Apr
21
Blog Post 14
April 21, 2015 | 1 Comment
I think the New York Times article has a lot of speculations, but not enough evidence. Many changes and innovations are predicted, like a simpler computer-human interface. However, only the benefits, and not the limitations, are explored. The article suggest that these innovations can cause the return of less-skilled labor like repair and such with the increase in technologies, but it could actually be harmful. I think this move could recreate the market where we rely too much on computers. These new technologies could easily displace real entrepreneurs who may not be with the times, but will then be forced to take a more menial role. Though, I do like the article’s idealistic approach. I do agree that we will likely see inequality for some time, but technological innovation will lessen its impact as it provides more useful products to the consumers.
The New Yorker’s “Richer and Poorer” article offers two different standpoints to view inequality. One put stories on the forefront instead of numbers and statistics. Numbers are varied and contradict each other, but stories are relatable, emotional, and are different because each person’s experience is different. The distinction between the rich and the poor is painted clearly in the stories of Chelsea and David in Putnam’s book “Our Kids.” Their surroundings are entirely different and portray a story that’s not only black and white. His resolutions complement this by addressing the need for communal support.
He calls for changes in “family structure, parenting, school, and community.” Again they’re idealistic, and as the article says, “none are new… few are achievable.” Though, I still firmly believe the structuring of a youth is the most important event that will ultimately carry over to his or her future. It’s also hard to disagree with the numbers argument that shows how the United States for so long has greater inequality than other democracies. In the study, the fact that the U.S. has the least representative form of legislature indicates that inequality may be an institutional problem. So in culmination, there needs to be two approaches which address familial and governmental structuring.
I found the article on entrepreneurship in low-income households to be pretty obvious. The amount of capital, risk, and time involved in entrepreneurship is not something a lot of people can manage to give. It’s an extremely big task for someone to handle and will only get more difficult as your idea grows. Furthermore, the relative ease in getting a job at an established firm attractive. I think it’s only wise when one has all these factors taken into account. Your idea may be your dream, but your life can be jeopardized with one wrong move. Nevertheless, I think with the vast amount of information online, entrepreneurship is definitely growing, though I can’t speak about the number of successes versus failures.
The takeaway that really stood out was that early stage development is very important. Children who begin with a head-start have a much better chance to continue to succeed. But hard work can only take one so far without the resources available. I think as technologies continue to innovate, the availability of opportunities for future generations will steadily level.
—
Jia Jun (Jay) Wu
