Rich Get Richer, Poor Get Poorer
Updated on October 10, 2006, 2:17 PM - Written by Tim Buttner
Reasoning for the "rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer" based on my readings is that all skilled jobs of the middle class are going overseas to equally skilled workers willing to work for less, or imports coming into the country or instability of capital markets. Reich argues that the number of union workers in the U.S. has gone down considerably because of this. He also makes the point that the rich leaders of these businesses are going to make more money while spending less on labor, thus putting more money in their pockets and allowing the low workers to become poorer. Oxfam, on the other hand, stresses that through globalization that wealth and opportunity is being redistributed in the wrong direction, from the poor to the rich. Oxfam points to the poor not having a chance for growth because the rich get to use the most up to date technology and get to understand it's use and apply it towards their work. For instance in America almost every school now has been outfitted with computers for the students to use and become familiar with, whereas in the poorer countries they've yet to receive the proper books to even teach their students.
I do believe that somewhere before in high school this concept was covered in United States History. We analyzed it then to better understand what was happening in the campaign for presidency that was happening at that time (it was in Oct. 2004 to Nov. 2004 that we covered this.) We found that under Bush's first term presidency that unemployment was at it's highest since the depression. We also learned what the tax cuts that Bush proposed meant in terms of all these areas. I forget a good deal more of what we did, or exactly what our findings were, the main point is that we did cover this concept.
The reasoning for me going to college is solely based on the fact that for the career path in which I wish to pursue, I need a college education in that field. Screenwriting is a specified field, which they do not teach in high school, and the rest of filmmaking is so specific and expensive that only an illustrious private devoted to it, could teach anyone while still in high school. If I was not interested in screenwriting or film as my future career, I would most likely and in all probability still be going to college for specific training in whatever field that may be. In today's world it is almost impossible to get a really decent job without a college education. That is unless you are a bona fide genius, which occurs rarely. Either way it wouldn't affect my major because I would be looking to do something in which I enjoy rather than something that I can make a lot of money on.
Something that is interesting about screenwriting and directing is that it is not likely that you will have work right out of college. More likely you won't be able to write and direct your first feature film until you are closer to thirty years of age. You'll work as a waiter or in a coffeeshop for a few years before you sell any screenplays, and even if you sell a screenplay a studio or independent producers probably won't take a chance on you directing without experience, and especially if it's your first screenplay able to be bought. The best option is just to get on as many sets as possible and show that you are dedicated to the business and to make connections. That is my plan. I plan to get the recognition and make the connections so that someone will trust me enough to see me helm my own or someone else production. My parents, teachers, and friends all have some kind of confidence that I'll be famous and the next Spielberg. I have no intention of being the next Spielberg. I'd rather be like Orson Wells or Howard Hawks, or even John Huston. I simply, if anything, just want to get my movies made with the hope that others will also find them enjoyable enough for me to continue making movies. That is all I care about. The COOP program at Drexel was a big seller in my choice for Drexel, as well I saw an up and coming film department that has great potential and that I want to be a part of. If I or anyone from Drexel makes it big in the business then Drexel will be on the map and I'd rather go when it is rising than when it is already on the map because then it is a small pool with small fish instead of a big pool with yet too many big fish. And in the business connections is everything so the COOP is an ingenious way of getting those connections started.
My home neighborhood is an interesting one where many of the residents are retired folks living in Killington for the sake of being ski bums for the rest of their days. Others work the mountain because of their love of skiing with no care for their income. Other residents aren't even full time residents who work elsewhere with another house and come up just for the skiing or even the nice summers. Those who do work are generally in retail, real estate, food, or other small jobs needed in a small town. It can be called a rich area, though there are those who can be considered poor, but there are not many of those poor people. Those who are considered poor live like kings among the poor because they still get good land and a pretty good house to live in. There are no apartments. There are condominiums, though those are not full time residence, though they could be. I must put the area as a rich area, though it is not completely so. Most likely with the poor weather we've had recently and the lack in tourism, which is our main source of income, we are a rich town getting poorer. I guess that goes against what the analysts are predicting. You know where they can stick that up.
comments powered by Disqus