Is Lush worth the high price?

Lush is a popular shop which sells creams, soaps, shampoos, shower gels, lotions, moisturizers, scrubs, masks and most notably bath bombs. Lush is considered by some a luxury good some think the price is too high for a product that has a one time use. As a consumer, I do think Lush’s goods can be overpriced but when it comes to bath bombs, no other company makes ones like the high quality ones from Lush. Speaking from experience, most bath bombs simply sink to the bottom, fizz and change the water to a different color. These bath bombs are considered inferior goods compared to the ones form Lush. Bath bombs from Lush do what off brand bath bombs do but also usually create foam, float and sometimes include other features. The consumer is definitely getting more for their money by purchasing a bath bomb from Lush but the prices of substitute goods create incentive for consumers to look for other places to shop.

The Lush product called the Giant Rose Bombshell costs $19.95. It is important to weigh the cost and benefits before purchasing this. While this bath bomb is three times larger than a regular one and contains oil, perfume, and rose petals, the consumer is still paying a good bit of money for a one time use item. In contrast, one can buy a set of six bath bombs at Walmart for $12.95. Regular Lush bath bombs typically sell from $6.95-$8.95 but Dollar Bath Bombs typically sells their’s for $1-$5.95. During holiday season, Lush makes a lot of profit by selling wrapped gift sets which contain a mix of their products. Some the gift sets are very expensive, one costs $129.95 but contains 14 products. Many choose to buy these products from secondary markets such as eBay.

I do not believe the Lush will lower their prices because their products remain in high demand. I also believe that Lush will continue to be successful in the near future because they have little competition when it comes to their specialty. Another thing that I like about Lush is that they do not sell any products which use animal testing and their products are vegan. Lush also sells a lotion called the “Charity Pot” which donates 100% of their profit to charity. The company has given over $10,000,000 to grassroots charities in 42 countries. Employees that work in the Lush factories and stores are treated with respect and make above minimum wage (minimum wage is $7.25 in Texas). These features create more incentive for consumers.

While I am conscientious about my spending, I will keep on purchasing Lush products despite the price because for me the benefits outweigh the costs and they are something I really enjoy. There are ways to be a Lush consumer and a conscientious shopper. Lush is not a store I go to all the time and I usually only make a few purchases when I go. I also only go when I have a good bit of money saved.   \

Image source

Posted by evied2018

The Evolving Nature of Representation

Rep. Albert Gore, Jr. of Tennessee was the first to speak when the U.S. House of Representatives first began live, televised debate on the House Floor in 1979. “It is a solution for the lack of confidence in government,” Congressman Gore said, alluding to the public’s post-Watergate demand for a more transparent government. “The marriage of this medium and of our open debate has the potential, Mr. Speaker, to revitalize representative democracy.”

Today, we are in the midst of another media revolution: text, email, websites, wikis, blogs, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Google+, Foursquare, Quora, RSS Feeds, Instagram, Spapface… today, the Internet is social, interactive, and collaborative. Nonetheless, it’s possible that Representative Gore’s comment from 1979 has implications for us today – as we consider ways that social media shape legislators’ evolving relationships with their constituents. With today’s assignment in mind, please share your opinion on the question below:

What impact should social media have on the way legislators represent their constituents as trustees and delegates today?

Should the Electoral College System be Preserved?

Many forces shape the political strategy of presidential elections, but few are more significant than the Electoral College. This complex, rather odd institution was yet another compromise at the Constitutional Convention, a means to moderate the “passions of the public” and to allow smaller states a greater say in the selection of the president.

Today, the Electoral College system shapes the politics of how and where presidential candidates campaign in the general election. And, occasionally, as in the 2000 and 2016 presidential elections, the Electoral College is decisive in determining which candidate wins the White House.

Walter Berns, scholar at the American Enterprise Institute says KEEP IT: “I doubt we could come up with a better system than they (the Founders) did.”

Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) says DUMP IT: “The Electoral College is an antiquated institution that has outlived its purpose… it represents a serious and persistent flaw in our current system.”

What do YOU think about the Electoral College – keep it, alter it, dump it??

(For full credit, offer evidence from your text OR FROM YOUR OWN RESEARCH to bolster your argument!)

Image Source: C-SPAN Classroom

On The Filter Bubble

Now that we have viewed Eli Pariser’s TED Talk (from March, 2011) and discussed its implications in class, please comment on one of the following questions:

1) Is it okay if you are only seeing search results (articles, ads, etc.) that mirror your political beliefs? <or>
2) Do we need a policy? Should government set guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet?

