The Corporate Takeover of American Farming Essays

The Corporate Takeover of American Farming Essays The Corporate Takeover of American Farming Paper The Corporate Takeover of American Farming Paper Essay Topic: Slaughterhouse Five We are literally eating ourselves to death. For the first time in American history, the generations born after the baby boomers face a lower life expectancy than their parents did. This situation Is largely a result of a product that we cannot even eat until it has been processed into our food and drink supply. This food, plus a sedentary life-style, have caused an epidemic of obesity which has been on the rise in America for the past 30 years, increasing the rate of diabetes and other food- related Illnesses. Because of the method of farming, the use of chemical fertilizers, ND the supply of genetically modified seed for crops of corn and soy, we have plenty of cheap food available in the US, but this food comes a at a cost. It causes so many problems with our health that we would be much better off with a lower quantity of a higher quality substitute which we would call wholesome food. The primary Ingredient Is found In the most common element In our food supply: corn. Not the type of sweet corn that you eat off the cob in the summer-time, but an inedible corn that must be processed at high heat levels to be transformed into a starchy mess before any mammal can eat it. This corn product Is in our food and our sweetened soft drinks. It Is used as cattle feed because It Is cheap and readies the cows for market in a shorter time than the grass which cattle have naturally evolved to eat. It is in ready-made foods and soft drinks in the form of high fructose corn syrup. Another ingredient grown by US farmers is soybeans. These are also used to feed cattle and they wind up In two-thirds of all processed foods (Pollen p bib Corporations run the whole system to their ultimate benefit in the form of cheap feed and sweetener as inputs of production. Ethanol producers also benefit from the availably of cheap corn. This corn is farmed at a loss to farmers which the U. S. Government makes up for In the form of subsidies called deficiency payments. Without these subsidies, farmers would not be able to earn a living farming such a low-priced commodity. Thesis The modern corporation has taken over the farming industry. What we have, as a result, Is a near serfdom In the personage of farmers who must follow the rules that corporations set when they draft the Farm Bill. Corporate lobbyists control the production of corn and soy beans for their own benefit. We, as taxpaying citizens, subsidize a system of over-production and farm subsidies which only allow farmers to barely survive volcanically, while ultimately benefiting only the corporations who write the rules for their own game In the end. The result Is a diet which Is unhealthy for Americans to eat, causing obesity and a myriad of related health problems and farmers who have no say in the economics of agribusiness. Problem Because of the corporate control of farming In the United States, we are faced with a staggering set of problems which have no easy fix. Four corporations, Monsanto, DOD Chemical, Archer Daniels Midland, and the Cargill Group control the vast majority of the food supply (Wolf). One of every four Americans lived on a farm near OFF ten turn AT ten TNT century (Pollen 3 ) Nine, a Tarter could supply enough T feed his family and twelve others also. Today, less than two million people in the United States still farm. (ibid). Yet, they grow enough food to feed the entire population and then some. Today, in Iowa, what we used to call the Bread Basket of America, farmers grow nothing but corn and soy beans. Todays typical farm is so productive that it can feed 120 Americans (ibid). American farmers are the most productive of all humans in any civilization in history. But this productivity comes at a high cost to humans, animals, and the entire ecosystem. Because corn is so abundant and cheap, it is used in various forms in the American food supply. As stated above, this type of corn is inediblefor anyone or any animal. It must be processed and heated to a mush to make cattle feed and further processed to make liquid corn syrup. Cattle have evolved to eat grass, which they do for the first couple of years before they are shipped to feedlots where they re kept in crowded, inhumane conditions and fed this corn-based substance which fattens them up faster for slaughter. These conditions and food are so unhealthy for cattle that if they were fed it for another month before being shipped to the slaughterhouse, they would die (Wolf). Cattle are kept alive in these conditions by the use of powerful antibiotics. They are also given growth hormones so they will yield more meet. Cattle are raised on feed made from corn and are injected with antibiotics and growth hormones. We eat cattle, and therefore we eat the anti-biotic and growth hormones in our beef. We drink sodas and other soft drinks which are sweetened with corn syrup. So much of our food and drink supply are full of this corn product. Yet this corn-fed meat is less healthy for us, because it contains less omega-3 fatty acids and more saturated fat than comes from grass-fed cattle (Pollen p 75). Cafes?Concentrated Animal Feeding Operationsanother phrase for feedlots, have caused