Update

July for me was a crazy and busy month for a few reasons, hence why I have not posted in a little bit(I really didn’t check how many days I haven’t posted). The first reason for my lack of posting was studying and doing my first CLEP exam(which was the Western Civilization 1 exam), which was quite difficult to study for. But I did it and its over now thank goodness. I will be getting into my CLEP experience more in the next post I will make. Also since I am done with that CLEP exam I have been getting my life back together, studying for an exam put my schedule in complete disarray. But those things are neither here nor there.

A thing that I have been introducing back into my life is reading. I mean I have been reading the whole month; I have been reading my textbooks and notes, if that counts, which ultimately fried my brain. A book I just finished recently was, Six of Crows. I am not huge on fantasy, but Six of Crows, my goodness was actually a worthwhile read. I might post a summary on the book in the near future, if I have time. Now I am rereading Jane Eyre, which is one of my all time favorites. I can’t believe I have forgotten how good the book was! Before closing this post I will like add, actually I have nothing more to add; well I have nothing more to write about, so I guess I will end the post here.

I hope ya’ll are doing well and enjoying your summer, thanks for reading!

-Dreamer

Btw: has anyone been watching the Olympics?

How Could Voluntary Arrangements Solve This Problem if the State Did Not Impose the Politics of Plunder

For the past while for the government course I have been doing I have been reading: How to Argue with a Liberal and Win! This has been very interesting and insightful. Moving on to the main topic of the essay, my teacher wanted me to pick any chapter from the book. The chapter I chose is called: Government Should Control Prices but Not the People. After choosing a chapter now I must figure out this: how could voluntary arrangements solve this problem if the state did not impose the politics of plunder.

Well first of all how is it possible for the government to not control people but control prices? The answer is absolutely not. Controlling prices basically controls the prices of services or products that businesses sell, also it controls how much people have to pay for services or products. Hence price controls are people controls.

But how could voluntary arrangements solve this problem if the state did not impose the politics of plunder? Well the first thing you can do is budget. With budgeting you have limits on how much you spend on services or items. 

In conclusion, this is my answer to: “how could voluntary arrangements solve this problem if the state did not impose the politics of plunder,” through the book chapter: Government Should Control Prices but Not the People, from the book: Argue with a Liberal and Win!

Photosynthesis

How does photosynthesis affect the transfer of energy through an ecosystem? I was asked to consider the forms of energy that are readily available, and processes that make this energy available to other organisms in my answer. Well this seems confusing enough; to make it more simple I have created a scenario for explanation purposes.

In the beginning a seed grows into a plant, which in turn spreads more seeds. Also a herbivore most likely when passing by these plants will consume these plants. The herbivore uses the plant to get fuel and nutrients to continue on the day. The waste of these herbivores will go back to the soil which in turn will provide more nutrients for new plants. Maybe this certain herbivore is killed and eaten by a carnivore. Which in turn provides nutrients to the carnivore.

Now with this analogy in mind, photosynthesis helps transfer the energy from the sun to plants; these plants are most likely food for some herbivores. The Herbivores are food for the carnivores. Which in turn is how photosynthesis affects the transfer of energy through an ecosystem.

Price Controls are People Controls

The title of this essay may seem vague or confusing. I mean who controls prices in the first place, why are price controls people controls, and what does this whole thing mean? I was also quite stuck when I was presented with this statement. But with a few minutes of figuring things out I believe that I have sufficient answers to all questions you most likely have.

Prices should be controlled by the people; this is how the free market works when it comes to prices. Unfortunately in many scenarios it seems that the state is controlling prices instead of the people. If the state or government controls prices which is becoming more common these days, business owners, you or me, or any other person will have no control over prices. Businesses no longer will be able to control how much their products or services will cost. The average person including you and I will not have control over how much we would want to spend on something, because now that is not our decision if the state controls prices.

Now that I have given a basic image of who should control prices and what would happen if the state controlled prices, I will move on to the most important question: are price controls people controls? Well to begin with controls on prices by the government, now business owners are not able to have control over the prices of their services or products. That is controlling business owners, who are people, now I will move onto the side of the consumer. If the government controlled prices, that would control how much people would spend on things. In a world without price controls there is competition and the consumers are able to buy things at the prices they would prefer, or are more affordable for them personally. But with price controls now people have little control over how much they have to spend on things. This is quite a control, hence price controls are people controls.

In short, prices should be controlled by the people. By the government controlling prices that will control the prices of services or items, and the customers or consumers will have not a lot of choice over how much they would prefer to spend. This is why price controls are people controls.

Who Should Have the Authority to Set Prices, the Free Market or the State? Why?

There is still much a debate on who should control the economy. One side of this argument argues that the government should have little say or almost no say when it comes to the economy. The other side states the opposite. A topic that goes along with this debate is the topic of prices. Who should have the authority to set prices? The Free Market or the State? Which one should actually have the authority to do this?

When it comes to the idea of the state setting prices there are risks. Who knows, maybe the state will manipulate the prices, for their own benefit. Also this would give them the authority to raise the cost of living, to whatever they please. Also the state is not a business, it is the state after all, so it would most likely not understand the concept of voluntary exchange. Then you must think of all the regulations that the state would put upon the economy. Overall having the state have authority to set prices would not be a very wise idea, and would most likely negatively affect businesses, and individuals.

As for the free market option, instead of being restrictive; sellers can sell at any price, and the buyers can choose to buy things at any price. If something is too expensive for the buyer he/her most likely will go to a different seller to buy the item. In short meaning that sellers, and buyers contribute when it comes to prices. In the free market there is choice.

