Not My Cup of "Vomit"

I am not an avid news watcher, article reader, or blog scroller. In fact, typing and blog posts this year is the closest I’ve ever come blogs. So when I stumbled upon the “Barf Blog,” by Doug Powell, I didn’t really know what to make of it at first for a blog can have many of its own rules, but I knew what interested me and disinterested me.

The Barf Blog, for the most part, disinterested me.

The Barf Blog is intended to inform the reader about “safe food from farm to fork.” Throughout this blog Doug Powell explores food and it’s corrupt effects on society through labeling, disease, over pricing, nutrition, and cleanliness of food. At the same time, Powell also divulges into his personal life with his daughter and wife, and his many food related adventures in Canada, Kansas, New York, and Australia. Each day he makes around five to ten posts, each around two to ten short paragraphs long. Quantitatively the Barf Blog discusses many aspects of the food industry in just one day. Qualitatively Doug Powell barely shares a personal opinion or deeper thinking.    

Powell gives a short, and many times, repetitive scope of the corrupt food industry. Whether it be “3 sick; SD Salmonella outbreak associated with baby chicks” (4/20/13) or “34 sick, 2009-11; Salmonella and duck eggs in Ireland, outbreak summary“ (4/19/13) or “First, you growl: when your dog’s food is recalled for Salmonella“ (4/16/13) without any personal insight, Powell posts small random outbreaks of Salmonella almost daily. Although, yes, it is morally disturbing to hear people are dying from food, to read a very minor outbreak everyday is repetitive. Even then, it isn’t very shocking to read because very few people die and it’s affecting people from all around the world, like Irish duck eggs containing Salmonella getting 34 sick, or German sandwiches containing rat poison getting 25 sick.

Holistically what interested me most was finding out Powell’s opinion on monkey nuts, and elephant poop beer. He used humor, and let out his real persona in these posts, which is why I found it most interesting. Not only that, but he supplied interesting pictures and videos for both posts.

The most disappointing thing about this blog was when Powell would share an interesting argument, but wouldn’t support it. In “Duh: Consumers finally figure out organic is an excuse to charge more“ he argues that organic food isn’t necessarily healthier and that “microbial food safety should be marketed at retail so consumers can choose.” However for the rest of the article he goes into how “Americans need to learn this for themselves” and states several pointless statistics. I was more interested in learning how organic food could be unhealthy and how his retail strategy works. He does this again in “CSPI, Ramsey race to the gutter of food gimmicks.” In this he denounces food shows, which he doesn’t even watch, to be the same as they were ten years ago in that they were “nothing but hackdom.” I understand this is a personal blog where Powell has the freedom to voice his opinions, but considering he is a professor at the University of Kansas, Powell should qualify his claims.

Besides his bits of humor, I don’t think I would willingly read this blog on a daily basis. I suppose this blog is not my cup of "vomit."

http://barfblog.com/

An Opener To a Freer Future

GENERAL VERRILLI: Mr. Chief Justice, and

may it please the Court:
The equal protection analysis in this case

should focus on two fundamental points: First, what

does Section 3 do; and second, to whom does Section 3 do

it?

What Section 3 does is exclude from an array

of Federal benefits lawfully married couples. That

means that the spouse of a soldier killed in the line of

duty cannot receive the dignity and solace of an

official notification of next of kin.

(80:15-25: General Verrilli's opening argument)

On Wednesday morning, March 27, 2013, was a pivotal day for judicial history, for General Verrilli was representing the liberals' postion in United States v. Windsor. This was a court case that could change the future for Gay Marriage through potentially amending the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA). In General Verrilli’s opening argument he both responds to Mr. Clement’s argument, while maintaining a qualified and informative opening in a very effective way.

