Author Archive

T-Mobile: The future AT&T

April 23, 2013 Leave a comment

T-Mobile is just behind Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon on the popularity scale. T-Mobile would be on the way to success if it weren’t for all the competition. These different companies desire the money of consumers; however, because competition exists, T-mobile is offering more deals and pricing. The main difference between T-mobile and AT&T, besides the numbers itself, would be the long-term versus short-term contracts.

T-Mobile now has the iPhone 5 available.

T-Mobile now has the iPhone 5 available.

Consumers aren’t committed as long when choosing T-mobile. This offers the flexibility to look at competitive pricing. This offers a chance for individuals whom have lost their jobs to respond to his/her financial needs.

However, some don’t see T-Mobile as rewarding and valuable. “The company has said its main problems were consumers’ negative perception of its network and its inability to offer customers the iPhone” (New York Times). IPhones are everywhere. Buyers want this specific phone simply because it is useful and it seems as if everyone owns one. T-Mobile doesn’t want buyers to substitute them for Sprint or Verizon. To avoid this, T-Mobile has made a deal with Apple and turned on the LTE network. “Apple iPhone 5 would be available starting April 12 for $100 up front, with customers paying an additional $20 a month for two years. Other new smartphones, like the Samsung Galaxy S 4 and the BlackBerry Z10, will be available with similar payment plans (New York Times). T-Mobile has made advancements due to competition and will make more developments in the future.

According to John Legere, individuals should choose T-Mobile over other companies, because this corporation is straightforward. People would know what to expect; there are no surprises. “Mr. Legere said that over two years, an iPhone on T-Mobile would cost $1,000 less than it would on AT&T” (New York Times). In his mind, there is no question about it; T-Mobile is more sufficient. But, buyers’ self-interest and preferences also matter. It could be easier to be on a long-term plan or there’s the possibility of AT&T having more appropriate prices.

This relates to the Appletown Simulation in class. Just like there were multiple producers, there are varieties of cellular companies to choose from. Consumers, or buyers, decide which company to choose from by looking at prices and self-interest. Naturally a potential customer will examine prices and choose the lower price. Self-interest can change a decision between AT&T and Verizon. Self-interest can change a decision between green apples and red apples or large apples and small apples. Buyers can use the substitution effect anytime. If T-Mobile isn’t going well for a user, especially considering it is short-term, he/she can investigate in an alternative, such as Sprint. If a producer in class was charging too much for a basket of apples, he/she can turn to another producer who has a reasonable price. Anyone can be replaced.

In my opinion, I would want a short-term contract. I would feel more comfortable and secure in case something was to happen with my financial stability and I couldn’t pay for my phone anymore. Corporations try to win people over with the “unlimited texting” or “unlimited minutes”. For me personally, I would need unlimited texting. That is a way a company would buy my interest. The minutes aren’t as important to me, so unlimited minutes with T-Mobile isn’t an advantage or disadvantage. Also, when I was in late-elementary school and middle school, I would buy a new phone almost every two years, sometimes more. A short-term contract would be more beneficial so I could change phones or even companies.

Categories: A1 Tags: , ,

Cheering for Religious Rights

February 28, 2013 Leave a comment

In my government and economics class, we had a debate over cheerleaders using Bible verses. It was just a one-time discussion, but I found it something extremely interesting. I feel like there are multiple perspectives to this story. In Kountze, Texas, high school students painted a Bible verse on their run-through banners. One of the verses was from the book of Hebrews, saying “And let us run with endurance the race God has set before us.” Another verse was Philippians 4:13: “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” In certain outlooks, these verses can be closely related to football and strength. However, there has been controversy regarding freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Are cheerleaders aloud to express their religion in this kind of way? This has been considered unconstitutional, but there is still disagreement amidst.

According to the first amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” The cheerleaders have the right to say whatever they desire. They have the freedom to shout and chant whichever words please them. They are capable of expressing their religious beliefs. The first amendment grants this. David Starnes, an attorney, said that

Kountze cheerleaders supporting their school with a Bible verse.

“It is the individual speech of the cheerleaders and not in fact the government speaking. It is not just one girl or one person in the group that comes up with the quote, but it’s on a rotating basis that each girl gets to pick the quote. That is their individual voices that are being portrayed on the banner.” The girls can have a voice. And according to the New York Times, “they came up with what they felt were more inspiring phrases”, instead of the usual slogans. The cheerleaders wanted to avoid negative, harsh words. Considering the Bible verses chosen are related in some ways to football, and not just random selection, individuals see this as acceptable. It is simply their way of supporting their high school and their way of encouraging the football players in a positive, uplifted atmosphere.

