement good for commercial and children. 4. We would all be better off without supermarkets. In the UK, five biggest supermarket chains such as Tesco, Sainsbury, Asda take over 80% of grocery market share (NewStatesman, 2003). In the meantime, less and less corner shops can survive when supermarkets closed in. Approximate 100,000 corner shops were closed since 1940s (NewStatesman, 2003). Supermarkets look like double-edged sword, provide conveniences to consumers but also damage society, particularly they change the concept and behaviour of shopping. Indeed, supermarket is the future because it can use sources more effectively. Supermarket chains have advantages to compete with small independent shops and provide convenience to customers. First of all, supermarket is more effective and provides one-stop service for customers. For example, people can find everything they need in one big supermarket (Taylor, 2011). Secondly, cheaper and quality products are provided by supermarket chains, especially supermarket named products (Simms, 2007). Moreover, supermarkets can create employee occupations for local people. Tesco claimed 140 jobs are created in each new store (Monbiot, 2009). However, comparing with benefits which are brought by supermarkets, more damages are created to consumers and society at same time. Firstly, damages will be discussed from stand point of consumers. Shoppers are dissatisfied with supermarkets. According to Simms (2007), around 50% of people feel unhappy when they are shopping in Tesco because of bored, stress and other unpleasant reasons. In addition, the price of products is not as cheap as supermarkets claimed. For instance, bread, eggs, and milk are more expensive than local independent shops (Taylor, 2011). Food price is higher than rate of inflation recently and supermarket is considered as a sector which push price going up (Wearden, 2011). Meanwhile, it is trap to shopping in supermarkets because people try to full fill their trolleys, which means spend more money (Taylor, 2011). On the other hand, less variety of food can be found in supermarkets (Eastbourne Herald, 2011) Supermarket chains dominate market which has negative effects on interests of suppliers, communities and local authorities as well. Supermarkets squeeze suppliers because they have market and suppliers have to dependent on them, particularly farmers (Arnold, 2004; Gray, 2003; Timpson, 2011). Figure 1 shows the supermarkets and mid-chains grind farmers. Indeed, it is untrue that a new supermarket store could provide 140 jobs but at least over 270 unemployed will happen (Monbiot, 2009). Some people who loss jobs were corner shop owners, and they created 5 times job opportunities than supermarkets originally (Monbiot, 2009; Simms, 2007). Due to corner shop owners are almost local people, the shop could be the connection for community, and residents have chance to have conversation usually (Simms, 2007; NewStatesman, 2003). Figure 1 (Arnold, 2004) Simms argued that big supermarket chains like Tesco may kidnap local authorities to ask what they want (2007). Over 90% of the population choose to go to supermarkets as first option when they want to shopping (Arnold, 2004). This means supermarkets have been vital role in our daily life and government should follow them. Another advantage of supermarket chains is they can keep on appealing local authorities base on their tremendous financial power, for example, the turnover of Tesco in 2008 is 47 billion (Simms, 2007). Supermarket chains provide conveniences to people before they become profit earning machine. People can enjoy shopping and have chance to get cheaper but good quality products. However, supermarkets tie up the whole society and transform the traditional shopping habit of all consumers, even authorities cannot beat them. Supermarket is good for using resources more effectively, but appropriate control is necessary. 5. Is that acceptable to buy fake brands? Counterfeiting of named brands is an international commercial problem today. Piracy is illegal and unethical, however, people still buying. There are two types of consumers perspective on counterfeits purchasing behaviourdeceptive and non-deceptive (Wilcox et al, 2009; Nia Zaichkowsky, 2000). Deceptive counterfeiting damages consumers benefits because it exists among genuine products and hard to be distinguished. Non-deceptive counterfeiting is fully recognised by consumers but they wish to purchase (Wilcox et al, 2009). No matter what kind of reason, it is not acceptable to buy counterfeit brands. Some people argued that counterfeits helped genuine brands promoting to customers. Counterfeits may increase awareness of named brands and bring additional orders for genuine manufactories (Staake et al, 2009). McCartney stated that people buy counterfeits when they young and ignorant, but genuine products are their pursuit when they become elder (2005). Indeed, customers may think counterfeits are inferior and cannot be compared with original products on quality. Therefore, fake products cannot devalue the genuine brands, manufactories and marketers concentrate on creating strong positive images and good quality products will bring success (Nia Zaichkowsky, 2000). The counterfeits may have positive effects as stated above, but this is not the reason to buy fake products. Meanwhile, it is impossible to ban all counterfeits because of high profit and consumers desire of luxury brand which encourage counterfeiters to take risks (Wilcox et al, 2009). Counterfeiters