Firstly, he responds to Mr. Clement’s argument by integrating the moral consequences of DOMA. By responding to Mr. Clement at the beginning of his argument, General Verrilli can show the contrasting flaws in Mr. Clement’s claims. Mr. Clement focused primarily on the federal and state law, and was claiming that federal law should stay out of state policy. During his turn, he discussed with the justices the various policies like the Definition Act, and the boundaries of the Federal Government. To directly counter argue Mr. Clement, General Verrilli appealed to the justices morals through ethical and nationalistic biases. By referencing both the military, and DOMA’s heart wrenching policy that the spouse of a soldier “cannot receive the dignity and solace of an official notification,”  he shows the ethical injustices of DOMA’s Section 3. General Verrilli thereby counters Mr. Clement’s logistics with his ethical reasoning.

Through the use of rhetorical devices, General Verrilli effectively gets the attention of both his intended audience, the Supreme Court Justices, but also the news reporters and American citizens listening in on this court case.  He first leads in with his first paragraph by asking a question with the intent of sounding enlightening, yet also to focus on his thesis: that DOMA discriminates against homosexuals. Obviously the justices, and Mr. Clement knows DOMA through and through prior to the court case, but announcing this rhetorical question boosts his appeal from his unintended audience. Then, in his second paragraph, he uses words like “dignity and solace” to emphasise the nationalistic appeal to the American Military. Although the court justices instantly dismissed his pathos to move onto his main argument, adding in these rhetorical devices at least made his position clear and persuasive.

General Verrilli was also very careful and qualified in how he constructed his opening statement. He was able to appeal with both his diction and structure. Besides the procedural “Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court,” General Verrilli appears qualified through saying words such as “Fundamental” and “Formal Notification.” These words show that he is superior to Mr. Clement’s logistics through him simplifying DOMA to its bare ethics. Sequentially, this is a clever strategy for an opening statement because it shows that both General Verrilli can be factual, and he can set up his ethical analysis of DOMA, for later in his argument. Staying broad in idea, yet specific in fact is what makes this opening statement clear and concise.

For an opening statement, General Verrilli must have put a lot of time into it. It was strategic for it set up his later argument. He was quick and effective without ever pausing or stumbling. He also appealed to his unintended audience through his rhetorical devices and clarity. Hopefully with his argument, the Supreme Court will side with being Pro Same-sex Marriage.

Would You Like That Wrapped?

When I was a child, at one point I was sitting in the middle of an expensive Italian restaurant. It was your atypical shrimp penne alla vodka, priced at eighteen dollars. I munched away at the sweet yet repetitive taste of pasta and vodka sauce. After ten minutes I start to wonder if I have even made a dent into the pile of pasta, for the majority of the pasta was still on the plate . I finally decided that I was too full and tired of vodka sauce. Just as I’m pushing my plate away with a third of the meal left, suddenly the waiter shows up asking the question.  

“Would you like that wrapped?”

Feeling frugal and efficient, I foolishly replied that I would love to get it wrapped. Sure I may have eaten all five shrimps, leaving the bland pile of pasta with vodka sauce, but I thought I could just eat it over the weekend. Little did I know it would mold up in my refrigerator after two months.

Sadly, this cycle of leftovers continued. I could never forget the “beautiful” smell of mold as my mother ordered me to throw the leftovers away and to even disinfect the refrigerator. I would trash blueberry pancakes, shrimp lomein, sushi, and pineapple pizza. Each time I would wonder why I was so lazy, and didn’t touch it.

It wasn’t until only a few years ago I finally ate my first leftovers: crab ravioli. It was in that moment that I realized why I didn’t eat leftovers. It tasted dry, cold, and nasty, and reminded me of every time I had thrown away moldy, old leftovers. From that moment on, I would decline getting my meal wrapped. However, each time I answered no to the waiter, I felt guilty!

Does this mean I’m not frugal anymore? Should I just suck up the moldy memories and eat the leftovers? What about those children in Africa or China who are hungry? Many of these questions would haunt me whenever I ate out so I finally reached a conclusion I could live with. If I’m satisfied with how much I eat my meal, then I’m getting my money’s worth. I've learned, through my experience that getting left overs is not worth the stomach ache. If finishing all of my meal leaves me lethargic, then finishing my meal with a quarter left is worth it. Likewise, if I’m to bring leftovers home for a future unsatisfying meal, then I shouldn’t wrap it. I'm not being pompous in deciding not to finish meal, but that I know my limits. Now whenever I eat out, I feel confident in indulging myself however much I want. 

So no, I would not like that wrapped.

"Made in U.S.A." Is An Endangered Specie

There is no avoiding the influence that is China, and many other developing nations. In just one decade of products, goods have gone from "Made in U.S.A." to "Made in China." Looking at old wash clothes, baby clothing, and old pillows, I find made in the U.S.A., but my closet is a whole other story. My clothing comes from places such as China, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, and India (China being the majority).  All but one brand of my clothing in my closet is made the U.S.A. This one brand being "Threadless," an online shirt company that makes many silly shirt prints. It doesn't stop there; all of my electronics, including alarm clocks, iPhone, lamps, and toys are all made in China. What I found most surprising was that many of my tourist fixtures, like a New York Snow globe, or a mini statue the Empire State Building were all made in China. The only products I use in my house that are made by U.S.A. is my toothpaste, mouthwash, shampoo, conditioner, soap, and chap stick. In other words, any product that has liquid and basic chemicals. Based on the many imported goods I end up buying, free trade in the United States must benefit many other country's income. Therefore, although "Made in U.S.A." is dying off as the United States starts relying more on imports, optimistically consumers receive cheaper goods, while America builds better trade relations with other countries. 

Why then do many people believe the majority of products should still be made in America? I've heard two key reasons people may believe this. One: America should maintain nationalism, therefore all products should say "Made in U.S.A." This will somehow make us all more patriotic as a whole. I disagree with this because based on the many products I've cataloged, finding the actual tag and reading the text on the tag is a tedious task, that the usual consumer (including myself) wouldn't usually do. Therefore, it will have a minimal, unconscious effect on how we see our country.  Two: America is losing many of its manufacturing jobs to outsourcing, therefore without jobs, our people are losing money. This is one of the effects of outsourcing that can't be avoided, but evolved from. Society, since the second industrial revolution, has built a job market around manufacturing. Now that outsourcing is causing this job market to be an endangered specie, America must evolve it's job market to suit jobs that can make money. So although with people with lost manufacturing jobs may suffer now, if America is pursuing free trade, society must evolve to a newer job market. "Made in U.S.A." may be dying off, but with free trade, America can live without it. 

Should America Give Up On Technological Jobs?

When I grow up, I want to get a job as a computer programmer, or a job related to technology. However, after looking into outsourcing, I found that getting a job in technology was just a waste of time, for outsourcing would "move" my job to another country. This put me in quite a panic because I thought I'd have to compromise my dream job for something else. Outsourcing has been the supposed silent killer of many jobs in technology and yet somehow our economy's savior, for outsourcing, "gained momentum after the Internet started bringing together every corner of the world"(Ghimire). However, because of this momentum, Me, as well as many other teens should be aspiring for technological jobs now more than ever for progression and innovation of technology. 

Many have said that outsourcing and off-shoring, although has reduced the prices of many products, has put many people impoverished. However, due to the recent recession, "those jobs would have been lost regardless of the outsource option being available or not"(Tony). Our country is slowly losing many of its high-wage workers because many companies are dying off regardless of outsourcing. Outsourcing, many times, is a company's last resort to avoiding bankruptcy. However, because of this recent conspiracy that off-shoring puts technological jobs at risk, many American teens, fear going into technological jobs because they worry it will be off-shored. Because of this questionable information, "students are concerned that their jobs could eventually be outsourced internationally and are therefore deciding to focus on their business skills"(LaMarca). But what many don't realize is that America must change it's direction of technical occupations. Now that many countries are capable of doing many manufacturing and service work, America must move onto being inventors. This is just and observation, but the most popular companies in the world are companies like Google, Apple, and Disney, are filled with inventors, creators and merchandisers. These companies each started with one inventive idea, that has been expanded upon so much so that they are the powerful company they are today. We too, should be looking for jobs like those in Google, or Apple, that are creating many new ideas for the internet, phones, and computers that revolutionize technology.