several problems in the ecosystem with their waste byproducts (Pollen, 67). A recent article in Mother Jones reported that meatpacking giant, Tyson Foods, would no longer by cattle which have been injected with the popular growth Armonk, Climax made by Merck pharmaceuticals. In a letter to their Cafes they cited concerns over animal welfare: there have been recent instances of cattle delivered for processing that have difficulty walking or are unable to move. (Philipp). This announcement is sending showplaces through the CAFE industry. China, Russia and the European Union, already ban imports of cattle where Climax has been used. In fact, China bans all beef from the U. S. And instead rely on supplies from Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Australia, and New Zealand (Philipp). The problem is manifold. The sots include higher rates of obesity than at any time in our history. Before the asss, when cattle were mostly grass fed, our meat was less fattening and more natural. We can still buy beef from grass-fed cattle, but the cost is nearly twice that of corn-fed beef. The cost of beef has gone down drastically in real terms over the past 30 years due to the abundant supply of cheap corn. Before our food supply changed to provide cheap beef, meat was a treat for most families. Today, the hamburgers we eat are kept cheap, and, as a result, we eat too much. The only people benefiting from his system are those who profit from corporations which run the system. Government policies, which are highly influenced by powerful lobbies of corporations wanly Duty corn, nave athletes ten economics AT Too supply In America Into a perverse system of over-production at any price paid at the grain elevators. Market forces are out of balance in terms of equity due to the fact that so few players determine corn prices, both in the commodities market at the Chicago Board of Trade, and at grain elevators themselves. (National Family Farm Coalition). Farmers are at the mercy of mega-corporations such as Monsanto which determine how much deed costs, what seeds will be available, what crops will be grown, and what prices will be paid. Ultimately, the only real benefactors of this system are a handful of huge corporations, the players who keep the system running for their own benefit. Other problems with the modern agribusiness system is genetically modified food products. A study done in 2010 revealed some disturbing effects of GM corn when fed to laboratory rats. The study found that the SMOG corn caused organ damage in the rats indicating that this could also present a danger to humans. The primary organs affected were the kidney and liver, both of which have the function of laminating toxins. In addition, some effects on heart, adrenal, spleen and blood cells were also frequently noted. Monsanto followed up with a crude 90 day study which, not surprisingly, found that the SMOG corn had no ill health effects. Scientists at JIBS had concluded stating data strongly suggests that these GM corn varieties induce a state of heptagonal toxicity and that these substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown (Miami). It wasnt always like this. Before World War II, more Americans worked farms and they planted a wide variety of crops. They also kept cattle which provided not only income from their sale to slaughter houses, but also manure which made a great fertilizer for farm land and preserve the nitrogen needed for growth for other crops. There were problems with erosion which became obvious during the dust bowl years of the sasss and which were addressed by the conservation corps to educate farmers to prevent erosion of the top soil . Crops were rotated to maintain a balance of essential ingredients for plant growth, especially nitrogen. Chemical redelivers were almost unheard of and they were not necessary because of the manure provided from cattle. During WI, ammonium nitrate was used for explosives. After the war there was an overabundance of ammonium nitrate which so happens to be a rich source of nitrogen. The use of ammonium nitrate as a fertilizer caused a huge increase in harvests which were guaranteed year after year, only affected by bad weather. The use of chemical fertilizer has eliminated the need for farmers to rotate crops with anything other than soy beans, which are the other leg of farm production and also used as high protein foods for livestock. The corn elevators are mostly owned by corporations now, not the farmer co-ops of yesteryear. In Iowa, the operators of the grain elevators will only buy corn and soybeans. So, the corporate owners of the elevators end up dictating not only the price of these commodities, but the type of commodities that farmers must plant. The price of corn falls whenever there is an abundant supply which has been the case in almost every year since Earl Butt, secretary of agriculture under the Nixon administration, changed farm policies that had been in effect from the time of the New Deal. By encouraging farmers to plant crops in every available piece of land they owned, Butt ensured an annoyance TOT I en result came at Just ten relent time politically following a sharp increase in food prices in 1973. Butt would later argue that he had done the right thing based on the fact that there is more food available now at lower prices than at any time in