can obtain high profit because there is no expensive design and advertising cost, and raw material cost is low because of quality (Juggessur Cohen, 2009). Consumers will to buy fake named fashion products because of psychological reason. Counterfeits such as clothes, bags and shoes seem harmless and cheaper, especially some counterfeiters could provide the products which similar as genuine, this may be why people could accept fake products (Cathcart, 2007). However, fake brand products disrupt normal commercial life and bring social problems. Companies like Burberry claimed loss every year because of counterfeits, for example, US counterfeit market was worth $155 million in 2006 (Hilton et al, 2004). Furthermore, counterfeiters are also invading in low-end markets and bring negative effects. Take an instance, Kiwi label in Africa lose 20% sales overall because of counterfeit products, as a result, some plants have to be closed and people lose their jobs (Businessweek, 2008). Purchasing fake products would decrease the income of named companies and increase unemployment rate, this is bad for development of economy and security of society. Therefore, stop buying counterfeits and learning knowledge about anti-counterfeit is necessary. Moreover, purchasing fake products is not respect on creation. Branded companies invest huge capital to develop new products for consumers. This is the cost which should be collected back on selling. However, it is not sustainable development if people do not buy genuine products but counterfeits (Staake et al, 2009). For example, Microsoft lost $2 billion in China in 2007 because of counterfeiting (Microsoft, 2007). It is a disaster if China is main market of Microsoft because that means the company cannot obtain money back on time to develop new product. To sum up, fake brands might have some positive effects which are proved. However, negative influences are main part of discussion. People buy counterfeits will bring legal and moral considerations, and affect on normal business life. Indeed, unemployment and slower creating may attribute to this behaviour.

The History and Future of Computers :: Technology

The History and Future of Computers Computers have been around for many decades, doing tasks such as counting much faster than any human could ever do. The first computers were so inefficient compared to the computers we have today, they couldn’t do half of what computers can do today. Some say that computers aren’t the way of the future, while others say that computers will bring civilization to a new era, a more complex, and magnificent place, where our wildest dreams will become a reality. The first computers ever built were so big that they took up many classroom size rooms. The only thing that these computers could do, were count numbers and do simple calculations. One of the major problems with these computers was the fact that the vacuum tubes inside of them would always need replacing. The vacuum tubes would burn up due to the tremendous amount of heat that these computers gave off. In today’s world, the computers that are on the market today are a million times faster than the computers that were first invented many decades ago. The computers that we use can perform many complex applications in seconds. Computers run factories, keep our planes up in the sky, and educate our young ones. Computers today, are much smaller than previous computers to come on the market. As the years go by and technology improves, scientists have been able to find ways to make smaller components to build computers with. It is said that the transistors count of computers doubles every eighteen months. [1] If this is the case, than there is no telling what the future may hold for computers, all I can say is that computers will continue to get smaller and smaller, and faster and faster with no signs of stopping. Some people believe that computers are taking over society, others think that America would be a better place, if we didn’t relay on computers as much as we do. Some time ago when computers were still new, people said that there wouldn’t be that much need for them on the market, experts said that people wouldn’t have enough time, to sit down and use a computer, while others said that computers will never ever be small enough for families to own. Popular Mechanics magazine states â€Å"Where . . The History and Future of Computers :: Technology The History and Future of Computers Computers have been around for many decades, doing tasks such as counting much faster than any human could ever do. The first computers were so inefficient compared to the computers we have today, they couldn’t do half of what computers can do today. Some say that computers aren’t the way of the future, while others say that computers will bring civilization to a new era, a more complex, and magnificent place, where our wildest dreams will become a reality. The first computers ever built were so big that they took up many classroom size rooms. The only thing that these computers could do, were count numbers and do simple calculations. One of the major problems with these computers was the fact that the vacuum tubes inside of them would always need replacing. The vacuum tubes would burn up due to the tremendous amount of heat that these computers gave off. In today’s world, the computers that are on the market today are a million times faster than the computers that were first invented many decades ago. The computers that we use can perform many complex applications