On the other side, people do not want to be forced into religion. In opposition, there are individuals who believe this violates public schools not enforcing religion. As Thomas Jefferson once said, there is a “separation between church and state.” The secular world can easily come in contact with religious beliefs and faithful conversations. This is an exceedingly difficult, yet a possible, arrangement that must take place. In public school, religion and the earthly world cannot be touching. There needs to be boundaries, because without this separation, people aren’t guaranteed their unalienable rights. Citizens have the right to be whichever religion he/she chooses to be. Being forced into religion or in a public environment with Christian influences (such as the Bible verse on the banner) is considered crossing the line.

In my opinion, I do believe cheerleaders can use Bible verses at football games. Their intention was not to make anyone feel out of place or uncomfortable. They initially thought about creating a heartwarming and enthusiastic setting. This, however, can only go to a certain extent. Having Christian references is far different than pressuring an individual to pray or follow a different religion other than his/her own. If (most) public schools say the Pledge of Allegiance, which does include “under God”, it shouldn’t be considered unconstitutional to expand that thought at football games. If saying “under God” isn’t a violation of public schools not being aloud to incorporate religion, then cheerleaders are by far not crossing any line. I do believe writing such encouraging and bright words on a football banner are acceptable, as it is the cheerleaders’ way of supporting their team in a healthy way.

Categories: A1 Tags: , ,

It’s Easier Said Than Done

February 22, 2013 3 comments

On December 14, 2012, twenty children lost their lives to a bullet.

Emilie Alice Parker was one of the children shot at Sandy Hook Elementary.

Six teachers, who were dedicating their lives to education, lost their lives to a bullet. Newtown, Connecticut lost family and friends to a bullet. Adam Lanza shot these innocent children and blameless teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School. This means there is an angel in heaven that will not be able to celebrate his/her seventh birthday because of a gun. This incident brings the United States together to discuss gun control. In Barack Obama’s State Of The Union Address on February 12, 2013, gun control was saved for the last part of his speech, as this is one of the most controversial, frustrating topics to find a solution to. There is the discussion of making more detailed, secure background checks, preventing criminals from receiving weapons, and sending votes to Congress. The most sincere and significant part of Obama’s address was when he said, “I know this is not the first time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time is different.” This time is different. This occurrence isn’t even remotely similar to any other event. These were pure and righteous citizens who lost their lives. When a first-grader loses his/her life from a twenty-year-old man, we know the United States needs an adjustment. What that adjustment is? What should the revised gun control regulations be? It is unknown. But, with the assistance of Barack Obama and all the various rolls he plays, a more stable and safer future is sure to come.

As I have learned in my Government and Economics class, Barack Obama has numerous rolls and responsibilities. These jobs will greatly impact the outcome of gun control. Obama is the Voice of the People and Protector of Peace. These two roles easily place him as the leader of gun regulations. First, as the Voice of the People, he must understand and comprehend what the citizens want. He represents us. He is a human being with every citizen’s words inside him. He doesn’t just listen, but responds to the opinions of this country. If we want certain guns banned, he can follow through on that. If we want to have a majority vote, then he can follow through on that. If we, as citizens, do not want guns to be allowed within a hundred feet from all schools, Obama can follow through on that. He is our voice. He is what we want as a whole country. Also, the President is the Protector of Peace. When an event or sudden disturbance somehow troubles the People’s peace, it is the President’s job to step in and help. It is the President’s roll to maintain peace. When an occurrence, such as the one taken place at Sandy Hook Elementary, happens, Obama is the one to act. This may include making decisions that are best for the United States. Sometimes the United States can’t have what is best for the country and what each citizen wants. Obama is the leader and decision-maker for both the Voice of the People and the Protector of Peace. He will be able to lead us to more thorough gun regulations.

Based on discussion in class, my own research, and the news, I realize that history keeps repeating history. Nothing is happening. In Colorado, there was a shooting at a movie theatre. After a few months, during which Obama claimed to have been making a change, innocent children were killed at their school. The same nerve-wracking episodes will keep repeating each other until something is actually put into place. I also do not necessarily agree with the voting mentioned in Obama’s State of the Union. Why is a vote necessary? The ones who vote ‘no’ for gun control bills are the ones who shouldn’t have weapons in the first place. The wrong hands are getting a hold of weapons. I obviously do not have an answer to the problem. I do know, however, that something needs to happen now. We can talk about it all we want. Putting a plan into action is different. Just like people say, ‘It’s easier said than done.’

Categories: A1 Tags: , ,
%d bloggers like this: