Creemee Season

Summertime is rapidly approaching and many are starting to count the days until they can return to the water, eat some corn on the cob, and/or take a break from schoolwork. However, when I picture summer in my head, I don’t see swimsuits and open calendars; I see creemees.

            The Vermont version of regular soft-serve ice cream has swept the state, making it a staple in summer time activities. One does not go out for ice cream in the summer, it is always a creemee. Creemee stands begin to pop up around the middle of April and remain in business until the end of August, making them a precious seasonal treat. The Thread, a local magazine rooted in Burlington, ranked the top cree-mee stands in Vermont to direct tourists and adventurous locals to expand from their regular stands and try the best of what Vermont has to offer. Al’s restaurant, my personal favorite creemee producer, ranked in the top five, probably because there is more fat in the cream they use.

            Thread talked a bit about how nothing sets a creemee apart from traditional soft-serve ice cream, besides the buzz Vermonter’s created. Ben & Jerry’s is widely known as Vermont created ice cream, yet during the summer, it is like it disappears for a few months. Creemees usually only come in four different flavors: vanilla, chocolate, twist, and maple. Some stands even refuse to supply sprinkles to decorate the creemee. Do creemees actually taste better than other summer treats? Probably not, but the selling point is the experience. Vermonter’s take pride in their weird quirks, and creemee stands are one of the most popular.

            My friends and I are usually looking out for signs and waving creemee flags this time of year to find our first creemee of the season. Sure, I am excited to see my family this summer, but I am counting down the days until I can get my hands on a creemee.

Taylor Swift Versus Middle School Music Teachers

Music plays a huge role in my life. Although I lack the talent to play an instrument or sing in key, I love listening to artists that possess those skills. One artist that I have always loved, despite some ridicule, is Taylor Swift. I listened to her albums when they were still considered country and have stayed a fan ever since. After reading Nate’s blog and the list of salaries some major athletes received per year, I started to think about how much celebrities made a year, especially those who are extremely popular. So, I went online and searched for Taylor Swift’s net worth and holy moly was I surprised. Through album, ticket, and merchandise sales, Taylor Swift makes more than 60 million dollars a year, making her net worth around 200 million dollars. In comparison, as Nate pointed out in his blog, an average high school teacher makes about $45,000 a year.

Now, as I previously stated, I love music. However, if I had to choose which was more important, education or music, I would have to go with education. It is astonishing the differing sums of money between popular entertainers or athletes and educators. The variation between salaries goes to show how cultures praise and reward certain talents. The popular idiom, “those who can, do; those who can’t, teach” represents the issue quite nicely. In society, those who are graced with a certain talent and are considered superior to all the other people with the same skill are regarded extremely highly and receive not only incredible popularity, but also financial rewards. However, those who couldn’t please agencies or scouts and turn to teaching a particular skill are not only paid poorly, but are also seen as a kind of failure.

My middle school music teacher was in a band that was signed to a label and they put out an album. For whatever reason, whether it was their music wasn’t catchy enough or the members weren’t attractive enough, the album flopped. Students made fun of his failure and ridiculed him because he was teaching in a basement of a school in Vermont instead of selling out Madison Square Garden.

Why is teaching a skill worthy of millions looked down upon?  

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/dl/taylor-swift/ 

Population Crisis and TLC Shows

I have a great love for reality shows, specifically, those that TLC produces. Little People, Big World, John and Kate Plus Eight, and Cake Boss are just a few examples of my favorite shows on TLC. It’s not that I think these programs are Emmy worthy or anything, but I am compelled to watch because I have a weakness for what people label “stupid” or “worthless” television. What can I say? It’s my kryptonite.

One TLC show that I have always been particularly intrigued by is 19 Kids and Counting. The lifestyle of the ginormous family is unlike any I have personally experienced, so learning their unique way of life has always pulled me in season after season. One of the oldest daughters of the 19 children recently married and today, had her first baby. Hearing the news made me think about how large the family is and wonder if each child will continue in their parent’s footsteps by creating their own lengthy family tree. In my sustainability science class, we have talked about the global limitation of population growth and how we are currently going toward the Earth’s carrying capacity of humans.

Previously in China, policies were passed that limited families into having only one child due to the huge population. Now, however, the policies have relaxed, but most people have reported having no interest in having another child. Other reports have been made suggesting that countries everywhere should practice the policy China created due to the population crisis, which relates to the problems of decreased land space available and huge demand for agriculture to increase production that we currently face. This argument has been shot down due to the ethical and moral beliefs in regulating family size.