history. (Wolf). The US government subsidizes cheap corn by direct payment to farmers for the approximate difference between the cost of production and the price of corn in a given year. Thus, the only way for the farmers to arrive economically is to plant more and more corn. The perverse effect of this is that such overproduction only causes the price of corn to fall further and further the more that is produced and it is we the taxpayers who pay for the governments deficiency payments to farmers (ibid). But who really benefits from this whole twisted system of agricultural economics? The big corporations such as Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland, neither of whom sell directly to the public nor do they therefore have reason to answer to the public. Together both corporations buy the majority of he corn supply. They are what economists would call monopolists entities which corner the market on buying commodities and therefore have market power to control the price of a given commodity, such as corn and soybean at their grain elevators. This corn, as Pollen says in the Omnivores Dilemma, is less a food than an industrial raw material?and an abstraction. (Pollen, p 64) Proposed Solutions All sorts of horrible things are set into motion by our corn policies. This paper cannot cover the entire scope but keep in mind that cattle are fed this corn to fatten them p faster in crowded feed lots which are unsanitary. To keep the cattle from dying of disease before they can be slaughtered, the feed lot owners make sure they have plenty of antibiotics. Also, cattle evolved to eat grass, not corn. Many become ill due to an inability to digest the enormous quantities of corn they are fed. We eat this meat full of antibiotics and extracted from unhealthy cattle all so that we can have cheap hamburgers. The only way to change this perversion of nature is by paying careful attention to what we consume including fast food and even much of what can be found at a typical grocery store. Still, there remain cattle which are grass fed and yield much leaner meat. This meat is more expensive, but if enough consumers want it, it is possible that enough could be supplied to bring down the price. This is one way of eliminating our dependence on unhealthy corn. Other ways of influencing farm policy, include keeping track of the voting records of U. S. Assembly members and senators, writing and calling them, and organizing or supporting grass roots organizations which address the Farm Bill and the lobbying that the few corporations do to get their version passed annually. A situation where we see a return to regular farming, where a variety of crops are grown besides corn and soy beans, where cattle are raised on grass, and where more of the population returns to working farms is not likely. There are, however, some who are farming small plots of organic vegetation to feed their families with high-quality food. The ways that our food industry works can be changed with effort and organization among voters, who are the very consumers affected by the Farm Bill. Because the Farm Bill is actually written by lobbyists for Monsanto, DOD, Archers-Midland, and Cargill, a solution lies UT of reach through their representatives for most Americans. These corporations Duty ten congress tongue Notations wanly assures teen AT tenet approval AT can and every item in the Farm Bill. Because of Citizens-United, these moneyed-interests are assured an unlimited amount of free-speech in the form of unlimited corporate donations. This is the one issue that will require years to change, but there are movements now to persuade congress to legislate Citizens United out of existence as the law of the land. However, most are pessimistic about the chances of that happening while the Roberts Court is still around. A Call for Action Public education should be encouraged to reveal the results of our farm policy. By making information readily available concerning agric-business and Smogs, demand for such food can change and a preference for healthy, naturally grown food can be realized. This is already happening among consumers who shop for organic foods at farmers markets around the country and among grass-roots political organizations which have as part of their goals the labeling of GM foods. The presence of chain stores selling healthy food indicates there is strong enough demand to start hanging the market and working for a healthier America. Because of the power that corporations wield, the only way for consumers to change the food industry is through banding together, getting organized, and becoming involved politically. There is hope for change because ultimately what is supplied in the market is what consumers demand. Americans have changed their consumption of beef in the past few decades from an average of about 80 pounds per person annually, vs.. About 130 pounds in the mid-sasss (Philipp). That means that the big meat packers have had to rely on exports for profit growth. As consumers, we ultimately have the power to change demand. It is clear that demand for beef is elastic in relation to the price of beef. This is because there are substitutes. We can eat chicken, pork, or become vegetarians. It is up to us what we consume. Also, since ready-made foods usually have some corn product in their ingredients, it would be healthier to skip