Clement Clarke Moore, Author of The Night Before Christmas

Clement Clarke Moore, Author of The Night Before Christmas Clement Clarke Moore was a scholar of ancient languages who is remembered today because of a poem he wrote to amuse his children. His memorable work, widely known as â€Å"The Night Before Christmas† appeared anonymously in newspapers beginning in the early 1820s, titled A Visit From St. Nicholas. Decades would pass before Moore claimed  he had written it. And over the past 150 years there have been hotly disputed claims that Moore did not really write the famous poem. If you accept that Moore was the author, then, along with Washington Irving, he helped to create the character of Santa Claus. In Moore’s poem some of the traits associated with Santa today, such as his use of eight reindeer to pull his sleigh, were established for the very first time. As the poem gained popularity over several decades in the mid-1800s, Moores depiction of Santa Claus became central to how others portrayed the character. The poem has been published countless times and the reciting of it remains a cherished Christmas tradition. Perhaps no one would be more surprised by its enduring popularity than its author, who was, during his lifetime, highly regarded as a very serious professor of difficult subjects. The Writing of A Visit From St. Nicholas According to an account Moore gave to the New York Historical Society when he was in his eighties and presented them with a hand-written manuscript of the poem, he had first written it simply to entertain his children (he was the father of six in 1822). The character of St. Nicholas was, Moore, said, inspired by an overweight New Yorker of Dutch descent who lived in his neighborhood. (Moores family estate became Manhattans present day Chelsea neighborhood.) Moore apparently had no intention of ever publishing the poem. It first appeared in print on December 23, 1823, in the Troy Sentinel, a newspaper in upstate New York. According to published accounts from the late 19th century, a daughter of a minister from Troy had stayed with Moores family a year earlier and heard a recitation of the poem. She was impressed, transcribed it, and passed it along to a friend who edited the newspaper in Troy. The poem began to appear in other newspapers every December, always appearing anonymously. About 20 years after its first publication, in 1844, Moore included it in a book of his own poems. And by that time some newspapers had credited Moore as the author. Moore presented several handwritten copies of the poem to friends and organizations, including the  copy given to the New York Historical Society. The Dispute About Authorship A claim that the poem had been written by Henry Livingston dates to the 1850s, when descendants of Livingston (who had died in 1828) asserted that Moore was wrongfully taking credit for what had become a very popular poem. The Livingston family had no documentary evidence, such as a manuscript or a newspaper clipping, to support the claim. They simply claimed their father had recited to the poem to them as early as 1808. The assertion that Moore hadn’t written the poem was generally not taken seriously. However, Don Foster, a scholar and professor at Vassar College who employs â€Å"linguistic forensics,† had claimed in 2000 that â€Å"A Night Before Christmas† was probably not written by Moore. His conclusion was widely publicized, yet it was also widely disputed. There may never be a definitive answer as to who wrote the poem. But the controversy has captured the public imagination to the extent that in 2013 a mock trial, dubbed The Trial Before Christmas, was held at the  Rensselaer County Courthouse in Troy, New York. Lawyers and scholars presented evidence arguing that either Livingston or Moore had written the poem. The evidence presented by both sides in the argument ranged from the unlikelihood that someone with Moores stern personality would have written the poem to specific notes on language and the meter of the poem (which only matches one other poem written by Moore). The Life and Career of Clement Clarke Moore Again, a reason for speculation about the authorship of the famous poem is simply because Moore was regarded as a very serious scholar. And a cheerful holiday poem about a â€Å"jolly old elf† is like nothing else he had ever written. Moore was born in New York City on July 15, 1779. His father was a scholar and a prominent citizen of New York who served as the rector of Trinity Church and the president of Columbia College. The elder Moore administered the last rites to Alexander Hamilton after he was wounded in his famous duel with Aaron Burr. Young Moore received a very good education as a boy, entered Columbia College at the age of 16, and received a degree in classical literature in 1801. He could speak Italian, French, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew. He was also a competent architect and a talented musician who enjoyed playing the organ and the violin. Deciding to follow an academic career, rather than becoming a clergyman like his father, Moore taught for decades at the Protestant Episcopal Seminary in New York City. He published a number of articles in various newspapers and magazines. He was known to oppose the policies of Thomas Jefferson, and occasionally published articles on political subjects. Moore would also publish poetry on occasion, though none of his published work was anything like â€Å"A Visit From St. Nicholas.† Scholars could argue that the difference in the writing style could mean he didn’t write the poem. Yet it’s also likely that something written simply for the enjoyment of his children would be quite different than a poem published for a general audience. Moore died in Newport, Rhode Island, on July 10, 1863. The New York Times briefly mentioned his death on July 14, 1863 without referring to the famous poem. In the following decades, however, the poem kept being reprinted, and it by the late 19th century newspapers regularly ran stories about him and the poem. According to an article, published in the Washington Evening Star on December 18, 1897, an 1859 edition of the poem published as a small book with drawings by a prominent illustrator, Felix O.C. Darley had made A Visit From St. Nicholas extremely popular just before the Civil War. Of course, since them the poem has been reprinted countless times, and recitations of it are a standard component of Christmas pageants and family gatherings.