To satisfy the requirements for this assignment, you must either: 1) post your opinion – thoughtfully; and/or 2) respond to one of your classmates’ posts – in the spirit of deliberative dialogue.

IMPORTANT NOTES

1. Consider saving your very first comment (!!) in Word or Google docs and using copy-and-paste to upload… at least until you are comfortable using our blog.
2. Remember to ‘sign’ your post with first name and last initial ONLY – to earn full credit.
3. Still curious? Eli Pariser updated his thinking in a 2015 essay for Wired Magazine. Check it out HERE.

 

Welcome!

Welcome to our online home for students’ writing!

This is a class blog authored by student contributors and curated by their teacher, Dave Ostroff.

The posts on this blog are part of an ongoing assignment in Dr. Ostroff’s Government and Economics classes. The major goal of our course is to prepare students for responsible citizenship in the 21st century. Students post reflection pieces on a rotating basis. We invite you to return often and read what we write!

Please read the specifics of our class blog assignment here.

View our class blogging and commenting guidelines here.

Special thanks to Mike Gwaltney and his AP US Government and Politics students for providing the inspiration for this project!

The Damage Of Money On Elections

In government elections today money has become a major part of running for office.  Many political parties raise money in effort to try to get their representatives to be more publicized, so that they have a better chance of getting elected.  It has become more than that though, money is starting to become more of the candidates and parties focus than the election itself.  They believe that they ultimately need money to win elections, which is sadly true.  The only political parties that have been elected into the presidency are Republicans and Democrats.  There are more political parties in the United States besides the two, but no one ever hears about them because they attain a less amount of money than the other parties. Money is an issue in government elections today and Congress should put a limit on it because it is unconstitutional. The money that is implicated with the election process is unjust: different parties have more cash than others, individuals and groups are taking advantage, and it is making government more corrupt.

Money is thought of to be unfair in political elections because a wealthier candidate would have an enhanced chance of winning.  The Democratic Party and Republican Party raised a combine 2.38 billion dollars for the 2012 election alone and most of the money was spent on advertisement (Washington Post).  Money is not just becoming a tool used as an advantage in government; it is also distracting candidates from their main focuses. “‘When candidates … are spending 90 percent of their time raising money,’ Bayh says, ‘that’s time they’re not spending with constituents or with public-policy experts’” (News Week).  The candidates that raise the most money get more recognition and that was thought of to be unequal. Members of congress did attempt to get rid of the huge factor of money in elections.  In 1971, the Federal Campaign Act was passed to try to limit the amount of money spent and after the Watergate scandal and more amendments were made.  These laws passed, established a court case Buckley v. Valeo.  Buckley argued that spending money was connected to freedom of speech and therefore taking away his rights of the first amendment. “The court sided with Buckley by taking away limits on overall spending, on spending on the candidates, and on spending by independent groups.  However, the justices upheld the public funding of presidential elections the court allowed limits on how much an individual or group might give to a candidate” (Scott).  This made loopholes in the law and political action, committees then started to give money to candidates.

This gave rise to PACs, Political Action Committees, and it allowed them to give unlimited sums of money.  These corporations, groups, and individuals giving ridiculous sums of money to the candidates are how the corruption takes place.  “They give their money in attempt to get access with the winners of the election, and make them wealthier” (News Week).  Their money goes to reforms that they help idealize and that benefit them and their companies.  This is how money is becoming a problem, since PACs are giving large sums of money, the candidates have to listen to their opinions and take them into account.  This is unreasonable to the poor people in the United States because they do not have the crash to donate so that they can have an opinion in government too.  PACs is why money is becoming corrupted in the election process, and government should alter the way that they are allowed to donate an unlimited amount of money.

Money has become a huge factor in elections and it is fixing which representative wins.  A lot of corruption is also involved and there should be a limit on the sums of money used in elections.  It creates an unfair balance between representatives because one is a lot more publicized than the others.  Money has also become a distraction in the government; they should be more focused on their priorities, which are the citizens of the United States.

It is Women’s Right to Decide

In government class we had discussed the many different ways to become active in government. The pathways of action, and especially the court pathway, are one of the many ways that citizens can participate in government. The court pathway has been used to shape government. In the courtroom they use the Constitution to back up their argument. In this instance using the Constitution is the most powerful tool because it is one of the founding principles of our nation.

The use of the Constitution was extremely evident in the Roe vs. Wade Case in 1973. The Roe vs. Wade case was very instrumental in changing the law nationwide. They had used the court pathway to shape the nation by “establishing a right of personal privacy protected by the due process clause that included the right of a woman to determine whether or not to bear a child” (Justia Law)

Curtsey of Cecilia.W.Yu

. They had won the case 7-2 because under the Constitution in Amendment Fourteen, women obtain the right to equal protection, and liberty. The lawyers in the Roe vs. Wade case had skillfully used the Constitution as a tool to reinforce that all people have the right to privacy, and that women have the right to decide if they want to have an abortion.