I know that when I get older and have a family, I will want to judge what size family I want by taking into account my own personal economic situation and if I am up for multiple kids. Although 19 Kids and Counting is an extreme example of producing as many kids as people want, I think the right to decide family size isn’t something that can be taken away.

How Andrew Carnegie Thought the Wealthy Should Handle Their Wealth

            Andrew Carnegie, one of the wealthiest industrialists of his day, made his opinions on the wealthy well known in the late 1880’s with his book, Gospel of Wealth. Carnegie’s philosophical beliefs were somewhat of a new view regarding wealth and the role the wealthy played in society. He stated that the wealthy were the elite of society, as they possessed a spectacular talent, which allowed them to make their fortunes in a capitalist society. Due to their natural intuition, the wealthy had a duty to watch over the gap of classes in the capitalist society in order to make sure the gap didn’t grow too much to cause an uprising from the poor (Gandolfo). Carnegie had many ideas regarding how the wealthy should handle their fortunes to maintain a sufficient gap; one was that of a 100% inheritance tax upon the death of the prosperous figure. This tax would encourage the well-off population to figure out ways to spend their money in alternative ways, because who would want to give all their money straight to the government? Carnegie thought that with this tax, the government wouldn’t have as much control of the gap of classes, since the government workers were not the wealthy, which means they did not possess the sought after hardworking, creative gene that graced the top tier of the world (Gandolfo).

            Another conclusion made by Carnegie was that any person that dies filthy rich is a disgrace because the money is supposed to circulate in philanthropic ways to help to common good. Carnegie also stated that leaving all of your hard-earned money to family isn’t a great alternative since the family weren’t graced with the same fabulous talents as the wealthy, so it wouldn’t be fair to society to have untalented rich people.

            Recently, the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, decided to follow in Andrew Carnegie’s outline, as he plans to give away his $785 million fortune, minus the money he put aside to pay for his nephew’s college education (CNBC). Many other millionaires and billionaires have gone in the same direction, finding it necessary to aid the remainder of society rather than frivolously spend and leave it all to family members.

            Many arguments can be made against Andrew Carnegie’s philosophy. The biggest being that of his idea of the wealthy being the most talented people in the world (Gandolfo). What about public heroes such as Mother Teresa or influential figures like Martin Luther King? Are they not considered spectacular because of their small bank account?

            I completely support wanting to give away your fortune to the less fortunate or public services, but I also believe that it is entirely up to the wealth-holder. If they want to hand it all down to their decedents, go for it. If they want to build thirty libraries, all power to you.

            I don’t believe that a person’s economic status decides how talented, hardworking, and creative they are. So many factors play into the character of a person, not just wealth.

            Andrew Carnegie brought up many solid points, but like every opinion, it can be disputed.

"Apple's Tim Cook Will Give Away His Money." CNBC, 26 Mar. 2015. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.

            http://www.cnbc.com/id/102539600

Gandolfo, David, Prof. "Andrew Carnegie." Philosophy Lecture. Forman University, Greenville. 26 Mar. 2015. Lecture.

Meat Production in Popular Culture

            I’ve been hearing more about meat production in the past week than I ever have in my entire lifetime. My sustainability science class, an extremely depressing course revolving around how my car, long showers, and eating habits are making the Earth deteriorate, has focused the past two classes on how food production, mainly meat, is incredible possessed and the treatment of the animals is beyond humane. After the class ended on Thursday, I walked into my room with a cloud over my head, searching for something to cheer me up. Naturally, I watched Aziz Ansari’s newest stand-up to grace Netflix. As I laughed along to his witty commentary on relationships, he transitioned to his next segment: meat production.

            After having the few classes dedicated to meat production and how evil it is, I had a good amount of background knowledge regarding Ansari’s bit. He commented on how various documentaries about food production have been released in order to instill fear and outrage in all consumers so that we could spark a change. I personally know a few people who have taken on a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle to fight the treatment of animals involved in meat production, but for the most part, most people I know have witnessed the horrid documentaries and continued with their hamburgers and chicken nuggets. Aziz Ansari touched on this topic during his comedy show. He said that he, like many other viewers, was outraged by the conditions of animals and was completely grossed out to hear about the genetically modified chemicals and drugs, but continued to eat meat, because, well, let’s face it, meat tastes really good.

            I would assume that the majority of people in the world dislike how animals are treated in food production and would fully support new, safer, more natural methods for meat. However, until a bill or a law comes around with enough force to reach the general public, I think most are going to put ketchup on their hot dogs, unhappy with the process it took to produce said hot dog, and enjoy it for dinner without much thought.