There are rumors that some members of Congress are considering pushing a bill that would make it illegal for dogs and cats to live together in the US.
Supporters of this bill are claiming that cats and dogs living together attack the moral fabric of society. One person, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity, said the idea of dogs and cats who cohabitate is essentially an attack on family values and sets a bad example for children.
Opponents of the bill argue that it violates cats and dogs’ constitutional rights. Many others believe dogs and cats should enjoy the same rights that are given to other animals such as pigs, ducks and zebras. Organizers have already began to rally people to protest this bill before it can become law. Some have started obtaining petitions, while others have taken to the streets to set up peaceful demonstrations.
It is unlikely this bill will receive ample to support, but there are still many concerned families who currently own both cats and dogs. These families fear that if this bill does become a law, it will cause a split between family members on which animal to keep.
We’ll keep you posted as this story develops. Up next, we’ll have an indepth look at how space planners are preparing mankind on colonizing Mars within the next 2 years.
I have been wanting to write this blog entry for quite some time, but I haven’t had the opportunity to give it proper attention until now.
A few months ago, I attended two weddings within a few weeks of one another. As I observed both weddings, I began to think about how weddings themselves hold no instrumental value. Rather, they have ceremonial value.
Marriages often involve some type of a celebratory ceremony where friends and family gather to witness two people commit themselves to each other for the rest of their lives. These ceremonies have different ranges and can be anywhere from extravagant and lavish to simplistic and intimate. Traditionally, a licensed official performs the ceremony in front of all the witnesses followed by a reception where everyone celebrates the new chapter in the couple’s lives.
Weddings are a celebration. They add no additional value to two people’s love for one another nor do they provide any instrumental enhancement for a marriage. A couple who have an extravagant wedding do not love each other more than a couple who have a simple wedding–rather, the former couple are participating in conspicuous consumption. And a couple who decide to be married at a courthouse are still married in the eyes of the government. The recognition of their marriage is no less meaningful than a couple who have a sunset beach wedding.
Weddings may not have any instrumental value–only ceremonial value–but they do create economic value. If we examine closely what is involved when it comes to planning a wedding, there is a lot of economic activity involved; however, that economic activity varies based on the couple and their budget.
I did some research and found this information here from the Library of Congress (LOC). The LOC identifies some available services when it comes to a wedding: dresses, consultants, food, videography, disc jockey, favors/bridesmaids gifts and destination weddings. The demand for these services creates jobs for individuals. After all, we need bakers to make the cake, cooking staff to prepare the meals, waiters and waitresses to serve the food, tailors to fit the clothes and so forth.
There is demand for other services such as travel, hospitality, decorations, rental of banquet hall for reception, etc. Depending on the complexity of the wedding, the list of services could go on and on.
I couldn’t find official statistics on weddings, but I did stumble across the following website here. It provides some statistics for weddings in 2011 (I can’t assure the accuracy of these numbers). As you can see, the average amount of money spent on a wedding is quite high.
Weddings are a celebration of a lifetime commitment of love. While they may have only ceremonial value, there are certainly economic benefits from them.
I really enjoyed this amazing YouTube video that recaps the 2012 Stanley Cup Finals series between the Los Angeles Kings and the New Jersey Devils. It’s quite impressive to say the least due to the outstanding quality of the chosen footage, the music selection, and the drama of the series.
There is one thing that bothered me about the video; it happens around 21 seconds into the video. The commentator, Mike Emrick, says, “You see his name as both a pronoun and a verb describing the way he plays,” when referring to Jonathan Quick’s last name.
First, it is incorrect to categorize Quick as a pronoun when referring to someone’s last name. The proper categorization is proper noun.
Second, it is incorrect to refer to quick as a verb. Quick is an adjective, as in, “Jonathan Quick is very quick.”
I don’t know whether “Doc” was caught up in the moment, or if he thought pronoun and verb flowed much better than proper noun and adjective. I do think he does his audience a disservice when it comes to his ad-hoc grammar lesson. However, I will give him the benefit of the doubt by assuming he was caught up in the moment and didn’t have much time to process what he was saying.
Scrooge McDuck, the multi billionaire dollar mallard from Duckburg, USA, is set to make a surprising announcement. Sources close to him have confirmed that he plans to donate 99% of his wealth to numerous, “worthy” organizations around the world–or as he likes to call it, the pond.