in seconds. Computers run factories, keep our planes up in the sky, and educate our young ones. Computers today, are much smaller than previous computers to come on the market. As the years go by and technology improves, scientists have been able to find ways to make smaller components to build computers with. It is said that the transistors count of computers doubles every eighteen months. [1] If this is the case, than there is no telling what the future may hold for computers, all I can say is that computers will continue to get smaller and smaller, and faster and faster with no signs of stopping. Some people believe that computers are taking over society, others think that America would be a better place, if we didn’t relay on computers as much as we do. Some time ago when computers were still new, people said that there wouldn’t be that much need for them on the market, experts said that people wouldn’t have enough time, to sit down and use a computer, while others said that computers will never ever be small enough for families to own. Popular Mechanics magazine states â€Å"Where . .

Biggest problem in america is the economy Essay

Unfortunately, this topic has now been â€Å"politicized,† which means that you can’t talk about it without being instantly cheered or jeered by fans of each respective political team. But the economy is much more important than this year’s election or either political team. There are several factors that have come together to produce a frustratingly weak economy that has persisted in the United States for more than a decade. One of those things are â€Å"Globalization†. It opened up a vast pool of billions of workers who for way less than Americans because they’re desperate. This messes up everything, it has resulted in companies shifting formerly middle wage paying jobs overseas. Another is Technology it has continued to increase productivity, allowing companies to do more with fewer employees. These and other factors have contributed to the most radical redistribution of wealth that the United States has ever seen. Since the late 1970s, the country’s assets and income have moved steadily from â€Å"average† Americans to the richest Americans. This has created a society with more extreme wealth inequality than we have seen at any time since the 1920s. Fairness aside, the problem with this state of affairs is that it leaves hundreds of millions of American consumers the real engines of the economy with little money to spend. With consumers having little money to spend, businesses suffer. As businesses suffer, they look for ways to cut costs. And this, in turn, hurts employees (consumers) even more. One thing to keep in mind as we think about how to fix this state of affairs is that this is not an era in which everyone is suffering. Everyone is not suffering. Big companies and their owners and senior managers are not suffering. They are doing great. Big companies and their owners and senior managers, in fact, are doing better that the have done at any time in  history, at least judging by the amount of profit they are producing. It’s everyone else who is getting hosed. Now, in the current political environment, you can’t make an observation like that without being pegged as an anti-business â€Å"socialist† or â€Å"communist.† So, it’s important to emphasize that there is nothing anti-business about this observation. I just don’t believe that great businesses exist solely to capture â€Å"profits† and steer cash into the pockets of their owners. When a free-market economy is functioning well, as the American economy did for most of the 1950s, 1960s, 1980s, and 1990s, the benefits of the system accrue to all participants, namely: Owners and senior managers Customers Employees Society at large When the system gets out of balance, however, the benefits begin to accrue disproportionately to one or two of of the constituencies at the expense of the others and that’s the situation we’re in now. The benefits of our free-market capitalist system which, by the way, is the best economic system on the planet, by a mile are accruing disproportionately to owners, managers, and customers, at the expense of everyone else. If we actually want to put some effort into fixing our economy, we have to fix that. Specifically, we have to persuade companies and their owners to hire more employees and share more of their immense wealth and profits with them. Most importantly, companies don’t need to do this just for altruistic reasons (though no one would object if they did). If enough companies do this, they will not just help their employees. They will help their future sales growth. Because their employees and customers, the American consumers, will then have more money to spend. Bibliography sources Internet†¨Online ads Encyclopedia

Global Stratification and the World Order