However, the Constitution did not anticipate abortion so there are places in the Constitution where it is not clear. Pro-life activists used this to their advantage. The pro-life activists had used every pathway to pass new laws and place restrictions upon abortion. In the Constitution it states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States…” (Choices, The Constitution). The Constitution does not clarify and say that all persons born and unborn should not be deprived of life. But the Constitution does not indicate whether the person can be unborn. There are some “gray” areas in the Constitution but it is ultimately up to the judges of the case to determine what is being said and how to apply that knowledge to modern day living.

The pro-choice advocates led with the issue that women could have health risks if abortion was banned due to the violent uprisings of the pro-life advocates. Some pro-life activists burned down abortion clinics, and attacked the doctors performing these operations. These serious actions proved that it is a controversial issue. Some women do need these clinics, and if the women did not have the option they would turn to people that were not specifically trained to do so, and could potentially suffer severe problems or face death.

Curtsey of “The World As I see it” Blog by albertacowpoke

Under the Constitution, I believe that every woman should have the option to have an abortion.  Despite the many protestors against pro-choice, it is ultimately up to the woman. The fourteenth amendment clearly states that women have the right to choose whether she wants to terminate her pregnancy. She has the right to her privacy if she doesn’t want to share her personal information to the public. The government cannot dictate that only have an abortion if the woman has health issues, or her decision on if she wants to proceed with the operation.

Abby

Burst Your Bubble

Source: Don’t Bubble

On the second day of government class, we did an assignment on bias and filter bubbles (Parish Government). I had never thought about this topic and how it could potentially be related to government. It was shocking to me to discover how what we search on our computers and phones enables our later searches to be narrowed down to seemingly only what we want to see. Who would have thought that when the person sitting next to me in class googled the exact same thing that I did at the exact same time, different search results popped up for both of us. Some articles were higher up on the list on my search and some articles that popped up on her search weren’t even present on mind. Internet sites such as Yahoo, Google, and Facebook all control what we are seeing based on the information they have “gathered” on us as individuals.

Source: Audio Editions

Sites such as Yahoo, Google, and Facebook edit what we see on the Internet based on previous searches. Google looks at everything you are doing, including where you are searching from, and uses that information to filter your searches to what it believes you will want to see. Yahoo is a personalized site where people will receive different information when searching for the same thing (TED). Facebook uses recent searches on your computer to customize the type of advertisements that pop up on the sides of your page. If you had recently searched for an SAT tutor then logged onto your Facebook account, it is likely that you will see and add for SAT online tutoring or SAT prep books. The Internet is showing us what it thinks we want to see based on past searches instead of what we need to see. We don’t have a choice of what gets edited in and we don’t see what gets edited out. Factors such as political beliefs play a major role in what the Internet filters for a specific person (TED). If someone is constantly searching for a certain political party, the Internet will eventually detect those searches and start to filter our searches so that we are only seeing the results that mirror our political beliefs. We are cut off from other’s innovative thoughts about certain factors and find ourselves stuck in a box of our own beliefs not willing to accept other points of view. We become trapped and see no way other than our own while there are so many different ideas floating around that could be better or that could add on to and improve our own thoughts. Being deprived of all ideas does not improve an individual and his/her knowledge but rather hinders him/her.

We need to have some control on what gets through and what doesn’t because, sometimes, the limited information given to us only isolates us from the rest of the world and important issues that we should be cognizant of. This disconnection from the rest of the world can easily harm our society instead of help it. Being unaware of certain issues and view points just because an individual searched for an opposing view is trapping him/her in a bubble that he/she cannot burst. I believe that we must work to burst this filter bubble in which we are confined in order to broaden our perspectives on issues that involve opinions and ideas other than our own.

Exploring the Presidency

This year in government class I learned about the basis of our government through our six units: Civics 101, Foundations, Elections, Presidency, Congress, and Judiciary. I came into class barely knowing anything and was constantly confused when my brother and dad were talking about politics in front of me. Now, I have a greater knowledge of the government and I am able to participate in the various conversations my family has about politics. My favorite unit out of the last two trimesters was the presidency because I enjoyed learning about the specific duties and leadership positions that our president takes on.