Political Conventions Day-by-Day

Political Conventions Day-by-Day The United States presidential nominating conventions are held during the spring or summer of each quadrennial presidential election year by most political parties fielding nominees in the November presidential election. Along with selecting the party’s nominee for president, delegates to the conventions adopt the party’s platform- the party’s principals and goals for its candidates presidential administration. Most delegates to the conventions are selected through the presidential primary elections and caucus process and are pledged to vote for a specific presidential candidate during the nominating process. Other delegates, called â€Å"unpledged delegates† are seated automatically due to their status in the political party and are free to vote for the nominee of their choice. The cities hosting the conventions are selected by the national party organizations based on factors including availability of meeting space, lodging facilities, entertainment opportunities, and economic incentives. As they have grown into major, highly-publicized events drawing intense media coverage, the conventions offer significant economic benefits to the host cities. Although the U.S. presidential nominations have largely been settled during the primary/caucus cycle in recent elections, the national political party conventions continue to be an important part of the American political system. As you watch the conventions, heres whats happening on each of the four days. Day 1: The Keynote Address Coming on the first evening of the convention, the keynote address is the first of many, many speeches to follow. Typically delivered by one of the partys most influential leaders and speakers, the keynote address is designed to rally the delegates and stir their enthusiasm. Almost without exception, the keynote speaker will emphasize the accomplishments of his or her party, while listing and harshly criticizing the shortcomings of the other party and its candidates. Should the party have more than one candidate seriously vying for nomination at the convention, the keynote speaker will conclude by urging all party members to make peace and support the successful candidate in the upcoming campaign. Sometimes, it even works. Day 2: Credentials and Platforms On the conventions second day, the partys Credentials Committee will determine the eligibility of each delegate to be seated and vote for nominees.  Delegates and alternates from each state are typically chosen well before the convention, through the presidential primary and caucus system. The Credential Committee basically confirms the identity of the delegates and their authority to vote at the convention. Day-two of the convention also features the adoption of the partys platform the stance their candidates will take on key domestic and foreign policy issues. Typically, these stances, also called planks, have been decided well before the conventions. The platform of the incumbent party is usually created by sitting president or the White House staff. The opposition party seeks guidance in creating its platform from its leading candidates, as well as from leaders of business and industry, and a wide range of advocacy groups. The partys final platform must be approved by a majority of the delegates in a public roll-call vote. Day 3: The Nomination At last, what we came for, the nomination of candidates. To win the nomination, a candidate must get a majority more than half of the votes of all delegates. When the nominating roll call begins, each states delegate chairman, from Alabama to Wyoming, may either nominate a candidate or yield the floor to another state. A candidates name is officially placed into nomination through a nominating speech, delivered by the state chairman. At least one seconding speech will be delivered for each candidate and the roll call will continue until all candidates have been nominated. At last, the speeches and demonstrations end and the real voting begins. The states vote again in alphabetical order. A delegate from each state will take the microphone and announce something very similar to, Mr. (or Madame) Chairman, the great state of Texas casts all of its XX votes for the next president of the United States, Joe Doaks. The states may also split the votes of their delegations between more than one candidate. The roll call vote continues until one candidate has won the magic majority of the votes and is officially nominated as the partys presidential candidate. Should no single candidate win a majority, there will be more speeches, a lot more politics on the convention floor and more roll calls, until one candidate wins. Due mainly to the influence of the primary/caucus system, neither party has required more than one roll call vote since 1952. Day 4: Picking a Vice Presidential Candidate Just before everybody packs up and heads home, the delegates will confirm the vice presidential candidate named in advance by the presidential candidate. The delegates are not obligated to nominate the presidential candidates choice for vice president, but they always do. Even though the outcome is a foregone conclusion, the convention will go through ​the  same cycle of nominations, speeches, and voting. As the convention closes, the presidential and vice presidential candidates deliver acceptance speeches and the unsuccessful candidates give rousing speeches urging everyone in the party to pull together to support the partys candidates. The lights go out, the delegates go home, and the losers start running for the next election.

