There is a failure to realise that long term better economic welfare also means general higher standards of living, as people have enough money to buy everything they need and some of what they want, competition is rife so drives quality up and prices down, and the government are able to take in more taxes from firms who are much healthier financially. This mass employment may lead to more jobs, but the workers themselves or the way they’re used is hugely inefficient. Another reason that labour production in the UK is so low is the lack of competition. There is a strong body of evidence that competition enhances productivity. So, with a lack of one there is a lack of the other.
A married couple could divide those responsibilities and schedule their work hours so that the kids hardly spend time alone. It will be easier to guide them in a positive direction. Poverty is a major factor that negatively affects the households. Both the parents and the kids will have a much more stressful life and that stress will reflect upon their performance at work and at school. An education costs money and a single parent with only one source of income plus all the other payments will definitely cause problems.
His overall attitude towards technology is that the uncontrolled growth of technology destroys the vital sources of our humanity. It creates a culture without a moral foundation. It undermines certain mental processes and social relations that make human life worth living. (Postman, 1993) Postman defines technopoly as a "totalitarian technocracy", which demands the "submission of all forms of cultural life to the sovereignty of technique and technology". However, Negroponte is very optimistic about technology although he knows technology has dark side, and he makes many predictions for the future development of media and technology.
He has represented the Internet as the answer to all of society's worries. In both these articles both writers provide very convincing evidence weather on how the Internet is making us more brilliant or is it turning us brainless. In Nicholas Carr’s Article “Does the Internet Make You Dumber?” he argues the fact that the Internet indeed does make you “dumber,” almost scaring its reader to stay away from web usage. He takes a more scientific approach talking about how the Internet allows us to have a mass amount of information at any time, but with all that info comes distractions. He goes on about how those distractions hurt our mental thinking.
He then moves on to inform the reader on how absorbed he would get in the textbooks and articles. Carr’s challenge to blame his disorder on computer/internet use is an unfair emotional claim with no importance. He has completely demolished his argument that the Internet is to blame for his disconnection, when in fact it sounds more likely to be a medical condition to blame. The feeling of having someone playing with his brain, remapping the neural motherboard, reprogramming the memory can even be viewed as grounds for a panic evaluation. Carr continues stating that the use of computers is also to blame for his reduced ability to read through whole articles on the Internet and adds that even his friends and acquaintances-literary types most of them are dealing with the same
In fact, those “growing” companies are not truly “growing” because that even if they are still making profit, they are losing consumers and market at the same time. Especially those companies who owns irreplaceable resource and products for now, they should have a clear cognition that no product is indispensable forever. In addition, companies always narrow themselves to a limited area so that it is hard to have extraordinary improvement in their products. In order to keep their competitiveness in this rapidly developing age, asking for trouble is necessary so that companies will be pushed to develop products to reach higher level of consumer satisfaction. It is important to focus on customers and customers’ needs instead of just persuading customers to make the exchange.
Consider the cost of missed opportunities - The biggest risk that people fail to consider is the benefit they lose by avoiding high risk/high reward opportunities. In his guide to career planning, Netscape founder Marc Andreesen compares a well managed career to a diversified portfolio. The ideal career contains a wide range of job opportunities (some risky, some safe) that combine to form a relatively safe career with a high potential for growth. Taking high risk opportunities is essential because they offer the greatest reward: The issue is that without taking risk, you can’t exploit any opportunities. You can live a quiet and reasonably happy life, but you are unlikely to create something new, and you are unlikely to make your mark on the world.
Procrastinators spend more time stressing over things that are due than those who get their work done before hand and can enjoy any extra time stress free. Time is valuable because it limits how much we can do; it gives us a sense of progress by letting us keep track of things past and to serve as a schedule for the future. Without time it would feel as if we were going on forever. Some scientist say that time is relevant meaning that in the grand scheme of things in the universe it is unimportant and insignificant. This is somewhat true but it hardly applies to us because we are humans with lives full of value.
My opinion about this is that law is really not that great.. there is many reason why this law is not good, and not a great idea. For examples people that work for the companies that make the phones will start losing money. Other example is that people are not going to buy phones and the companies will start losing money. Most parents now a days buy phones their kids because sometimes the kids really need it. Sometimes when their parent cant call them, they will leave a message.
In a nutshell all three articles are discussing the truth behind the concept that the internet alters the brain and reduces its competence as the commander and chief of the human body. Some articles are in favor of such a concept whilst others beg to differ. The article “Addicted Scientists show how internet dependency alters the human brain” by Jeremy Laurance chooses to go with the internet being a destructive force when it comes to being addicted. The writer uses a bold statement comparing internet addiction to the likes of cocaine and alcohol which automatically attracts the reader and plants a sense of concern within them. Jeremy Laurance used different sources to help aid his argument.