tokiokobayas's blog

    In current society, there lies a stigma against socialism as if it goes against capitalism and democracy in the United States. In reality, socialism does not go against either of these, and in fact can exist happily with both. Socialism is the idea that people who earn a greater salary, get taxed more in order to help pay for programs that are beneficial for society. These taxes are relative to a person’s income, therefore everyone is taxed roughly the same percentage off their paycheck. These programs include programs such as medicare, medicaid, free higher education, free health care, and more. The main argument against socialism argues that the reward from earning a higher salary is diminished due to higher taxes, and instead “punishes the rich”. Although it is true that the more a person makes, the more they are taxed, but that does not mean that everything they are earning is being put into taxes. The social programs are also beneficial to society as a whole, and people of all wealth classes benefit from them being free. It is understandable that multi-millionaires might be getting taxed a couple thousand, if not tens of thousands of dollars more than the average worker making minimum wage, but that money is being put into good use. It does not mean that those who earn more will eventually earn the same amount as everyone else--socialism is not communism, they’re severely different.

    For some reason, there lies this stigma against socialism as if it goes against capitalism and democracy. Socialism does not go against either of these, and in fact can exist happily with both. Socialism is the idea that those that make more money, get taxed more in order to help pay for programs that are beneficial for society. These programs include programs such as medicare, medicaid, free higher education, free health care, etc. Some people view this as a negative detriment though because if they make more money, they end up getting taxed more. Yet just because they’re being taxed more, that does not mean that everything they are earning is being put into taxes and social programs they aren’t participating in. Sure that multi-millionaire might be getting taxed a couple thousand, if not tens of thousands of dollars more than the other guy making minimum wage, but that money is being put into good use. It does not mean that those who earn more will earn the same as everyone else--socialism is not communism, they’re severely different.

    The inclusion of participation inside a classroom for a grade is the most bizarre and unnecessary thing required out of most, if not all classes from the AP/IB level and above. Participation arises if the teacher is engaging enough with the material, as well as if the students themselves have questions or are not performing well. When participation is necessary, such as coming to class, it causes the students to lose lots of valuable time if they do not find the lectures beneficial. In a perfect world, professors should notify students when the lecture material will deviate from what would be available from home, so students know to come to class on those specific days. This case in point ties into why reverse classroom is becoming more popular in recent times. By having the students learn the material in their own time and their own pace, they will become able to come to class with questions from what they learned. The only reason participation is a required in most classrooms is just to make sure the course material is forced to become “engaging”. Everyone learns at a different pace and in different ways. Material does not always have to be “engaging” as long as it’s being understood.

    Faheem Rasheed Najm, better known as T-Pain, at his peak was one of the most influential artists in the late 2000’s. He utilized auto-tune in a way that although was used very little here and there for pitch correction before 2005, he changed the way it was used in a very drastic way, that caused the music industry to be shooken up by storm. He influenced very large named artists back then, including Kanye West with his album 808s and Heartbreak, which was completely influenced by T-Pain’s use of autotune. His usage of auto-tune caused a lot of backlash from a lot of people as well, with a lot of people saying that the way he used auto-tune was what “was wrong with music” at the time. A lot of critics still followed the philosophy of 1980s and 1990s rock music, which was supposed to be “as raw as possible”. The inclusion of auto-tune was then looked at as a complete contrast to what music was “supposed to be”. The general perception of auto-tune is that it’s this magical filter you can put on any artist, and it will make them sound good. This could not be further from the truth. In order to still sound decent with auto-tune enabled, you still have to sing relatively on pitch. T-Pain really demonstrated this aspect of it when in 2014, he appeared on NPR tiny desk and sang without autotune for the first time to the public, and completely took the world by storm with his incredible vocals. From that performance on, he really demonstrated that he never needed autotune, but rather used it to its potential as an instrument instead.

    There is a saying that goes “every person you meet in your life, is either a lesson or a blessing”. This idea plays on the philosophy that mistiming occurs, which a lot of us can agree upon. Sometimes we’re too young when we met the perfect person, and that immaturity caused rifts to grow, when in reality the relationship could’ve really went somewhere had the two met later in life than earlier. Yet can that really be said? Sometimes we meet the right people at the wrong time, but if we had not met them, would we still be the same person now? In my opinion, the answer’s no. Without that person we lost in life, we would not understand how to preserve those that are important to us now. To call it mistiming in my opinion, is misconstrued and comes from a place of regret. Instead, it’s important to understand our mistakes so that these mistakes are prevented in the future.