Markerting fundamentals Nintendo DSL polar white Essay

Markerting fundamentals Nintendo DSL polar white - Essay Example It has launched in various markets within a short span and hence the political disturbance in any one market will not affect its overall sales. While Sony and Microsoft, its main competitors spent extravagantly on fast chips, graphics, and cutting edge disk technology but Nintendo designers use energy-saving chips and a standard optical disk player to lower product costs (Bremner, 2007). Others in the industry like Atari failed because they did not have high-quality software and games to sell the hardware (Marketing Week, 2006). Video game is a cyclical industry in which new consoles are launched every five or six years. With each cycle the power of the hardware increases with better graphics and more powerful games (The Economist, 2006). Nevertheless, Nintendo felt that industry has reached a crossroad and games are not designed for non-gamers. This undermines the prospects for future growth. With this in mind, the new Nintendo DS was launched making it easier to learn and play. It launched a different color of the product that was unique to each region/country. For instance, in Europe it launched the black version in addition to the white color which it launched initially in Japan. In Australia and North America, they launched online white and renamed it Polar White. The current market leaders being Sony and Microsoft concentrate on 16- to 24-year-old males market, which is core to the gaming industry. Nintendo DS are easier to learn and play and is aimed at the younger, female segment (Marketing Week, 2006). They have very strategically taken this step as they are unable to cope with the market leaders. The games for the core market are becoming dull and similar and hence Nintendo expects to create a market for Nintendo DS with this strategy of segmentation. Since every five or six years new launches take place, Nintendo DS has been launched at a very strategic time because the

Impact of Technology on Individuals and Society Essay

Impact of Technology on Individuals and Society - Essay Example Since human beings apply technology in everyday life, it has led to the emergence of impacts to individuals as well as society. Such impacts have been either positive or negative and have had a significant influence in human life. Therefore, the paper discusses such impacts in detail and thus enlightening society and individuals. With the inventions and innovations of social sites, individuals learn more about different people with relation to culture, practices, and religion of individuals in the environment. For instance, individuals can learn about Chinese culture, Indian culture, or even Japanese cultural practices without having to visit such geographical regions or have face-to-face communication with people from those cultures (Benchmann, Decker, Fiedeler & Krings 2). This knowledge enhances understanding and peaceful coexistence among individuals. The introduction of new and advanced technologies such as telephones, internet, TVs, Radios have ease communication and made it effective irrespective of distance or time barriers. Individuals now efficiently communicate with one another through emails, Facebook, Google+, phone calls, as well as short message services (Hollon 1). Moreover, technology has enabled individuals to share ideas, information, and news very quickly with little effort as compared to the older times. This has made life simple, easier, and enjoyable due to lack of communication stresses. The invention and adoption of technological tools, software and machines such as computers, the internet and search engines like Yahoo and Google have created opportunities for learning (Hollon 1). As compared to the olden days, an individual in the contemporary world finds learning easier and simpler due to the presence of internet search engines. For example, students can now conduct research on any topic by searching for information pertaining to the