Mr. McDuck admits to losing interesting in swimming through all his cash reserves at his infamous money bin. He has suffered several concussions from the constant dives into the coins, which some are speculating as the real reason for his sudden generosity.
Among his ardent supporters are his nephews Donald Duck, Huey, Louie and Dewey. Also applauding his new sense of generosity are Duckworth, his long time butler, Launchpad McQuack, his long time pilot, Gyro Gearloose, his personal inventor, Mrs. Beakley and her granddaughter, Webby–all are expected to be in attendance when he makes his announcement.
There are some critics who are questioning McDuck’s intentions. They include his long time rival Flintheart Glomgold, who is characterizing these actions not as heroic and altruistic but as a public relations stunt to win more favorable attention towards McDuck Industries.
Other fierce critics include Magica De Spell, who sees McDuck as a thorn in her side. Not surprisingly, the Beagle Boys, who McDuck has foiled many times in the past for their constant attempts of robbing him blindly, have said they don’t think he’s doing it out of the kindness of his heart due to his reputation of being cheap.
McDuck’s representatives deny anything other than good will and genuine sincerity about helping others as being the key factors to his decision to part ways with much of his wealth.
Human rights groups, charities and NGOs are some of the groups expected to receive donations.
Mr. McDuck plans to keep his lucky number one dime, which he credits for much of his success, because of its special value and significance in his life. The event for the announcement will be held in two weeks outside McDuck’s mansion with many dignitaries in attendance, including the legendary and iconic Mickey Mouse.
It’s not hard to understand why city workers in Escondido, CA are protesting a decision to give raises to top managers who are making quite a substantial amount of money in the first place–above $100,000 to be exact. Even though the city is cash strapped, the top managers are to receive pay hikes while the rest of the city employees are being told to suck it up.
Cases like this one, where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, are the reasons we have seen the Occupy movement gain so much traction, especially during times when so many of us have become victims of greed.
Update: It appears the city of Escondido isn’t the only city in San Diego county to approve a raise for its highly paid managers. Carlsbad has issued a 6% raise for its city manager.
A friend sent me the following link here about South Korean men who are using marriage brokers to help themselves find brides from Vietnam. While arranged marriages are not unusual in a lot of societies–Vietnam included–the business aspect of these marriages have seemed to dilute the meaning of marriage, at least if we are to look at marriage from a western perspective.
The arrangement is quite simple. A man from South Korea who is seeking a bride hires himself a marriage broker. The marriage broker arranges to fly the man to China or Vietnam in order to introduce him to a group of women who are looking not only to marry someone but who are also looking to marry a man able to help their families financially. After spending a few fleeting minutes with each woman, the bride and groom are swept away to be married quickly once the man has made his choice. The transaction seems to go smoothly because the man has himself a bride, while the woman’s family receives a monetary assistance from the groom.
However there is an alarming matter of concern regarding these arranged marriages: the possibility of domestic violence that results once a newly married woman has moved to South Korea. The hurried nature of the marriages doesn’t offer any of these women a real opportunity to really get to know her new life partner. Some marriages often ending in terrible violence as men physically abuse their new brides because the brides are unaware of any history of violence or mental problems with their new husbands. This article here provides several accounts of violence towards several Vietnamese women who married South Korean men.
The South Korean government can do more to help quell this issue of violence by setting up programs or agencies that can assist newcomers adjust to their new country, or by requiring and enforcing stricter screening requirements on men who are choosing to marry women from other countries. I can only imagine how difficult the transition must be; after all, one is talking about living in a new country, leaving one’s friends and family, feeling isolated, learning a new language and culture, and committing one’s life to a perfect stranger.
It’s not very often I have the opportunity to write a blog post on February 29, so I thought I would take advantage of today’s date by sharing the following picture.
One lesson we are all taught in economics is there is no such thing as a free lunch. However, the sign in the above picture claims the store is giving away a free wife–wife miễn phí translates into free wife.
But maybe, just maybe, an employee at the sign store made a boo boo and wrote wife instead of wi-fi. In any event, I wonder how many eligible bachelors visited this store in hopes of receiving his free wife?