the convenience of these foods and return to fresh food preparation and cooking. Conclusion The situation with the food supply in the U. S. Is complex and perverse. Farming is no longer the function of the typical American, nor is it recognizable when compared tit the type of agriculture upon which humans have relied upon for 5,000 years. In the last half of the 20th century agriculture grew into agribusiness and in the last 30 years, into the domain of corporations which have only their financial bottom line in mind. Farmers now must follow the dictates of a handful of corporations. These behemoths determine what crops will be grown and at what price. The farmer really has no choice. Because of the corporate influence on congress, these corporations hold all the cards. Corporate lobbyists write the Farm Bill which determines Farm policy for the next five years until it is renewed again. The passage of the aspects of the Farm Bill which these lobbyists write are routinely approved by congress. Their approval is assured by campaign contributions and outright bribery. The resulting state of the farm, and farmers is not far off from the relationship between feudal lords and the serfs who farmed their land. The difference exists is that farmers are allowed to own their land but, in terms of choices, that is where the difference ends. The price of corn is kept so low that farmers operate at a loss.

Final Paper Term Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4000 words

Final - Term Paper Example Anxiety is one psychological disorder which is reported even from the beginning of recorded human history. In Holy Bible incidents of depression are reported to two prominent personalities; King David and Job. Many people still don’t have much idea about anxiety as a disease since the symptoms of anxiety are visible among even normal people occasionally. Like many of the psychological disorders, both heredity and environment can cause depressive behaviors Anxiety is always caused by negative thoughts and negative energy driven by unpleasant emotions or feelings. Anxiety can be defined as a psychological disorder characterized by cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components. It is driven by low mood and lack of activity. Persons with anxiety disorders may exhibit sadness, hopelessness, helplessness, worthlessness, guilty feeling, restlessness, uneasiness, apprehension, fear, or worry. Anxiety can change the normal conduct of a person and it can be considered as a normal reaction to stress. An 80 year old mother of one of my friends, who is staying near my home, is undergoing treatment currently for anxiety related psychological problems. Lady X (For convenience throughout this paper this lady is referred as ‘Lady X’) was a brave and courageous lady who has faced several problems during her childhood with respect to poverty. She was the second child of a seven member family. She was married to a soldier at an early age of 18. Her husband was busy with his military assignments till 58 years of age and enjoyed only 2 months of his annual holidays with his wife and four children for a prolonged 20 years of his military services. When he retired at the age of 58, he was quiet happy as all the four children were already got employment and his family burdens were considerably reduced. Lady X was the one who brought up her children and worked hard for the wellbeing of their children even though Mr. X assisted her with

Cultural differences Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Cultural differences - Essay Example ould like to state that the importance of understanding different cultural factors is limited to business but it is vital for eliminating several societal problems prevailing in the community that comprise racism, gender inequalities and differences in social classes among others (Littlechild, 2012). According to my viewpoint, understanding cultural differences in the light of theories postulated by certain distinguished researchers and their implications on cultural diversity leads towards significant outcomes in terms of facilitating greater understanding different unaddressed cultural issues. Moreover, I believe that these theories guide an individual with necessary insights that promotes displaying of specific behaviour at varying cultural environment. Hence, in order to critically address the issues of cultural differences, I have chosen six primary topics like culture as well as lived experiences, working with the Spanish and Japanese, cultural intelligence, teams and cultural differences, historical perspective of British class of society and leadership along with management development. Bruce Parry is one the most well-known activists who possess a comprehensive understanding about different cultures. He strongly believed that there is only one way of understanding cultures. According to his observation, in order to understand the culture for any particular tribe, it is quite important to live with that particular tribe for a certain time period. He also realised that taking part in the daily cultural lives of tribes with all its richness as well as diversity would certainly enable to understand their culture better. One of the tribes that he observed was the Penan tribe that has its existence in the state of Sarawak in Malaysia. It has been observed that there lay the presence of a significant portion of Penan tribe in the Malaysian state of Sarawak. (BBC, 2008). In relation to determine Bruce Parry’s view i.e. ‘to understand a culture you need to