This Really Sucks :: essays research papers

C.G.Jung's comment, "The unconscious mind of man sees correctly even when the conscious reason is blind and impotent", is indicative to Margaret Atwood's book The Edible Woman. We see how the unconscious affects a woman mind unknowingly. The mind and body have an inter connection. They work with each other even though the conscious mind may not know it. Atwood's main character, Marian McAlpin, was ordinary. After she graduated college she started her simplistic job. Her relationships with people, friends, and her boyfriend, were purely surface. She began feeling crippled by the mundaneness of her already mapped out life. She feared the thought of being the annoying old lady in the basement. She feared living a married life with children, miserable like Carla. She feared the very thought of the "pension plan" for it symbolized the future. A future she hadn't began to question until she met Duncan. We see a shift of characteristics between Duncan and Marian. Her job is to chew up words to make it easier for people to read and understand and then test these people with her revisions. Duncan, however, treats the test as a psychological evaluation ex amplifying that one should think and question what is simplistic. This is what Marian begins to do. She needed to escape the thoughts that resided in her unconscious mind. She feared being pinned down. We get images of this through out the book. Her thoughts of cannibalism represents her fear of consumption. Destruction. Peter erupts these feelings inside her. His proposal of marriage charged her with such irrational fear that her physical self started to react to her unconscious self. Her inability of eating animals was a major symbol of her not wanted to pin down life. This transgressed to not being able to eat vegetables, because they too seemed life like to her. One can argue that she was only able to eat pasta and beans because they are starchy and stiff. They fill her but do not pose as a threat to her for they aren't needed to live and aren't life like. She begins to act neurotic, like Duncan. We get a glimpse of his unconscious mind with his obsession of ironing things. His unconscious mind needs to straighten out and un-wrinkle. He controls this. He feels comfort in p ressing out the most wrinkled items. Another interesting character in the book is Marian's roommate Ainsley.

