Today I’m going to talk about how Plunkett made his money and why he was so open about where his money came from and the sources of his income while he was in politics.

Why was Plunkett so open about how he made his money? Plunkett was very keen on trying to dispel the theories that politicians would steal lots of money from the treasury of whichever sector of the government they worked for and get wealthy on it. The reason Plunkett was open about this was to show that this concept was not true for all politicians buy default.

Plunkett made the majority of his money in ways that most people can. The main thing he profited off of was real estate. He would buy and sell land for a profit. Plunkett didn’t need to hide how he made his money; why should he? He was making money just like anybody else. All he was trying to do was to prove the public opinion incorrect, and hopefully help his political party.

12/02/24

    Was George Washington Plunkitt serious about “patriotism’s” connection to obtaining government jobs after you vote for a certain person to be in office? Plunkitt was. It is quite obvious.

    Plunkitt thought that being able to get a government job after your candidate won an election should be easier than it was. He disliked civil service, and said that it should be removed from the process of someone getting a job in politics. He thought that part of being a patriot should be trying to serve your party by getting a job, which I personally think is actual idiocy, because that doesn’t matter to the people. Plunkitt ought to know that people are voting, not because they want a free easy job, but because they agree with the ideals of the person you are putting in office. I couldn’t disagree with Plunkitt more.

    In conclusion, Plunkitt thinks that it should be easier to get government jobs if you voted for a candidate that won. He was serious about it. I don’t think it makes any sense, but to each his own I guess.

11/04/24

    Today I’m to talk about memorable “images” from Booker Washington’s autobiography. There were a few: The first trip to Hampton and the founding & building of the Tuskgee School in Alabama are the first that come to mind.

    The first memorable story that struck me was the trip from Malden, WV, to Hampton, VA. This would have meant that young Booker would have had to cross the Appalachian mountains, during a time when he couldn’t get a hotel because of the color of his skin. Even though he was able to take busses most of the way, Washington had to sleep outside on the cold ground several nights, and his suffering being the only real physical hardship in the book made it more memorable than begging for money for a school (the rest of the book).

    The second story was the founding of the Tuskgee School. The only real reason I think this is memorable for me is because it was such a turning point in Washington’s life, and what he started in a shack grew into a very prosperous university. The fact that he not only taught book subjects but that he also taught life skills actually makes sense, as opposed to the rest of the school system today, which is nigh useless in the real world

    In conclusion, there weren’t very many memorable moments from Booker Washington’s autobiography that stuck out to me, but there were a few that I will remember his book by.

In this essay, I was asked to compare 1987 to 2000 in the book Looking Backward and state which one is more realistic. I’m here to say that the 2000 is the less realistic time period in this story, by a lot. The fact that Bellemey thinks a socialist utopia is possible and not utter fantasy astounds me.

The year 2000, as described in Looking Backward, is described, but it is not explained how everything functions behind the scenes. In Bellemey’s eye, everything just worked; he didn’t explain it because he couldn’t. There is no possible world where all people do their best without getting any extra compensation. That is not human nature, and taking away private ownership is not going to change human nature.

The least reasonable part of the novel so far is that competition in the economic market does not exist in the book. This doesn’t hold any water in all actuality, and is all fantasy. Today I’m going to dive into the details as to why this doesn’t work.

The first major point I need to bring up is product quality; in a world where the government owns everything and there isn’t any competition, there is no pressure to develop new products for the consumer to use. A good example of where this is essential is in the video game market, particularly a decade or two ago before Playstation and Nintendo separated into their own nieces (Xbox doesn’t count). Back in the early days of video games, the only reason the game companies were pushing for better graphics and hardware and advancements in the technology was because they were competing, not just with each other but with other forms of entertainment. If all product output was controlled by Big Government, then there would be little to no need for advancement in each individual field. There wouldn’t be any companies trying to outperform each other. The reason consoles kept getting more and more powerful is because each one was a leg above the other. Playstation made the PS2 the most innovative system, not because they felt like it, but because they wanted to drive as many people to their company to buy their product instead of the competition’s to make more money.

There is not even competition to see which employee does the best work. The book assumes that everyone does there best work, but in no socialist or communist world is that a reasonable expectation. (I think that) Human nature is to be efficient and/or lazy. There needs to be either positive or negative reinforcement causing us to want to do something. The reason one goes to work every day is because he has a need that he needs to fulfill. He will do quality work, or else he will be fired and won’t be able to fulfill his need anymore. Basically, in our caveman brains, do good work = money = good, do bad work = no money = bad. In a socialist world, it doesn’t matter how good your work is, so: do bad work = money = good. Because only a select few are going to give it their all in this society, the majority of people will not do good because there is no punishment for doing poor work, and if everybody does poor work, nothing will be done properly, and soon every government function cripples and dies. I can almost guarantee you that if everyone in the population was suddenly whisked away to a socialist “utopia” as described in the book, it would crumble within the year.

In conclusion, there is no such thing as a socialist utopia where the people are equal and happy simultaneously. Look at every communist nation in history: none of them had functional economies, happy people, or lasted very long.