I, as well as many other aspiring teens, when deciding their career or major in college, should be looking for something that is creative, and expansive. If we aren't the ones to be in the call centers, then we should be the ones making call centers more efficient. In other words, we shouldn't be the "machines" doing all the work technology can do, but being the ones inventing the technology to fill in those jobs. Outsourcing is just another way of making companies more efficient. We should look for jobs the same way Frederick Winslow Taylor did in 1909 when he revolutionized the job market with his book, The Principles of Scientific Management. When he made this book, in the time of the second industrial revolution, machine was replacing many manufacturing jobs, Frederick's theory was that instead of firing many manufacturers, they should put them in higher management to make manufacturing more efficient. Frederick's principle was that, “In the past the man has been first; in the future the system must be first”(Taylor). Although it's a century since his book, we should also apply his thinking when applying for jobs. We shouldn't be picking jobs that machines or other people can do, but jobs that are making the machines, or people more efficient. Therefore, for those who are interested in technology, like myself, should be looking for a job that are creating new ideas, and not ones that are carrying out ideas (like service jobs or manufacturing). America should definitely not give up on technological jobs, for creating technology is the way of the future. 

Works Cited:

Tony. "(Important) Computer Science Jobs Are Not Outsourced." CompScicablog RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

Ghimire, Bhumika. "IT Job Outsourcing." IT Job Outsourcing. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

LaMarca, Tina. "Outsourcing America's Future." N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Mar. 2013.

Taylor, Frederick Winslow. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Norton, 1967. Print.

Outsourcing Hurts American Programmers

In the United States, off-shoring and outsourcing has been the killer of many computer programming jobs. Many of these jobs have been dying off because countries like India are willing to do the same jobs at lower wages. The city Bangalore in India for the past fifty years has been encouraging and supporting computer science studies, so when these American jobs were outsourced, Bangalore became the center of many new higher paying computer science jobs for India. Even Americans who have received bachelor's or higher degrees for Computer Science are losing their jobs. American Legislators have recently created economic policies allowing more global free trade, thereby giving many companies freedom to offshore many of their jobs. While this brings America and India a lot of money, many Americans lose their job. America shouldn't outsource jobs because Americans deserve to keep their jobs, as well as bring business and progression in the Computer Science field.

Computer Science isn't a manufacturing type of a job. It requires brain power and math skills, and many computer science jobs are the backbone for many companies' business and profits. During the recession, many companies gave away these jobs to India because it would be more profitable to the company. This is partially why so many people in the recession lost their job. "About 92 percent of Tata Consultancy’s 250,000 workers worldwide are Indians, according to the company"(Helyar).  This means that most of Tata Consultancy's jobs are out of the country. This includes many call centers, and computer programming jobs. Outsourcing jobs is keeping many Americans from money they could be making. Many American's are forced to work in new fields just to stay afloat in our economy. Michael Zurich being fired from his software engineering job, "became a math teacher in 2010 after a fruitless 18-month job search"(Steele). Being fired from a high paying job is detrimental to many American's lifestyles. For workers, having a stable job is the easiest way to supporting a family. 

In essence, Outsourcing is bad for America. It's not out of patriotism that it is, but because economically Americans are getting the short end of the stick.  Even though the company may be making more money by off-shoring their jobs, Americans are losing their jobs in the process.  

Works Cited:
"Outsourcing Turns Inside-Out as Indians Open U.S. Centers." Bloomberg. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2013.
"Offshoring Ensures Loss of Good U.S. Jobs." Philadelphia Inquirer. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2013.

The Dialects of the Internet

Many people on the internet like to diversify themselves through various typing quirks. Because technology has encouraged a more typed language, than a spoken language, many people fall into various habits in typing with friends or on forums. Since friends are typically not judgmental of not using Standard English, people feel there is more lee-way to type more informally. Once the barriers of formality are broken, many new ways of typing emerge. Firstly, when entering the world of typing informally, many people fall into typing what is most efficient:

Efficient Typing Quirks:

1. Typing with abbreviations and never capitalizing: brb; gtg; omg; lol; etc.

2. Replacing words or feelings with letters, symbols or numbers: c u l8r; i <3 u.

3. Taking out as many vowels and consonants as possible: wht hw do w hve 2nite?

This Efficiency Typing Quirks, although quick to type, may show a level of un-intelligience. Although it can be considered quirky, and punny at times, in an online community there is elitism in the way you type. Efficient Typing Quirk users are usually considered beginners of the online messaging world. 

The next most commonly used informal typing quirk are ones that show personal emotion. When talking face to face in Standard English, there is facial and body language people pick up on to understand a wide range of emotions. When speaking Standard English on the phone, the tone of your voice can indicate a smaller range of emotions. Although, in typing messages, all emotion is lost. If everyone were to speak in Standard English to their friends, they'd need to explicitly state that "I feel angry" to indicate emotion. This is way too formal and lackluster. Since your friends can’t see you, making emoticons, using many punctuation points, or using all caps becomes a key indicator of how you are feeling.

Personal Emotion Typing Quirks:

1.I AM SO EXCITED FOR TOMORROW!!!; I'M SO CONFUSED???

2. I am so excited for tomorrow :D;  I'm so confused O_o.

3. People may also show emotion through announcing various actions: *Dances with excitement for tomorrow*; *Tips head in confusion*

This typing quirk is more respected in online communities for it requires a broader vocabulary, and use of imagery.  It is also very useful in using sarcasm. With Standard English, sarcasm is represented by using quotes around what you want to be sarcasm. This system of showing sarcasm is very inefficient because many could confuse your statement with an actual quote. With Personal Emotion Typing Quirks, it is easier to explicit point out sarcasm. Using some form of Emotional Typing Quirks in typed messaging is a very integral part of communication.

Using typing quirks have become very widespread. Typing quirks are a lot like spoken dialects because they are understandable by all of that language, even if one doesn't speak the dialect themselves. The main difference is that typing quirks are not region based, but interest based. Because everyone is formerly taught to type and write in standard English, no matter what ethnicity or gender one may be, they are recognized as any person the internet. Therefore, many typing quirks are based off what internet communities and forums one may belong to. If someone were to talk to you which goes on the forum "4chan", and someone were to talk to you who goes on "Reddit", the one from "4chan" would probably have a more vulgar typing style. Likewise, if you were to speak with someone from "Hellokitty Online", and someone from "Call of Duty", the one from "Call of Duty" will probably have a more efficient typing quirk, while the one from "Hellokitty Online" will probably have a more emotional typing quirk due to the playing style of the games. There are obviously exceptions, but generally stereotyping these quirks is based on interests.

Having these typing quirks are very important to the internet. Other than just the utility of being able to show your emotions or write something quickly, typing quirks provide individualism on the internet. Since the internet is a haven for informality and expression, typing quirks provide all users of the internet to have freedom of speech (or in this case typing). Writing in Standard English may help with explicitly stating one's ideas in a more systematic, respected way. However, writing with a typing quirk makes the internet more personal. I agree with the use and expansion of typing quirks because the internet symbolizes creativity and freedom. 

Taking into account the vast amount of typing quirks, there is code switching on the internet. The reason I wrote this blog primarily in Standard English is because I see Standard English as a way to organize my thoughts. On forums I usually write in Standard English because it's most comfortable and logical for my thinking. However when I talk to friends, I usually speak in an emotional typing quirk because I have a closer connection with them. Anyone may speak however they like on the internet, though the mainstream Standard English is what most people will understand. In other words, there is code switching on the internet depending on the medium one speaks. 

Speak what you see as most comfortable while you're on the internet, and show off your personality however you like!