Requirement One: â€Å"Global Stratification and the World Order† 1. )After reading what John Perkins had to say I really had to second guess my understanding and acceptance of our government. I did not realize how far the government is willing to go to ensure the world order and economic structure is always stacked in our country’s favor. I thought we were the country to help other countries out. The government does this, but makes it so the countries we are assisting are forever in debt to us, giving us what we want.We all seem to want to believe that we have a great government system but does tricking vulnerable countries and making them â€Å"slaves† to our economy sound like a caring strategy? I would have to say no. It was interesting to read from John Perkins that they will go through different levels of people until someone does the job and manipulates the other country or people. If those people do not succeed, then young men and women soldiers are broug ht forward to win the fight like they are doing in Iraq. This is pathetic. The government will put many peoples’ lives on the line just so they can have their way.After this information was brought to my attention, it made me and is making me feel very insecure about the government I live my life by. I love my country but the government is a completely different situation for me now. 2. ) American corporations keep our government alive and going. I say this because so many of our corporations look for cheap labor and other costs in different countries around the world that are vulnerable to our power. These American corporations will have their factors in other countries and control their workers. Then they can manipulate them and help out the government.For example, an American corporation like Target has a factory in Mexico. There might be some time of political thing going on in Mexico and a politician may be in favor to giving some control over the Mexico to the U. S. So Target will somehow bribe or persuade their workers to like this certain politician, giving the U. S. government what they want. This might me a dramatic situation but I believe it is happening. When I go to Target and buy a shirt I do not think about where it came from, what kind of environment it was made in, or who the people were who made it. American corporations can use their power against the government.If the government does not allow them to look elsewhere for cheap labor then they will no longer be funded and supported by that corporation along with other disadvantages. That could cause a domino effect with other corporations seeing this. It would simply tear our government apart. The government may be manipulating other countries but American corporations are the ones manipulating them. I always see commercials on TV, encouraging American citizens to help out others less fortunate in other countries. Sometimes the people that put on these commercials are American corporat ions.Those corporations have factors in other countries and are making it worse for that they are trying to â€Å"help†. It is a big act that the corporations put on to make it look like that they are not at fault; they are trying to fix things†¦ha. No matter where a corporation goes, labor is labor. Just because they move their factors to a poor country does not mean that the workers deserve less. They make surviving worse on them because they pay them nothing and never change it. Workers will work countless, harsh hours to make a tiny bit causing them to be mentally and physically ill.American corporations will promote help for the people that they are hurting. This is a concept that sadly I just figured out. 3. )No one should ever be murdered just for not agreeing and â€Å"going along with the program†. I would just go with it because I know how powerful the government is and I would not want to die. There have been many leaders and people of other countries w ho have not agreed with what the U. S. was trying to do with their country so they decided to put their foot down. Those people would usually end up dead or somehow their reputation got destroyed so they wished they were dead. It is a cycle that is hard to stop.People get scared of others who have power. That is horrible that power has to be used against people. I understand that this world is survival of the fittest but it is not a game to see who can win. It has been made into a game though and many people and countries lose against our government. The U. S. wins for all the wrong reasons. I understand that murder could be the answer if that person hurts our county in any way but I suppose they were just trying to make a stand in the wrong way. When I think about it I cannot think of how we can get out of this situation. How do I as a citizen of the U. S. ake our government stop this? I believe it will take a nation of citizens to realize this and make a change. 4. )The world†™s social class order is set up the exact same way as the United States’ social class. The dominant wealthy ones run the world while the rest of us live underneath them. In many social classes in the world the upper class has been distinguished by the possession of largely inherited wealth, while the working class has consisted mostly of manual laborers and semiskilled or unskilled workers, often in service industries, which earn moderate or low wages and have little access to inherited wealth.The middle class includes the middle and upper levels of clerical workers, those engaged in technical and professional occupations, supervisors and managers, and such self-employed workers as small-scale shopkeepers, businesspeople, and farmers. There is also often class permanently jobless and underemployed workers called the underclass. All of these things are related to our social system. I do not think the world has mimicked us but the U. S. has mimicked the world. We are a fairly younger country compared to others who also have had social classes sense their beginning.I do believe that when a nation changes their ways of social class sometimes others do too. The U. S. has much more equality in the social classes so other countries have seen how it works so they will make changes to their social class. The world social class as one has distinct social classes just like ours does. There are some differences though. The world social class seems to be ran more by the upper very wealthy social classes. These classes are made up of heirs that have lots of money. There are many countries who have families that have lots and lots of money.Our higher social classes do have heirs in them but I think many have made it to success and made lots of money. Social classes in the world have distinct different classes which I think we do to but there is a more mixture in each class. Sometimes people in upper class can also be categorized in the middle class, for example. 