    In Japanese culture, there is a famous saying that (when translate) states, “do your best not to bother the people around you”. This causes a huge culture of respect to emerge from this mindset, where the people do their best to keep anything public as clean as possible. This means public bathrooms are always very clean, the streets are kept clean from garbage, and even at the train stations, the people will line up in order to enter the train, and will always wait until everyone leaves the car before entering. The trains and public transport are also all very quiet. If someone were to talk on the phone in the front of the bus, that person could be whispering the conversation and they would still be loud enough that someone in the back can tell someone is saying something at the front. I feel as though America could do it’s part in trying to adopt this mindset, compared to the cultural mindset that we currently have which is more similar to “do whatever’s best for you”. This means littering occurs a lot more often, public bathrooms are not treated with respect, and there’s constantly people running into each other as people are trying to get off public transit. It’s unfortunate people live in such a “greedy” mindset, but that is what occurs when we all are trying to live in a way that is focused on just ourselves.

    Currently, there are a lot of allergies in the world, and it seems like you can be allergic to almost anything. Yet does the possibility exist that we will be able to stop being allergic to anything as a species in the future? As of right now, the only “remedy” to an allergy lies in using an epipen when an allergic reaction occurs. The solution right now only exists by eliminating the problem in case it occurs. Yet couldn’t we genetically engineer a method that allows us to alter our bodies so that allergens are not considered foreign anymore? That would solve the root of the problem and allow us to live without allergies. Of course, this solution brings forth a lot of ethical issues. If we are able to become immune to allergens, what’s stopping us from doing cosmetic changes based off our genome? This would introduce a lot more problems such as the standard of beauty in society, how important we view attractiveness, etc. As of current, the only methodology that’s similar yet ethical to this would be through epigenetics--where our genetics are altered due to outside stimuli. We are able to grow older and eventually “grow out” of our allergies, but are even able to become allergic to new things when we get older.

    They say that unless a child starts learning a language before the age of 6, they will be unable to speak proficiently and fluently enough that they sound native. This is technically incorrect. The way the brain picks up language is actually very similar to how we interpret music. For music, the brain will make “presets” that determine what “music is”. Our brain will then listen to other pieces of music, and compare it with the preset that we have as to what music is defined as. If the preset does not match to what we are listening to, then the brain will decide “oh we do not like this”. The same goes for language, but in a slightly different sense. The brain will create presets based on the sounds that are created in an alphabet of a language. For example, our brain distinctly knows the difference in sound between a “ruh” sound for “r”, and a “luh” sounds for “l”, and is able to formulate the differences in these two sounds. Languages like Japanese or Korean, do not have a distinctive “r” or “l” sound, so when native Japanese or Korean people hear the words “law” and “raw”, they hear the same thing because they never developed the preset to differentiate the two sounds. For them, the two words sound the same. So instead, the child simply has to be exposed to (at the very least) the alphabet of a language in order to still be able to speak proficiently and fluently if they would like to study the language in the future.

    In general, it can be agreed upon that order and law is required in order to run a successful business or maintain stability in society. Yet is this always the case? For example, a grocery store throws out tons and tons (literally) of food every single day. Grocery stores throw out over 43 billion tons of food annually. That food can be used in order to feed the homeless or feed people who don’t have enough food for groceries. Yet due to laws and liability issues, large grocery stores like Market Basket are not allowed to do that. I think it’s undeniable though that the food is being put to waste, and should be used better. In 2010, there was a lot more advocating for a change in the system, and allowing the food to be distributed to homeless shelters in order to prevent such wastefulness. There was a lot of talk of trying to pass a bill that would allow the grocery stores to be protected in case someone were to eat something that gave them food poisoning. Although a lot of health risks and problems may arise from people eating the food, as long as they consent to the food that they eat and know where it’s coming from, then there should be no liability issues present. Personally, I don’t see how that bill never passed and why we’re allowed to watch so much food go to waste.

     Male manakins are most popularly known for the “moonwalk” dance in order to attract potential female partners. This unique and amusing type of dance plays a crucial role in attracting a female manakins. The dance mainly consists of movements and sounds which includes fast movements up and down the branch (the “moonwalk”), snapping their wings to make noise, shooting between his perch and his surroundings, flying in circles around then swooping, and finally spinning to reveal their bright yellow legs. By utilizing this behavior, they attract potential mating partners, and the variations in the mating dance is what causes attraction in females. These variations can be observed and recorded, and behavioral flow charts can then be constructed to determine what specific variations cause female attraction, as well as what causes attention retention to increase in females.