College: Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't.

Tomorrow is the day I have been hoping and wishing would come ever since I was sentient. Tomorrow I load all my stuff into the car and set off for college. I couldn't be more excited. Yet just this year, I wondered if I should go to college at all.

Everyone knows college prices are outrageously high. My parents were (and will be for the rest of their lives) struggling to send my brother off to college. They told us what every upper-middle-class millennial was told: the sky was the limit, we could go wherever we wanted to for college. Harvard, Yale, anywhere. It would get taken care of. My brother took their words and went to one of the most expensive universities in the country. My parents are more than happy to pay for his top-of-the-line education, but considering asking the same of them left a bad taste in my mouth. How could I do this to them?

My parents are pretty well off in their careers. My mother is a doctor with a private practice and my father is an investment manager. We've been able to take many vacations over the years and I never lacked any necessities. If we're having trouble paying for college, what about people who don't have what I have? My little cousin is going to be a freshman in high school, and he's brighter than I am, but he lives at the poverty line. Where is he and kids like him going to get aid?

Scholarships, you can answer. But there isn't enough money in the country to send every kid who fills out a FAFSA what he needs to attend the school of his dreams. Merit scholarships are more likely, but even those that are supposed to ignore economic status are rigged. Many are based at least, if not fully, in part on the ACT or SAT . "But psychologist Claude Steele pointed out that the [SAT] test has been found to measure only about 18 percent of the things that it takes to do well in school, and thus is not a very good predictor of how a student will do in college. 'The SAT is not going to get you very far with predicting who's going to do well in college' [says Steele]" (source).

So these standardized tests are kinda bunk. More than once I've been told, "It's not about knowing material, it's about knowing how to take the test. Because of this, I signed up for ACT preparatory classes. Most kids aiming for a selective school need to take preparatory classes for the test and then take the test more than once. The catch? It all costs money.

The state of Illinois gives students one free chance to take the ACT (minus the writing portion, which is mostly necessary for selective schools). Competitive students take these tests three or four times. Taking the ACT with the writing section costs more than $50. For many kids, $50 dollars is the family grocery budget for the week. ACT preparatory courses can be free, or they can cost $2,000. A poorer student has to hope she's prepared for the one test given to her. Her score will be compared with the score of the thousands of other students who could purchase those classes and extra tests. Most likely, she won't get the merit she needs.

The next way to pay for college besides scholarships and robbing your parents' retirement fund is taking out loans. Student loan rates are going up, while the job market has been down. In this job market, sometimes not even the best credentials can save you from unemployment. In fact, 8% of 25-34 year olds, the age most people will be when they need to pay back their loans, say they're unemployed or under-employed. Read the rest of the statistics, but only if you have a strong stomach. Things aren't looking good for college graduates.

In my AP Economics class, a week wouldn't go by without someone griping about the cost of college. My AP teacher would tell us, "Then don't go to college!" It's simple capitalism. If the demand for a college education goes down, so will its price. This was the main reason I was considering skipping college for the moment, at least. How could I be complicit in these high prices keeping those who desperately need education locked out?

If things are bad for college grads, they're even worse for people without college degrees.

(source)

Nowadays, people without a college degree won't earn much more than minimum wage, which often is not enough to live on (source and source). Getting a college degree may bankrupt you and your family, but not getting one will put you into poverty or keep you there. Damned if you do and damned if you don't! Next time someone says that anybody can go to any university with enough hard work and gosh darn gumption I will probably explode. If poor high school students are aware of these facts, what motivation do they have to work hard enough to hope to compete with advantaged students just to get a place at a school no one can afford?

In response to the high rates of education, some good options have arisen. Many are turning to two year colleges and things like certified nurses assistant licenses. Unschooling, an educational philosophy is growing more popular. UnCollege teaches students ways to grow intelligence and secure great jobs through independent learning. More American students are taking gap years or work exchanges to delay or put off college entirely. In my opinion, these programs need to expand. If more and more teens go to these programs and encourage others to do so, colleges will have no choice but to pay attention. Additionally, increased lobbying of Congress will help to keep student loan rates down. In short, kids need to show the system that they are not satisfied.

I looked at UnCollege, but eventually decided to betray my economic sense and go to a four year university. I will, however, personally call my senator when the loan rates are up for discussion. Thankfully I got a merit scholarship, but it's never been something I'm proud of. I owe all of it to my parents, who could afford the tutoring, ACT prep, extra testing, and private schooling that allowed me to compete and win a scholarship. If I had been born to minimum-wage earners, it would have been a completely different story, and instead of heading off to college tomorrow, I might be punching in my Wal-Mart employee card.

iReport: Citizen Journalism Takes Flight.

We all know journalism is in trouble. You now have to pay to read news off many websites. Magazines all over are scrambling for readership, employing shocking tactics to force the readership to spike. Television news does the same thing, seeking sensationalizing existing stories and searching for human interest stories for entertainment.

I don't have too much of an issue with this; it's your right to publish it and my right to unsubscribe or change the channel. What I do have a problem with, however, is real news not being reported. On June 26th, I was alerted via Twitter and Tumblr that Wendy Davis, a Democratic Texas state senator, was going to attempt to filibuster an anti-abortion bill called sb5 for 13 hours to prevent it from going into law. She was not allowed to sit, lean on anything, drink water, or go to the bathroom. She had to talk strictly about the bill. If she could talk the whole day, then the senate would close the session at midnight without a chance to vote on the bill. I googled to check what channel it would be on and...it wasn't. It was only available on YouTube livestream. No major network gave coverage of the event, even as the filibuster wore on and as many as 178,000 people were tuned into the livestream.