Troubles in the Proctor Household Essay Example for Free

Troubles in the Proctor Household Essay Run High in Proctor Household In the beginning of Act II of Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible, the story presents an interaction between John Proctor and his wife, Elizabeth. The interaction between the couple emphasizes that their relationship is anything but normal than that of a married couple. The main cause of their awkward relationship stems from Johns wandering lust. John Proctor has conflicting emotions towards Elizabeth because both of them are trying to avoid the huge fact that he committed adultery. The conflicting emotions are present when John Proctor tries to avoid confrontations with his wife, the small talk between them where John constantly tries to please Elizabeth, and the lack of mutual agreement between them. Throughout the scene, John Proctor tried very hard in order to avoid altercations with his wife. In a patriarchal society of the 1600’s, it would be very common for a woman to be subservient towards her husband. In the Proctor household, it is no different since Elizabeth quietly questions her husband’s authority because she â€Å"fear(s) to anger him† although she has all the leverage she needs in an argument by simply stating the fact that he cheated on her (Miller 53). However, John displays the complete opposite behavior of what is expected of a male in a patriarchal society. Firstly, when John comes home and tastes the soup his wife prepared, he is â€Å"not quite pleased† with it for it was not seasoned well (Miller 49). After adding more salt himself, John notices that Elizabeth is intently watching him taste the soup. Instead of being a typical husband back in the 1600s by criticizing such a small mistake about how his food is seasoned, he compliments on how good-tasting the soup is while knowing that it was the product of his handy-work. By holding his tongue, he avoids a confrontation between him and his wife over a very small issue of not putting enough salt in the soup. Additionally, John seems not to be the typical male in his society when he, â€Å"as gently as he can† asks for some cider (Miller 51). It is clear that this is not what his normal behavior would be because, as Elizabeth is fetching him his cider, she feels â€Å"a sense of reprimand†¦for having forgot† (Miller 51). Because Elizabeth felt as if she did something to wrong her husband, she expects that John will make a huge fuss over the issue. However, John casually brushes off her mistake by just changing the subject to him tending to the fields. His careful behavior towards Elizabeth makes him adopt the tone of a husband that has done something to immensely displease his wife and is trying not to anger her. Clearly, it shows that John has conflicting emotions towards his wife because he wants to act as a typical husband back in the 1600s, but he remembers the heinous crime he committed and tries to avoid confrontation and the possibility of the two of them talking about his mistake. John Proctor’s entire conversation with Elizabeth is mostly saying things to please her in an attempt to make-up for his affair. For example, while eating his meal he makes constant remarks about their farm being extremely big and the reason for coming home so late was because he was busy â€Å"planting far out to the forest edge† (Miller 49). In this obvious attempt to please Elizabeth, John hints at the fact that he has worked very hard on their farm. By hinting at this, he hopes to show Elizabeth that he is working for the greater good of the family and that he is not spending time with Abigail. Furthermore, John wants to make sure that Elizabeth sees all his hard work when he suggests that on â€Å"Sunday†¦ (they’ll) walk the farm to together† (Miller 51). The above passage clearly shows how much John is trying to please Elizabeth because he openly said that they would go explore the farm on Sunday which is supposed to be dedicated to a day of prayer where no one is supposed to do any work and if an individual skips church service, they would get in trouble. Secondly, John tries to please Elizabeth with material wealth when he breaks the awkward silence between them by explicitly saying that â€Å"if the crop is good I’ll buy George Jacob’s heifer. How would that please you? † (Miller 50). By asking Elizabeth her opinion on what she thinks about his decision to buy a heifer shows an atypical relationship between a husband and wife back in the 1600s since the male usually does not ask for their wife’s opinion on their decisions and that John is also trying hard to please his wife. The typical male attitude toward women voicing their opinions on things is also present in John’s demeanor when he explodes at the slight thought that Elizabeth â€Å"has lost all faith in him† due to the fact that he â€Å"faltered slightly† at the thought of hurting Abigail’s reputation (Miller 54). The constant battle in John’s demeanor to act as the man of the house as well as the caring husband act he is struggling to put up in order to make up for his mistake is an example of the conflicting emotions he is experiencing while dealing with his wife.