5. )Sense our world is getting older, goods and certain things are becoming limited. Each country has something that is known to them. A certain good that is in high demand is oil, for example. World political order has a lot to do with this subject.It is obvious that people who have money and are higher up in social stratification can manipulate each other which mean the average person just goes along with it. The United States has inequality as well as the rest of the world. Sometimes things that bring in money and power is more important to the ones that run each country. They will choose this over getting food to their starving citizens or put more labor into their country than into something else. I mostly am talking about the example given†¦oil. I think it is a product that holds lot of power and money. The people that have power over others, high social class people, ight over it all the time. Like I said before, countries will choose to put all of their time, energy and mo ney into the production or buying of oil. OPEC nations have this power over the rest of the world and fight against the other OPEC nations. They can easily bargain with the United States and manipulate us to give something, pay a certain amount or even sacrifice something that belongs to the citizens. It seems to me that due to economic sanctions Iran has been completely shut, both in and out. This is due to the United States and the power it has, to make their economy suffer so they can gain control.Other countries have followed along and that is why Iran’s economy has gotten worse. Requirement Two: â€Å"Move over U. S. A. -Our Biggest Economic Threats† 1. )From my research I found that China is one of the two countries that holds the biggest threat to the United States. China is second from the United States in gross domestic product at over $11trillion and gaining on the U. S. according to aneki. com (2012). GDP in the monetary value of all the finished goods and s ervices produced within a country's borders in a specific time period, usually calculated annually.The United States does have a higher GDP put China is growing on us and is determined to make more things and give out more services. This does not have to with economics but China’s education system is far better than the United States. Producing smarter people makes a better economy because those people are the ones that work for the economy making it better. United States is far away from have the same educational level as China, so this also poses a threat to us. China’s defense system is also growing towards our strong defense system.With recent reports of China’s threats to our nation it shows the tension and competition they have with us. India falls in next after China with the GDP at $4. 5 trillion. Their economy thriving. Even though $6. 5 trillion dollars from them to us with seems low, it really is not in this sense. Their economy has completely turned around in the past years and they could pass China then us any day. Like China, their education system is also thriving and becoming great. According to americaprogress. org (2013), by 2017 India will graduate 20 million people from high school.That is 5 times more than the United States. I think that India is not only getting richer but making extreme changes. Forty percent of India families survived on only $1. 25 a day. They are changing this through their education system by getting more children through school. It shows the drive for success this country has and how it can go from underdog to top dog. I know I really emphasized the educational success that China and India has been having but I believe that plays a huge factor in the future of our economy and position in the world.More educated people can bring bigger, brighter, and smarter decisions for things that deal with the economy. I am not saying that we as Americans are stupid but we need to push for better education to better ourselves. It may be an awakening for the United States. China and India’s rising GDP also shows that the two countries are making a better economy for themselves but this could cause problem for the United States. This causes a lot of pressure on us because it is coming close to the day when we are not the top dogs anymore.The government has to make careful decisions because knowing that 12% of our debt is owned by foreign countries could cause them to lose even more power. That 12% is a lot and with China and India becoming more powerful, that could become 100%. We could go from the top and powerful country to the slave to many countries. This would be a horrible situation but it could be a learning process for us. We have seen many 2nd rated countries go through some harsh things and somehow survive. Maybe as a nation we need a taste of this especially our government because they often take our society for granted.This may be a bit