Sen. Davis spoke for about 11 hours before she was accused of going off topic. Much like baseball, in filibusters it's 3 strikes and you're out. Two strikes were given because she was allegedly off topic, and one because someone helped her put her back brace. However, her fellow senators picked up the slack. They argued on her behalf for a very long time, passionately pursuing the case. The entire time, protestors could be heard in and around the Texas capitol building. Ten minutes to midnight, Sen. Leticia Van Putte, who had been trying to get the attention of the other senators, asked, "At what point does a female senator raise her voice or hand to be recognized over a male colleague?" The protestors in the gallery cheered, nearly blowing the laptop speakers of 178,000 people. They continued to cheer for the remainder of the day. It was a moment I was proud to witness.

However, at what was later determined to be 12:03 AM, the Republican senators took a vote and declared the law passed. Everyone was confused; the day was over, didn't we win? There was frantic debate happening in the form of youtube comments. Still, there was no major news network to help the viewers out, which became painfully apparent when the youtube stream was cut off. 178,000 people were left in the dark. Then @ChristopherDiDo came to the rescue. A self-described "citizen journalist," Dido streamed everything from the capital building from his phone. On the stream, viewers were addressed by Planned Parenthood, and just a little while later, a triumphant Wendy Davis. The bill was pronounced dead.  Without an extraordinary guy and his ordinary phone, no one outside of the capital building would have seen her face at that moment.

Even writing this, I have trouble finding good links to credible sites about that night. It's this strange hush of the media that compels people like Dido into the streets with their phones, taking the news for the people, by the people. This grassroots reporting becomes even more crucial in places like Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc., which have been in tumult and are often censored. Dedicated "citizen journalists," however, are on the rise. Unsatisfied by the media, Anonymous surfaced to do their own "hacktivist" reporting, exposing corruption and scandal.

What I'm wondering is, what happened to the mainstream media? Most media outlets are dependent on how many people consume their information. Therefore, the most profitable news outlet is the one that is going to please the most people. Generally, people nowadays are alarmingly politically and economically apathetic, so why should the media truly cover politics and economics?  I'm not an expert by any means (although I did binge-watch The Newsroom), but it seems as if the media has lost its purpose. Freedom of the press is one of the fundamental rights in this country, and it is so fundamental because the Founders believed that a strong, free press would hold America and its government accountable for its actions.

If the mainstream media isn't going to accomplish that, then of course citizen journalism will take over. I am very concerned about the political apathy among the population at the moment (as all intelligent people should be), and thankfully so are others. Yes, citizen journalism is flawed and sources are often incorrect. Yes, sb5 would only affect Texas, but it marks a newly aggressive era of abortion debate nationally. When that's not covered when I turn on my TV and Kim Kardashian's baby name is, I'm going to put my faith in the people, not the networks.

Why Macklemore Has It Right

Today’s clothing market for teenagers and young adults who can’t afford designer clothing is stamped with a couple names: Forever XXI, Urban Outfitters, H&M, Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister. Being a teenager and not shopping at these places is nearly impossible.

However, there is a small but growing movement among young people to turn to other kinds of places to get their clothes: resale shops. Macklemore and Ryan Lewis even wrote a popular song about it! The growth of resale shops, if large enough, could have many benefits ethically and economically.

We’ve all been told to reduce, reuse, and recycle, but the average American household still throws away about 177 lbs. of clothing per year.  Those who shop resale are often doing so in order to decrease waste at a low cost. If resale shopping were to be more mainstream, then teens would participate in green living and sustainability.

Shopping resale also reduces sweatshop use. In 2010, 21 workers died in a fire at a sweatshop supplying H&M. Since then, H&M has launched a green initiative, but they and many other clothing companies are still guilty of ethical misconduct. If young people turn to resale in opposition to unethical manufacturing, the rising generation may become more mindful and ethical in all areas of their lives.

Teenagers should also be aware of where their dollars are going. Urban Outfitters, a brand catering to young, mainly liberal people, is cofounded by Richard Hayne, who has been in the limelight lately. He gave more than $14,000 to Rick Santorum and marketed UO a shirt with the harmful slogan “Eat Less.” Hayne is a conservative, and teens should be aware of this before shopping. If ethics in the clothing industry became stressed, young people could choose brands that support their values.

Economically, big clothing names like Forever XXI are creating a monopoly on their market. Abercrombie & Fitch owns Hollister. Urban Outfitters owns Free People and Anthropologie. America, as a country, is plagued by monopolization. Competition in the economy is the basis of capitalism, the American-chosed economic system. Individuals may use their dollars to support small businesses, consignment shops, and resale boutiques.

If it becomes widely known that young people are looking for green and ethical clothing, big brands may be forced to create higher-quality clothing in a greener way. Instead of employing foreign sweatshop labor, companies may hire people in America. In the current climate of unemployment, anything may help.

Thrifting has the potential to change America if it can become appealing to the average teenager. Individually, people can shop resale and encourage others. People may participate in clothing swaps and clothing drives in their communities. When thrifted skirts become just as fashionable as new Abercrombie & Fitch ones, the resale movement will have won.

(This is a really old post, but something I wanted to put up here.)