Prior to this unit, I did not know the specific powers and duties the president has. All I knew is that he was the leader of our country. But, there is a lot more to the job than just being a leader. In class we explored the powers and limitations of the President through reading Article II of the constitution, Richard Neustadt’s Presidential Power and Clinton Rossiter’s The American Presidency. Article II helped me understand what the President can and cannot do during his presidency. Neustadt’s Presidential Powers discusses the informal powers of the President. Then, The American Presidency explores the modern roles of the President. These three pieces broadened my views on the presidency.

Photo Credit: Mediaite

My favorite activity we did during class this year while learning about the presidency was fun with Article II. This made me analyze and take a deeper look into Article II of the Constitution. Instead of just reading through the article and retaining some information I had to closely read what the text is specifically saying. In the activity, we read eight hypothetical solutions and had to find out if they are constitutional or unconstitutional. This helped me explore the constitution in a new way that is more fun than simply reading it. One thing that I found interesting was that the constitution states that the president has to “give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union”(Article II Section 3).  While the president always gives the State of the Union address to the nation he does not have to. The president can just give the Congress a letter. The Constitution only states that he has to give the Congress information of the State of the Union not the whole nation.

The next step in exploring the presidency was looking at the modern roles of the president. Rossiter mentions ten presidential roles that the president has. These roles include: Chief Executive, Commander in Chief, World Leader, Chief of State, Chief of Legislator, Chief Diplomat, Protector of the Peace, Voice of the People, Manager of Prosperity, and Chief of Party. Personally I think the most important role of the president is Chief Executive. By reading Rossiter’s The American Presidency, I learned that as Chief Executive the president must choose federal officials, manage national affairs, develop policies, and enforce federal laws and court rulings.  These responsibilities of the president especially affect the United States and the citizens. Then, on the other hand, I personally think that the least important role of the president is Chief of Party. While the president is the representative of his party, his commitment as president is not to his party but to his country as a whole. Before reading this piece I did not know about all the roles the president takes on when he comes into office. The president definitely keeps himself busy with all the roles he plays.

Photo Credit: Econintersect

The last step in exploring the presidency is looking at his informal powers. Neustadt’s Presidential Power explores the informal powers the president has. In my opinion, the most important informal power Neustadt mentioned was the act to persuade. The president has to persuade people every day that what he is doing is what is best for our country. Persuasion is a big part of being a president and every successful president uses persuasion to prove that everything he does is in the nations best interest.

The presidency was my favorite unit because I explored things I never knew or understood before. Now I know the many different limitations and roles the president has as leader of our country. Overall, government class has taught me a lot about our nation and how it runs, specifically each branch of the government.

Government Made Fun?

This year Government class has been the most interesting course in my high school career, thus far. The class is not about listening to the teacher lecture and taking notes, but rather thinking critically to solve problems that today’s politicians have to solve. We have done many things to learn new information but also have to think of creative ideas.  For example there was an activity called “Constitutional Hypotheticals” in which we were given a hypothetical situation and had to search through the Constitution to find whether the certain situations were in accordance with the Constitution, or not. We did the same type of assignment many other times, focusing on particular sections of the Constitution such as Fun with Article I and Fun with Article II.

Though this activity was fun and education, it was not the section I liked the most, but rather that spot would have to go to the Mock Trial we did in the last section of the course. We were studying the Judiciary for the last subject and our teacher said, “Why would you want to sit there and listen to me teach you about the judiciary. And why would I want to have to prepare a powerpoint and lecture you for the class” (for clarification purpose, this is paraphrasing what he said).  So instead of making us sit and take notes, he had us reenact a real case, one that the Supreme Court has not yet released a decision for. We were to hold a mock trial for the Fisher vs. UT case, three people volunteered to be Petitioners for Fisher and three people volunteered to be the Respondents for UT. The rest were to be the Justices in the Supreme Court, I was included in this group. We were also assigned a

Fisher v. UT Source: Policymic

Supreme Court Justice to act as, I was Samuel Alito. We read our Justices’ bio to figure how our Justice would act and then wrote questions to ask the two sides of the court case. When the Mock Trial began I took the role I was given and ran with it. I was probably the one who asked the most questions, to both sides. I asked so many different questions, I even played Devil’s Advocate. By the end of the trial I was so into it that I could not stop thinking about the case for most of the day. Even though I have no interest into going into politics or law, I do like to question people and argue cases. When I was able to question the Petitioners’ and Respondents’ arguments, I was having a great time getting the information I wanted to know out of the two sides. At the end of the case we all voted like the Supreme Court would, it was a very educational and exciting experience.

This year’ Government course has been the most interesting and thought provoking class. The unique way it is taught is new to me. Because the class is centered around the Internet, it is a very effective way to teach todays’ high schoolers. I believe if the class were to be taught in a more traditional way, I would not have learned as much nor would I have enjoyed the it as much.