drastic for me to say but it is h ow I view it. References used in Requirement Two: (2012) http://www. aneki. com/largest_economies. html Cooper, Donna (2013) http://www. americanprogress. org/issues/economy/report/2012/08/21/11983/the-competition-that-really-matters/ Requirement Three: â€Å"Helping Developing Countries† Out of the theories I researched, I think that the dependency theory offers the best explanation for global stratification. This theory contends that the main reason why low-income countries are poor is because they are controlled by high-income countries.These countries exploit and dominate them. I think this is the perfect theory because it shows how much rich countries, especially the U. S. , take control of poor countries and make lives worse for the citizens. This is what this whole assignment is somewhat about†¦the power and control our nation has. Rich nations have a large amount of power by exporting jobs overseas, manipulating foreign aid, draining less powerful countries of th eir resources, and persuading or tricking national governments to comply their interests. This is what I have been discussing for part of my paper.Through this theory high-income countries benefit because the poor provide cheap labor and are no powerful enough to protest. I really believe that this shows how are world is ran. The government says they are helping other countries but really hurting them. The government I think wants to help less advantage countries but the thought of power, money, and being scared gets to them so they keep on manipulating other governments. This theory shows how global stratification works in this world and how it needs to change. The U. S. s not the only powerful country who falls under the dependency theory, other ones do and some are even worse. I believe that if we delete this theory and change global stratification, our problem with poverty in this world will stop. Christine Monnier (2011) from globalsociology. com says that dependency theory als o shows that the degree of dependency increases as time goes on. Wealthy countries are able to use their wealth to further influence developing nations into adopting policies that increase the wealth of the wealthy nations, even at their own expense.At the same time, they are able to protect themselves from being turned on by the developing nations, making their system more and more secure as time passes. Capital continues to migrate from the developing nations to the developed nations, causing the developing nations to experience a lack of wealth, which forces them to take out larger loans from the developed nations, further indebting them. This theory shows how bad countries manipulate each other and is also a never ending process. Reference used in Requirement Three: Christine, Monnier 2011 https://globalsociology. bworks. com/w/page/14711295/Theories%20of%20Global%20Stratification Requirement Four: â€Å"Open†¦. Yes†¦. ,But How Open? † a. After looking over my m atrix when I filled it out I noticed a few things. From my understanding and how I thought my matrix should be done I realized that each class of people is closed. Once a person is in a class, it is hard to be categorized into another by society. A person may go from manager to CEO and that would make them have more money and supposedly change their class. It is harder than that though.It is like what we talked about previously in our book, when society makes a stereotype there is no way to get out of that. I also noticed that I gave each class a certain annual income but after looking at it I think I was too low with each one. I thought that making $35,000 a year is middle class. I thought about it and that is more for the working class. It just shows that the modern society has changed and many people do not realize what â€Å"category† they are in. I also realized that while I filled it out I made it look like ever class besides upper and capitalist had no life or leisure time but actually their the happiest ones.Just because a person does not have a lot of money does not mean they are unhappy. Again, the stereotypical thought I had about each class got to me. After revising I would change a few things on my matrix. b. )The lower social classes are impacted hard by the out society’s stereotypical thought, like I said before. This is a huge obstacle these classes and it is hard for them to pass. It is also obvious to me that when a family is stuck in a lower class it is harder for them to get out of it within the next couple of generations.When a family does not have the means of sending their children to college, then usually that child will have to stay in the lower class because they cannot afford it either. This does not affect the poverty class but the working class and even the middle class as well. Lower class families also face the block of having a steady home. Due to money shortages, they have to move a lot going from house to house o r apartment. It seems to me that if you do not make a certain outrageous amount of money each year, then you will never get out and move up from your social class.The wealthy keep it this way by gaining more power while most of our society is trying to survive. I think that the rich have a lot of power in politics. They will sponsor and give money to politicians who agree with the way they think our society should be or keep it where it is at. Most politicians are wealthy anyways so they already know what to do. They are not there for the citizens but only for the wealthy citizens. They