Debt and it Consequences

For this week I decided to read an article about debt and how it's perceived in culture. It talked about how debt is an intrinsic part of who we are as a people, and that it is somehting we must come to terms with. For example, "in Aramaic, the language that Jesus himself spoke, the word for “debt” and the word for “sin” are the same"(2).
I thought this article was very interesting, seeing as how our country is ten trillion dollars in debt, and that we're still in a deficit. I find this despicable, as does everyone I know, yet we still continue to go deeper in debt. People just can't face the fact that we will have to raise taxes, or severely lower the budget to get out of it.
I also thought it was interesting because of how debt is shown as such a horrible thing in most of historical literature. For example, "hell, in Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” is the place where absolutely everything is remembered by those in torment" (3). This really shows how those that are unfamiliar with capitalism can be scared of taking someones money using just your word to say you'll pay it back later. Debt is also an important part of a capitalistic society, but it is important to remember their misgivings, in that you should only go into debt for what you can for sure pay back later.

Analog vs. Digital

For my reading this week, I chose to do an article about an upstart young company that's trying to make a digital video camera that is as good as one with film. This camera is known as the red1 The founder of the company however, is the billionaire founder of Oakley. It manages to have "4,096 lines of horizontal resolution—"4K" in filmmaker lingo—and 2,304 of vertical" (1). This is the same as analog recordings, however digital cameras are much easier to use and operate with. One of the greatest successes of the Red1 was how it can also allow the camera operator to blur certain areas of the screen, and use various other techniques that usually only analog can do. The best part? The Red1 sells for $17,500, while most analog cameras rent for $25,000 a month.
I'm a pretty big novice to the area of high quality film-making. However this seems like a win-win situation. Everyone saves money, and ultimately has an easier job. Its just yet another example of an invention rendering another technology obsolete. One of the most of the revealing things, is that "Peter Jackson, the Lord of the Rings himself, bought four" (2). The Lord of the Rings series is one of my favorite of all time, so Peter Jackson endorsing these cameras pretty much signifies to me how good these are. If these cameras do not become the standard in the next ten years, I will be very surprised, as it seems inevitable from this article. The only negative thing mentioned about them is that they don't produce a tangible result like film. This complaint seems ridiculous, as film itself can't be exposed to light or scratches, making it much more likely to fail than a hard drive.

Behar, Michael. "Analog Meets Its Match in Red Digital Cinema's Ultrahigh-Res Camera." Wired. 18 Sept. 2008. 23 Oct. 2008

The Photo

The Lies of Commericials

Throughout this election, TV commericals have been one of the big ways to convince voters. And of course there have been misleading facts, quotes taken out of context, and sometimes even outright lies. Supposedly, McCain started lying to voters in tv commercials, but "Mr. Obama began his own run of advertisements on radio and television that have matched the dubious nature of Mr. McCain’s more questionable spots" (1). For example one ad claims that McCain is very against stem cell research, when in fact but broke with President Bush to consistently support it starting in 2001 but he "broke with President Bush to consistently support it starting in 2001 "(1).

In my opinion, these commercials are ridiculous. In an ideal world people would be able to learn the truth, and thus would be unaffected by these commercials. However that is not how it is. People are influenced by these commercials, so lying into them is unforgivable. Particularly Obama, who's ads have "taken a decidedly negative tone in the past few weeks" (2). This is coming from someone who is supposedly above politics. Joe Trippi, a longtime Democratic strategist calls it "an eye for an eye"(3). This is outrageous. Because McCain, his opponent is doing it, that makes it ok for Obama to do it? One is supposed to stay above sinking to the enemies level. Fortunately there are some great resources I have found online likePolitifact that help people see who is lying and when. I feel bad for our nation when I see politicians lying, but I feel even worse when I see that it is an effective strategy.

Rutenberg, Jim. "Dubious Claims in Obama’s Ads Against McCain, Despite Vow of Truth." New York Times. 25 Sept. 2008. 9 Oct. 2008 .