Therefore, in my opinion the free market should have the authority to set prices, for a number of reasons including the fact that it leaves freedom to the actual seller and buyers. Being able to choose your own prices boosts the economy, and benefits others.

Prokaryotes

Many Biologists are passionately fascinated by prokaryotes, the way a “normal,” person might be excited by sports, music, or any other hobby. What are some of the characteristics that get scientists so excited about these tiny, primitive creatures? How do I feel about them?

Some of the characteristics of prokaryotes that biologists may get excited over include: some prokaryotes are harmful to humans or can kill you, and others are beneficial and are necessary for your survival. Also prokaryotes are very small, around eight micrometers long, and live with limited organelles. Prokaryotes are the most studied cells by biologists, and these characteristics that I mentioned above interest biologists.

To conclude, how do I feel about prokaryotes? To me prokaryotes only interest me due to school; personally I do not become excited about learning more about their characteristics, unlike a biologist. 

Happy Canada Day!

I usually don’t make posts on holidays, but today I felt like writing one today. Canada Day is not a really big deal in Canada compared to how big a deal 4th of July is in the States. This year especially it has been a bit sad due to everything going on, but thankfully today is a turning point, things are finally opening up where I live, so there is something to celebrate!

For the past week it has been abnormally hot, Tuesday was the hottest week in British Columbia, and the hottest it has ever been in Canada. In some regions in British Columbia, temperatures were almost 50 degrees C which is insane for Canada! But today it’s mellowed out which is another blessing!

Regardless of all the issues going on in the present and the unknown future ahead life is full of blessings and beauty, including places opening up, and changes in weather. So I hope you all a blessed day! Happy Canada Day!

Is it Possible to Have State Subsidies Without State Control

During the earlier months of the Covid 19 Pandemic in Canada, many businesses received some form of a subsidy from the government, to somewhat survive the shutdowns. A subsidy is a form of financial aid for businesses. Usually subsidies are controlled by the state, like I showed above in the Canadian example; but can these state subsidies be possible without state control?

Well the first point is the fact that you can start a charity or fund, but with that money must be coming from somewhere. This goes for state run subsidies, the money must come from somewhere. Usually this money is from other people. In the form of charity people give their money for a cause, but when it comes to state run subsidies, people are taxed. Which means that subsidies are not free, and they would not exist if they were “free.” In Canada when businesses receive subsidies from the government, other people are paying for that. Also people who receive subsidies from the state become dependent on it. Now the government controls those individuals; money after all is often used for control, so overall subsidies have a negative aspect to them. 

In conclusion, to answer the important question: is it possible to have state subsidies without state control? The answer is simply a no.

How Important Are the Words “So What?” In an Autobiography?

When writing an autobiography or any book in general one of the most important things that must be done is keeping the readers interested. You must write things that will interest the reader, not just the things that interest you, to have a successful book. Throughout this year of English I have read many autobiographies, all of which were different in their own unique way. Sadly most of these autobiographies were not very successful in keeping “me”, the reader interested. Some were definitely worse at this than others. An example of an autobiography that kept me interested mostly throughout the whole book was Sergei Kourdakov’s autobiography The Persecutor. Because a lot of autobiographies I have read so far did not do a very great job at keeping the readers interested, how much better would these autobiographies be if the authors simply asked themselves the question “so what?” On this note how important really are the words, “so what” in an autobiography?

Like I mentioned above, the most important thing when writing a successful autobiography is keeping the readers interested. Most of the time when authors write autobiographies they usually write about things that interested them from their life, instead of writing about things that would interest the reader from the author’s life. The way to prevent this common mistake when writing an autobiography is by asking the simple “so what,” throughout the writing of the book. This question would enable the writer to think like the reader, or understand how the reader would feel while reading the autobiography.

In my opinion an autobiography would be much better if the author asked the question, “so what.” By keeping in mind the perspective of the reader by asking this question, an author would be able to write about details that actually interest the reader, instead of just interesting the author. The question “so what,” also helps the author grasp what is relevant, or not relevant for the narrative; also this question most likely will help the author write a more clear cut, organized, and entertaining autobiography, while still being relevant to the readers.

To answer the final question: how important are the words “so what?” In an autobiography? These two words are very important in an autobiography. This relates to the point above; to write a good autobiography the author must keep in mind if the writing is actually interesting or relevant to the reader.

In conclusion, writing an autobiography is a complex task, if I was ever to go through with it the thing I would keep in mind is the perspective of the readers, through the question, “so what?” Keeping the interest of the reader is one of the most important things when writing any kind of book, and this goes much with autobiographies. The question, “so what?” It itself is very Important when writing an autobiography and should not be neglected, or forgotten, if you were to write a successful autobiography.

If the State is Strong Enough to do Something Good for You, it Can Also do Something Bad For You

The Government has played a role in society for a long time. It impacts many aspects of our lives today, and unfortunately has taken some control over our lives. Regardless if you agree with governments or not you must admit that governments have so far been a mixed bag. They have done some good to the people, but also have done some pretty bad things to the people.

With what I said above, it is clear that I do agree that the state can do something good for you, but also it can do something negative to you. Personally I also believe that a strong state is especially capable of doing negative and positive things to the people. Usually when a government does something negative to the people that negative thing looks positive. An example of which are certain taxes.

Also look at history; look at all the wrong governments have done to people. In my opinion history is proof enough that if a state is strong enough to do something beneficial it can also do something not beneficial.

Hence, I agree with the statement: if the state is strong enough to do something good for you, it can also do something bad for you.