want to gain more power and money. It is all one big greedy cycle. Most wealthy people are good at building the people below them up, just to knock them down again.Like when huge corporations make expensive and big factors then higher people, then they turn around and lay off hundreds of workers because they cannot pay them. The wealthy want the best and to be the best so they overlook how much money they should be spending and then the workers are the ones to get damaged from it. Everywhere you go you can see how the wealthy make sure that the lower class people do not move up in class. For example, in the education system if you do not have the name, the money, or the power then you cannot attend some schools like the Ivey League schools.Tuition is pricey and is always going up. Who do you think raises that? Wealthy, greedy people do who have power to do that. Other classes have been created by the wealthy so when people of lesser class make more money they just move up to a little to the next class and are still far away from wealthy. Unless you somehow magically get millions and billions of dollars, it is very hard and usually not even an option to move up in class. The wealthy put us there and will not let us move. c. )I believe that social mobility plays a huge role in how I can understand the matrix I made.In my previous paragraphs I talked about intergenerational mobili ty (moving up or down the class hierarchy relative to the position of one’s parents). This is what I see happens a lot in our society. It is all about our last name, the money we hold, and the power we have just by the genes we are made up of. Intragenerational mobility (moving up or down the class hierarchy over one’s lifetime) does happen but from my matrix I think that people move down way more than they move up in class. I do not think it has always been this way but this is the way it is in our modern society.From reading about meritocracy (a belief that individual are rewarded for what they do and how well rather than on the basis of their ascribed status), it should be incorporated into our society and social class system way more than what it is now. This thought is just from my own beliefs and from studying how I filled out my matrix. People should not be punished or get rewarded through their ascribed status. I do not like using the term â€Å"ascribed statu s† because we all are our own individuals and should not be identified by our status.This reminds me of what we learned and wrote about from our first reflection paper. I like the idea that the Davis-Moore thesis (the functionalist view that social stratification benefits a society) has but I do not think it is implemented into our social class at all. From my view, social classes are negative but from this theory it is a positive thing. I believe that the people who need to understand this theory and make it work are the higher class people because they are the ones manipulating everything. After then accept it, we can then take advantage of our social stratification.I also believe that the use of corporate welfare (an array of direct subsidies, tax breaks, and assistance that the government has created for businesses) should be stopped because this is one of the many big parts to keeping lower class people where they are at. Instead of helping them out, the government will h elp the corporations out so they can keep their power and money. Helping them first makes sure that the government will still be supported and backed up as well. It is a never ending cycle to keep the poor†¦poor and the rich†¦richer. d. In my life time I would like have social mobility to move me up in class, just like everyone else would like. The first obstacle I cross is of course money. My parents have always helped me to get over this block because they pay for my college and support me with my living. This has helped me to focus on school and get good graded while having a part time job. I believe that getting through college is the first step for me to go up in social class. I also have picked a career in nursing which is a career that holds security and it is easy to advance in. I think that is a probably with today’s society.People choose jobs that they would like to have but most of them are unsteady with not very many openings and the chance of being laid off. Through college I can get my LPN, ADN, and BSN. Each degree can get me more money and more flexibility with the chance to increase my education. When I become a nurse I have to find the best area that can pay me the best and of course I have to like it. Once I am married and have a life I would like to have horizontal mobility (moving from one position to the another at the same class level) because it is not all about the money and class for me, I just want a happy life.This is just the way I would like everything to turn out in my life but after filling out my matrix I realized that this may not happen. As time will go one, society most likely will get worse and it will be even a bigger struggle to have social mobility. All I can do is set goals and try to achieve them but if I end up in a lower social class then I will have to accept that because it is not about my ascribed status with the little power and little money I have but how I live my life. All I can do is hope for the best. Requirement Five: â€Å"Socialism- American Style† a. I think that we will not come to terms with what our society is really like. I think that most of us dream and strive to have money and power because