Great Divergence primary themes and main arguments by Timothy Noah Essay

Great Divergence: primary themes and main arguments by Timothy Noah Introduction            The most striking change in American society in the past generation roughly since Ronald Reagan was elected President has been the increase in the inequality of income and wealth. Timothy Noah’s â€Å"The Great Divergence: America’s Growing Inequality Crisis and What We Can Do About It†, a good general guide to the subject, tells us that in 1979 members of the much discussed â€Å"one per cent† got nine per cent of all personal income. Now they get a quarter of it. The gains have increased the farther up you go. The top tenth of one per cent get about ten per cent of income, and the top hundredth of one per cent about five per cent. While the Great Recession was felt most severely by those at the bottom, the recovery has hardly benefitted them. In 2010, ninety-three per cent of the year’s gains went to the top one per cent.            Since rich people are poorer in votes than they are in dollars, you’d think that, in an election year, the ninety-nine per cent would look to politics to get back some of what they’ve lost, and that inequality would be a big issue. So far, it hasn’t been. Occupy Wall Street and its companion movements briefly spurred President Obama to become more populist in his rhetoric, but there’s no sign that Occupy is going to turn into the kind of political force that the Tea Party movement has been. There was a period during the Republican primary campaign when Romney rivals like Newt Gingrich tried to take votes from the front-runner by bashing Wall Street and private equity, but that didn’t last long, either. Politics does feel sour and contentious in ways that seem to flow from the country’s economic distress. Yet much of the ambient discontent is directed toward government the government that kept the recession from turning into a depression. Why isn’t politics about what you’d expect it to be about?            Traditionally, class figured less in politics in America than in most other Western countries, supposedly because the United States, though more economically unequal, and rougher in tone, was more socially equal, more diverse, more democratic, and better at giving ordinary people the opportunity to rise. That’s what Alexis de Tocqueville found in the eighteen-thirties, and the argument has had staying power. It has also been wearing thin. During the five decades from 1930 to 1980, economic inequality decreased significantly, without imperiling â€Å"American exceptionalism.† So it’s especially hard to put a good face on the way inequality has soared in the decades since. Even if you think that all a good society requires is according to the debatable conservative mantra equal opportunity for every citizen, you ought to be a little shaken right now. Opportunity is increasingly tied to education, and educational performance is tied to income and wealth, when it comes to social mobility between generations, the United States ranks near the bottom of developed nations.            Noah writes from what might be called a neo-progressive standpoint. Like the original progressives, he seeks to blend an emotional and moral commitment to the causes of the left with the intellectual rigor of the best available economic and social science research. As in the case of the original progressives, the result is a powerful, if sometimes flawed, perspective that is likely to influence the course of American debates on issues of economic policy and justice. Noah’s central contention is that government policy can and should do more to reverse the trend toward greater income inequality that has developed in the United States since 1979. Some of his policy prescriptions, such as substituting carbon taxes and value-added taxes for the deeply regressive payroll tax, could win bipartisan support; others would have to await much larger Democratic majorities than currently exist in Congress. Still, although the analysis in this relatively short and very acc essible book is necessarily incomplete, and some of its contentions are more powerfully stated than convincingly argued, The Great Divergence is an excellent guide to the emerging center-left economic policy consensus likely to inform Democratic Party thinking and policymaking for some time to come.            In â€Å"The Great Divergence,† the journalist Timothy Noah gives us as fair and comprehensive a summary as we are likely to get of what economists have learned about our growing inequality. Noah is concerned about why inequality has widened so markedly over the last three to four decades, what it means for American society and what the country can and, he argues, urgently should do about it. As he makes clear, what has mostly grown is the gap between those at the top and those in the middle. The principal influences on inequality that Noah examines include the failure of America’s schools to keep pace with the step-up in skills that advancing technology demands from our labor force; America’s skewed immigration policy, which inadvertently brings in more unskilled than skilled immigrants and thereby subjects already lower-income workers to greater competition for jobs; rising competition with China, India and other low-wage countries, as changi ng technology enables Americans to buy ever more goods and even services produced overseas; the failure of the federally mandated minimum wage to keep up with inflation; the decline of labor unions, especially among employees of private-sector firms; and what he sees as an anti-worker and anti-poor attitude among American politicians in general and Republicans in particular. Along the way, he enlivens what might otherwise be a dry recounting of research findings with fast-paced historical vignettes featuring colorful characters like the novelist Horatio Alger, the labor leader Walter Reuther and the business lobbyist Bryce Harlow.            What’s to blame, then, for America’s widening inequality? Leaving aside the politicians, Noah reviews economic research supporting the familiar hypotheses. Indeed, each of them is probably part of the explanation. But the goal of research in a policy-oriented inquiry like this one is quantitative establishing just how much of the explanation to assign to separate influences one by one, even if all of them contribute to the story. We want not merely to portion out the blame but to know what to do, and different explanations call for different remedies. It would make little sense, for example, to invest huge sums in reforming K-12 education and reducing the cost of college if the mismatch between graduates’ skills and what the economy requires accounts for only a small part of the problem. By contrast, if my Harvard colleagues Claudia Goldin and Lawrence Katz are right that education is the core of the issue (Noah draws extensively on their recen t research, especially their aptly titled book â€Å"The Race Between Education and Technology†), then what and how we teach young Americans should be at the top of the agenda.            It is not Noah’s fault that economic research has yet to reach consensus on how much of the blame for inequality to place on which explanation, and it is to his credit that he does not try to portray a consensus that is not there. His summary of what we know from the relevant research is faithful to what the researchers have found. Part of the problem here, which â€Å"The Great Divergence† also accurately conveys, is the tension inherent in concentrating on the American facet of a worldwide phenomenon. As Noah makes clear, inequality is increasing almost everywhere in the industrialized and postindustrial world, even if the increase has been much greater in the United States. We need to know how much weight to give to America-centric explanations like the shortcomings of our schools or our immigration system or the demise of unions. But to understand a global trend, we would like a more universal explanation.            