The Character of Esteban in The House of the Spirits :: House of the Spirits Essays

The Character of Esteban in The House of the Spirits Allende portrays Esteban as having a strong and harsh character in the novel, The House of the Spirits. Yet, after leaving, his mother and sister, and starting a new and independent life, Esteban changes much. For the first time he is successful and wealthy. He feels as if he has no problems, mainly because he does not have a family to weigh him down. Trueba's move to Three Marias seems to appease his hunger temporarily, before his monstrous, demanding, and ever growing needs overwhelms him. The type of lifestyle achieved by Esteban Trueba in Three Marias far surpassed that of living with his mother and sister, however only brief moments of satisfaction are incurred. These, previously mentioned, moments created a hunger for perfection and greed that would continue perpetuate at any cost. Receiving a letter from Ferula brings back memories for Esteban of his sad life with her and his mother, which forces him to endure his memories of poverty and pain. He even remembers the smell of medicince, which had encompassed their home. These memories force Esteban to reflect on the reasons why he left them. He reminisces on that portion of his life, occupied by the deterioration of his family. Ferula endured many burdens as well, due to their father's drinking, then his death, their mother's age, her chronic sicknesses, and Esteban's childho od care. A direct result of these chaotic years is the siblings inability to relate. When Esteban bought a luxury, an elaborate coffee with his money she scolded him for "spending Mama's medicine money on [his] private little whims" (Allende 43). Eventually Esteban tires of this oppressive way of life and goes to search for a "destiny that was bright, free, and full of promise" (Allende 44). At Tres Marias he hopes to find his Eden. All this cargo from his past is called to his attention by the letter he receives from Ferula. The letter does result in inflicting guilt on Esteban, for his lack of morals and complete selfishness. Ferula tells Esteban, in the letter, that their mother wants to see her son again before she dies. "Esteban had never really loved his mother or felt at ease in her presence," but he knew that resisting this visit to pay his last respects would be unethical (Allende 71).

Television: the Undiscovered Drug

Television has brain-washed the majority of our youth. The first thing I hear as I get home are TV mumbles. I open the door and to no surprise there is my younger brother in full motion on the coach, hand in remote, flipping through channels. My brother could not be any more of a coach potato. He watches TV all day and night. I refer to him as the human TV guide. So much endless television can dull our minds, take away time from completing important activities, and has exposed us to a world of violence. First off, Television has dulled the mind of our youth easily.Youths today are used to having their information passed to them on a silver platter. Not as many teens like to read anymore because it involves too much work. My brother hates to read, not only because there are words involved in that activity, but also because it is now impossible for him to visualize the world presented within the book. It is also impossible for him to focus on a book because of the short attention span he has developed, and reading books just takes too much time for him. Television presents the world to him, a different world every thirty minutes, which holds his attention. Similar article: Teenagers’ Leisure TimeThis now leaves him no mental work to do, except to decide which channel he would like to watch. Because watching television requires no mental work, the brains of the adolescents that watch television are not stimulated enough. This may lead to a slower learning process, which would then explain my brother’s inability to memorize the multiplication table. Second, Television consumes time youths should be dedicating to more important and more essential things in their lives. Television takes away time that should be devoted to homework.When my brother gets home from school, he will immediately flip the television on, leaving his homework for later. When he finally decides to do his homework, the television will remain on, and he will sit on the couch with his books propped up in front of him, giving it only half of his attention. Homework takes longer to complete, and it probably will not be his best work since only half of his co ncentration was focused on it. Television also takes time away from quality family time. Most adolescents do not have a strong family connection.Families whose only time together is at the dinner table will waste precious quality time with their heads turned towards the television. The youth of today lose the strong morals and values they can get when spending time with their family. Television can even take away time from friends. When I spend time with my friends, I like to talk