Communication skills are crucial to almost every job. They are versatile, and important to almost every field of work. Developing these skills can really help you to look better in the eyes of a company. Today I’m going to go more in depth on how writing skills and proof of having them can be very helpful for applying to almost any job.

Having a blog with lots of content on it means that you have been getting lots and lots of writing practice (depending on the amount, some might even say too much). The more you practice something, the better you get at it. Because writing is such a versatile skill, companies that are looking to hire you have access to hundreds of pieces of your writing, and that provides proof that you are good at communication, regardless of any college major. It is solid, undeniable proof that you are good at writing, and if people in a company aren’t impressed by a library of polished essays, I don’t know what will.

Companies that need you to be competent at communication will be able to look at your blog, and should be able to tell that you are a very competent writer and communicator, and that is why you should have a blog with lots of content on it.

Are you tired of exclusively ancient, incompetent men being at the top of American Politics? Do you want a normal person like you or I to be president instead of some creepy old geezers?

Old men are not objectively good rulers. It makes more sense to have a president that doesn’t take almost half of their term in off days. That’s not an exaggeration. Biden spent about 40% of his term out of the white house on stuff unrelated to work. The reality is, we need younger, more competent men in our higher political positions. Several of the founding fathers were under the age requirement that is in place for running for president now, that being 35. We need a president that cares for the people (at least a little bit) and doesn’t have to have a piece of paper that reminds him to greet the audience when he gives a speech.

There is a new person running for president this year! Mr. Literally A. Else is a thirty-five year old man from Texas who changed his legal name as a sort of a protest against the two existing presidential candidates. He is just barely within the legal age to run for president. He aims to address some of the core problems of our nation, including the education system.

In order to help make change in the United States, go to literallyanybodyelse.com to learn how you can sign the petition and vote for Mr. Else.

Studying, filling out homework, and writing essays are difficult, tedious, mind-numbing, and time consuming tasks. Today I’m going to explore my favorite solution to these problems, and discuss ways to ease the pain that I would otherwise feel almost constantly throughout my school life.

There are several problems with school, even homeschool. The main one is the sheer amount of time-consuming and repetitive tasks, that can cause the brain to shrink rather than grow. I know that when I spend hours solving math problems and history essays specifically, I get bored very, very quickly, and it is very easy to get distracted by any little thing because every fiber of my body wants me to resist spending time on those things. Outside distractions can be a real problem when I’m working, especially as I live with a younger brother that seems to really, really like yelling at the top of his lungs for large portions of the day.

Listening to music while working on school is the solution to all of these problems. It helps me keep half of my brain occupied while the other half is creative while writing essays or bored while doing math. It helps me keep at least a little bit of my sanity intact. It also helps drown out any unavoidable distracting background noises that plague my focus.

In conclusion, I think listening to music without lyrics is a very good way to help preserve one’s focus and sanity while doing all sorts of schoolwork, just as long as you have the capability to maintain focus on your work and not be distracted by the music, like I do.

(First I’m supposed to list the problems, then write paragraphs for each)

1. Textbooks are take up a lot of space
2. Taking notes is not very convenient with a textbook
3. Textbooks are hard to navigate

Textbooks are really bulky and often heavy. It is not easy to have to carry around twenty pounds of books, when, in reality, you could just have a really light Macbook Air or other small laptop, which would be able to have all of your books on it, and even do other things that you might want it to.

Taking notes is not very easy and intuitive with a textbook. Writing between the lines and in the margins doesn’t always give you the room you need to make for your notes. It is much easier to take notes on an online textbook than it is a normal textbook, and they can be as long as you want.

Textbooks can be hard to navigate. You have to flip through until you find the right page or chapter, and then scan through to find the right paragraph, and all that could be replaced by a few clicks using a software program on a laptop.

Homeschooling is a great alternative to public schools. It gets your child away from the harsh (and often unjust) school system, potentially abusive teachers, and is, overall an environment that you, the parent, can control entirely.

Public schools are run by the government. That means that the government is indoctrinating your children with what they want your children to believe, not necessarily what you want them to. For example, you might not believe in evolution, but that is what is taught in the public school science class because that’s what the government thinks your kids should be learning about. You get to control exactly what your children learn.

Public Schools are, generally speaking, a poor social experience. The teachers are often underpaid, and very few actually want to be there, which creates a sub-par teacher-student relationship, and there is also lots of other administrator nonsense, like bathroom passes and the bullying problem.

You can also control exactly how much work that you assign your students. Public schools like to overwork their students with lots of homework, and then deduct points for it.

Lunch is a problem for public schools. The food that they provide the kids is very suspicious, and should probably not be eaten. I’ve had a very few school lunches in my time (don’t ask where), and none of them had been very good. Homeschooling also gives you and your child more options for meals that are actual food and taste good.

Finally, most public school kids don’t spend enough time with their parents. Homeschooling gives you the chance to really build a parent-child bond with your kids because you are teaching them and spending a lot more time with them.

Because of all these flaws in the public school system, I think that homeschooling is very beneficial for the students, and, unless some major changes are made to the public school system, then that will always be the case.