Noah’s own explanation is, in effect, â€Å"all of the above,† and his policy recommendation is therefore to take action on all fronts. His chief concern is the fear that ever widening inequality will undermine our democracy: â€Å"Americans believe fervently in the value of social equality, and social equality is at risk when incomes become too dramatically unequal growing income inequality makes it especially difficult to maintain any spirit of e pluribus unum.† He rightly emphasizes that while the potential for individuals to move up is essential to what makes inequality acceptable, at least to most Americans, economic mobility in the United States is now more limited than it appears to have been in earlier times and contrary to the popular image more limited than in many other countries. (It also matters that in America today incomes are becoming more unequal at the same time that most families’ incomes have been stagnant for more th an a decade after allowing for inflation a point that Noah notes but does not emphasize.)            How much inequality can the Republic stand before the social and political fabric frays? Noah does not answer the question, in part because he doesn’t know, but mostly because he feels he doesn’t need to. â€Å"You’d have to be blind,† he writes, â€Å"not to see that we are headed in the wrong direction, and we’ve been heading that way for too long. The worst thing we could do to the Great Divergence is get used to it.† What economics terms â€Å"the Great Divergence† has until now been treated as little more than a talking point, a club to be wielded in ideological battles. But it may be the most important change in this country during our lifetimes-a sharp, fundamental shift in the character of American society, and not at all for the better.            The income gap has been blamed on everything from computers to immigration, but its causes and consequences call for a patient, non-partisan exploration. In The Great Divergence, Timothy Noah delivers this urgently needed inquiry, ignoring political rhetoric and drawing on the best work of contemporary researchers to peer beyond conventional wisdom. Noah explains not only how the Great Divergence has come about, but why it threatens American democracy-and most important, how we can begin to reverse it.            Fortunately, however, we might comfort ourselves by knowing that the United States remains a land rich in opportunity much as it was in the past, unique among nations in its lack of a rigid class structure and its social mobility. But we’d be deceiving ourselves. In The Great Divergence, Timothy Noah of The New Republic posits that, since 1979, there has been a â€Å"particularly extreme† divergence in income inequality in the United States. Noah synthesizes the work of economists, political scientists, and sociologists to argue that income inequality has increased, and that this is not good for American society. In the book’s final chapter, he advocates specific actions and policies that he believes would help reverse this trend. His suggestions are largely politically progressive proposals, including increasing taxes on the super-rich, bolstering the federal workforce, and breaking up the too-large-to-fail banks. While there are likely some c onservative-libertarian policy wonks that would be amenable to his proposal to break up the large banks, few would likely support Noah’s proposal to revive organized labor.            The author takes the title of the work comes from a phrase used by Paul Krugman, an outspoken advocate for Keynesian stimulus, in his 2007 book, The Conscience of a Liberal. Noah defines the Great Divergence as a socio-economic phenomenon as one not primarily involving the poor. Rather, it â€Å"is about the difference between how people lived during the half century preceding 1979 and how they lived during the three decades after 1979.† The story he tells, however, is not just about income inequality; it is about diminishing access to the top. According to Noah, over the past several decades, opportunities for upward social mobility have not increased.            Unlike some pundits who rehash talking points, Noah commendably cites ample scholarship to support his claim. In The Great Divergence, the reader learns that the United States now offers its citizens less intergenerational economic mobility than northern and western European nations. (I would venture, however, that the United States still allows for greater social mobility for children of first-generation immigrants than do Scandinavian and other western European countries.) Noah also highlights an intriguing sociological finding which indicates that Americans tend to overestimate the degree to which American society fosters upward socio-economic mobility.            Notable within the pages of The Great Divergence then is the fact that Noah challenges Paul Ryan for an October 2011 speech in which the Wisconsin Congressman contrasted what he perceived to be American social mobility with a rigid European welfare state class structure. Ryan, according to Noah, â€Å"had it exactly backward.† In truth, European countries now offer more social mobility than the United States. While Noah penned his study of income inequality prior to Mitt Romney’s choosing Ryan as his running mate, The Great Divergence takes on a more salient political implication in this new found context.            So what caused the Great Divergence? According to Noah, the Great Divergence did not result from prejudice against African-Americans or women. The failure of the American educational system to meet the demand for higher skilled workers is part of the story, as is trade with low-wage nations such as China and the increase of business lobbying in Washington. The decline of organized labor also played a role. Noah also refers to the rise of extremely wealthy (â€Å"stinking rich,† in his parlance) as a â€Å"separate and distinct phenomenon† that can be thought of as â€Å"the Great Divergence, Part 2.† The last several decades have been witness to the emergence of what are, in essence, new social classes within the top 1%, namely the top 0.1% and the top 0.01%. Wall Street, according to Noah, played a substantial role in the emergence of these extremely wealthy individuals. Top income shares are rising faster in the United States than in other de veloped countries.            Overall, Noah may succeed in persuading the reader in that income inequality not only is on the rise and that it is problematic for society. He is less convincing in his policy proposals to remedy the situation. To be fair, he does rightly acknowledge that many of his proposals, many of which are further to the left than President Obama, are not â€Å"politically salable today.† Noah could have bolstered his work, and perhaps the reception to it, had he offered a list of concrete and specific policies that would both reverse income inequality and be palatable to a large slice of the American electorate. The work also suffers from the fact that it is largely a summary of other scholars’ work, much of it very technical; making it less accessible to a general audience that it deserves to be.            In conclusion, one can think of The Great Divergence as a plea to the American public to recognize that income inequality is a problem. It is also to acknowledge that social mobility is no longer operating the way in which it used to. I would contend that the frustration that many Americans feel with Washington in many ways reflects the fact that the system is not producing the same results as it did for people’s parents and grandparents. Income inequality currently is a topic of concern among the country’s economists, political activists, and pundits. Whether it will be a broadly discussed national concern remains to be seen. It would be heartening to see at least one moderator in the upcoming presidential debates ask each of the candidates where they stood on the topic of income inequality. References Noah, Timothy. The great divergence: America’s growing inequality crisis and what we can do about it. New York, NY: Bloomsbury, 2012. Print. Bottom of Form Source document