that is what America is all about. This is the country where your dreams can become true and you can live happily ever after. This is a great â€Å"idea† to have but it is not reality. Most poor people believe do not believe that the rich have put them there. Some do know this and try to fight it though. Rich people will help the poor but behind their backs they are just taking advantage of them. Most of us do not realize what is going on.I understand that this is the way it is because it is hard to know what the truth is†¦who to believe? Both rich and poor do not realize what truly is going on and how manipulating power and money is for both sides of the fence. It is a problem in a society that should be fixed but it is hard to find the first step to t hat. b. )Our nation’s welfare system I think helps the poor out a lot but maybe too much. This is how the rich can keep the poor poor. By allowing the poor to have an easy option to get welfare from the government, it enables them to try to better their lives.I do think that there are many poor people in American who need the help and take it while trying to give them a better life but there is also people who take advantage of it. It should become stricter with routine checks of how they are bettering themselves so they sometime will not have to use welfare. I explained this a little in this past week’s online discussion. By allowing more free money to the poor, this takes toll on the average American because they pay the taxes that fund the welfare system. More money allowed to the poor means more taxes being taken away from hard working people.It is a touchy subject because for some poor people it is hard to get out of poverty due to many factors and as a country we should help one another out. The welfare system does help many poor people but they should be pushed to get out of welfare and strive for better. If there are less people on welfare then this could take some power and control away from wealthy and powerful people. c. )I think that socialized medicine should be placed in our society. The health of each of us should be important to ourselves and also to our government.Medicine is a growing industry and with new technology and ideas it can help more people. Sadly though, many American cannot afford healthcare because they are not covered. After researching, I found that Obama-care has more pros than cons. I decided that I agree with it. Obama-care has been incorporated into our society for few years now and changes are happening, they are just taking time to be seen. According to Obamacarefacts. com, sense 2010 over 100 million American citizens have benefited from Obama-care.Its goal is to provide affordable health insurance for all US citizens and to reduce the growth in health care spending. Expensive health care means insurance companies are making more money when also means that the wealthy owners are gaining power. Obama-care may be what our nation needs for socialized medicine but it will take some time to figure it out. From my view, I think that we are on the right track and Obama-care has out us there. Being able to access cheaper healthcare or even just being able to get medical needs for everyone takes a lot of stress off of every citizen from rich to poor. . )In a perfect world I think that people over the age of 65 should have totally free medical care. I wish this could really happen but I do not think it ever will. I think that there might be a time where they pay very little for their medical care though. As a nation, we should strive to make the rest of their elderly lives comfortable because they have worked hard to get where they are at. Some elderly people have not worked very hard though an d those are the people who should be charged for their medical services. I think that when you put in the time you should get rewarded.There somehow needs to be a system where the government can tell how much time and effort that person has put into their jobs. This is kind of a crazy idea because it is hard to determine that we farmers or housewives for example who put countless hours into working and living for their family. Like I said before, I do not think that there will be a day where people older than 65 have free health care but we can aim to decrease their amount of paying as much as possible. I know when I reach that time in my life I will not want to be concerned about how much money I have to pay for healthcare.I would rather be thanked for all of my hard working hours that I gave to my community through cheaper healthcare. e. )I think that our society should incorporate more socialism because we are one nation so we should live as one. Many people are struggling in our society to survive and I think we need to come together to help one another out through forms of socialism. We should look at it as not being ran by the government but working together to benefit our nation not just ourselves as individual.I think that the education system should be available for all, from elementary through college. We should work as one unit to better educate our children. There also needs to be less power from the government and more power given to the people. It is basically what I have been saying throughout this whole paper. There needs to be equality through money and power going from each social class. I think my whole point of my paper is that socialism should be more incorporated into our society. Reference used in Requirement Five: (2010) http://obamacarefacts. com/obamacare-facts. php