with them or go out. When my brother spends time with his friends, they spend the whole day watching the television. Their conversation revolves around what they are watching on the television. Most teens have the majority of their day devoted to the television. Lastly,Television has exposed a world of violence towards our youth causing them to be apathetic towards situations. Many television shows make at least one of the three aspects, violence, drugs, and sexual immorality, a normalcy. Adolescents of to day model their behavior after characters who live in world of violence, and they do not realize that what they are doing is wrong because to our youth, whatever they see and hear on television is right. For example, my brother has become a lot less sensitive towards all his friends at school. He thinks its okay to laugh if somebody gets hurt accidentally even if it could be serious.Or abruptly scream nonsense! He also believes its okay to manipulate people as long as he gets his way. Violence on television is glamorised and styled, and watching it does not hurt. So maybe this contributes to my brothers way of thinking their is no consequences. It is pretty short sided to blame everything on television because my brother should know what is â€Å"right† and what is â€Å"not† but how can he be really sure when television glorifies all sorts of violence? In Conclusion, When television was first invented, its purpose was to bring the family together and perhaps present a way in which we could receive information faster.In modern times, the television has managed to affect our youth in various ways we would not have imagined. The family gathering concept has disappeared. We have accomplished a faster way to transmit information, but it was a little too much information a little too fast for the wrong audience. I suppose my brother chooses to react this way because he is already too accustomed to being a coach potato. Television has taken over our way of life and we must stop the effects it has had on our youths and our society before it is too late.

Dowry, Dower, Curtesy Legal Concepts About Marriage

Dowry is related to property or money given upon marriage, and dower and curtesy are concepts connected with property rights of a widowed spouse. Dowry Dowry refers to a gift or payment by a brides family to the groom or his family at the time of marriage. As an archaic usage, dowry can also refer to dower, the goods a woman brings to a marriage and retains some power over. Less commonly, dowry refers to a gift or payment or property given by a man to or for his bride. This is more usually called a bride gift. In South Asia today, dowry deaths are sometimes a problem: a dowry, paid on marriage, is returnable if the marriage ends. If the husband is unable to repay the dowry, the death of the bride is the only way to end the obligation. Dower Under English common law and in colonial America, dower was the share of a deceased husbands real estate to which his widow was entitled after his death. During his lifetime, she was, under the legal concept of coverture, not able to control any of the family property. After the widows death, the real estate was then inherited as designated in her deceased husbands will; she had no rights to sell or bequeath the property independently. She did have rights to income from the dower during her lifetime, including rents and including income from crops grown on the land. One-third was the share of her late husbands real property to which dower rights entitled her; the husband could increase the share beyond one-third in his will. Where a mortgage or other debts offset the value of real estate and other property at the husbands death, dower rights meant that the estate could not be settled and the property could not be sold until the widows death. In the 18th and 19th centuries, increasingly dower rights were ignored in order to settle estates more quickly, especially when mortgages or debts were involved. In 1945 in the United States, a federal law abolished dower, though in most states, one-third of a husbands estate is awarded to a widow automatically if he dies without a will (intestate). Some laws limit the rights of a husband to bequeath less than one-third share to his widow except in prescribed circumstances. A husbands right of inheritance is called curtesy. Curtesy Curtesy is a principle in common law in England and early America by which a widower could use his deceased wifes property (that is, property which she acquired and held in her own name) until his own death, but could not sell or transfer it to anyone but children of his wife. Today in the United States, instead of using common law curtesy rights, most states explicitly require that one-third to one-half of a wifes property be given outright to her husband at her death, if she dies without a will (intestate). Curtesy is occasionally used to refer to a widowers interest as surviving spouse in the property left by the deceased wife, but many states have officially abolished curtesy and dower.