Recommendation Letters in Signed, Sealed Envelopes

Graduate and undergraduate schools alike often require that prospective students include recommendation letters with their applications. Going a step further, many graduate programs require that the envelope containing the letter be signed and sealed by the writer making the recommendation. While students often ask the people writing these letters to return the recommendations, each in a separate signed and sealed envelope, many also wonder if its too much to ask of their mentors. Is organizing all that paperwork unreasonable? The short answer is no. Signed, sealed envelopes are pretty much required in order to ensure that the contents of such letters remain private.   The Standard for Recommendation Letters For most academic institutions that require recommendation letters, its expected that students will not be privy to their contents. Traditionally, programs require that faculty submit recommendation letters independently of students or only pass them along to students in sealed, signed envelopes. The problem with asking a faculty member to send recommendations directly to an admissions office is the possibility of losing a letter. Should a student choose this route, they should definitely follow up with the admissions office to be sure that all expected letters have arrived. The second option is for faculty members to turn over their letters of recommendation directly to the student, however, as the letters are to be kept confidential, admissions committees require the envelopes be sealed by the faculty member who must then affix his or her signature over the seal (making it obvious if a student has attempted to open the envelope, either to read or alter its contents). Its Fine to Ask for Signed, Sealed Envelopes Many admissions officers often prefer that applications arrive complete, with faculty recommendations in the packet. Most faculty  members are aware of this longstanding official preferred process for applications and do not consider a request for a signed, sealed envelope an imposition. That said, a student can make it easier by preparing an envelope for each program he or she is applying to, and clipping the recommendation form along with any relevant material to the envelope. Electronic Submissions Recently, electronic applications have become increasingly common, which may soon render this whole process obsolete. Instead of the traditional sign, seal, deliver process, a student will complete his or her application online, and then simply send the person writing the recommendation letter an online submission link. Students are notified if and when letters are received and will be able to contact any faculty members whose letters have not been received as expected. Dont Forget to Say Thank You After everything is said and done, the recommendation letter and complete registration packet submitted, its important for students to take the time to thank the person who wrote his or her recommendation letters and helped him or her in the application process.  A thank-you note is generally sufficient, although a small, appropriate token gift—though not required—may nevertheless be appreciated.