PAGE 4
十
THURSDAY JANUARY 22, 2015
TEXT
FREE FOR ALL
Text your FFA submissions to (785)289-8351 or at kansan.com
Where does one get these "crunchy chicken cheddar wraps"? Editor's Note: At Brellas in The Underground or The Market
When you get hurt running to your group's seats in AFH you know you're doing it right.
Thought I was growing up, then
I drank eight Hi-C juice
boxes at lunch.
In regards to the student taking a film studies class this semester. As a film major, I can truthfully say, no, you don't need to take it seriously.
Is it just me or did 1/4 of KU's population decide to dye their hair blue over winter break?
That moment when the girl on academic probation says I have class tomorrow at the bar. #ihaven'trolled
To all the boys who walk two steps out the doors of Ambler and then spit on the sidewalk: Eeeewwwwwww. Stop it!!
New shoes + new semester = me feeling like I'm in grade school again.
To whoever decided it was a good idea to have desks with wheels under it. I disapprove.
Sincerely, clumsy student.
Had a dream I talked to Obama, and then he proceeded to give his speech in jeans and a baseball cap; I can't be the only one right?
Running around campus is a) going to get me in shape and b) make me absolutely exhausted.
These bus reroutes are really going to screw with my day
Just saw a video of an armadillo playing w/ a small ball. Gotta hand over my man card.
I've been rewatching Breaking Bad and still love it as much as I did before!
Is it really true that professors can drop you from their class if you miss one day in the first two weeks? #CuriousStudent
Chicken noodle soup, chicken noodle soup, chicken noodle soup with a soda on the side.
Walking on campus at night is soo creepy. /
Does anyone else feel awkward blowing your nose in class?
Sorry Michelle, I'm gonna have to steal Barack from ya ...
PresidentialBabe :)
Recent ads push for acceptance, equality
MATTHEW CLOUGH
@mcloughsofly
They're everywhere — in the middle of your favorite TV shows, scattered among songs on the radio, and on nearly every other page in magazines. When living in a culture with an abundance of advertisements, it becomes easy to tune them out, all but ignoring their presence. Some recent ad campaigns, however, are much harder to ignore — and they are changing the advertising industry in a much-needed way.
in particular, our differences are largely cast aside in favor of a singular identity. This practice needs to change as it results in the marginalization of those in minority groups, instilling sentiments of insignificance and neglect.
With such a plethora of unique human experiences in America, it seems obvious we should celebrate our differences and connect with members of all races, sexual orientations and identities. Yet when it comes to the media, and advertisements
Back in July 2014, Target released an advertisement for its wedding registry that created a great amount of conversation and debate. The ad featured two men holding hands and pressing their foreheads together, with the tagline, "Be yourself, together." Earlier this month, upscale jewelry company Tiffany & Co. released its first ad featuring a gay couple for their "Will You?" campaign. Such advertisements depict socially marginalized groups in a normalized, positive light, and are exactly the type of media needed in this age.
Although both ads have
received their fair share of condemnation from conservative and tradition-based organizations, they should be commended for their pursuit of acceptance of the homosexual community. No matter which side of the debate you associate with, it is important to recognize that homosexuals comprise a large amount of the population. Not representing them proportionally in media outlets becomes problematic in a forward-thinking society.
For this reason, many other companies have a great deal to learn from Target and Tiffany & Co. when branding their products. The American public needs to be exposed to more than predominantly white, heterosexual individuals in media if they are to be conscious of the diversity
+ +
within our culture. By underrepresenting marginalized groups in advertisements, we further isolate differences that should be acknowledged and appreciated.
Nikon is one company that has recently made enormous strides toward equal and responsible representation. The company's new "I Am Generation Image" campaign seeks to capture the various lifestyles of average Americans across a variety of circumstances. One part of the campaign focuses on Kordale and Kaleb Lewis, two African-American fathers raising a family of three.
Since the fathers posted an Instagram photo of themselves styling their daughters' hair for school last January, they have gained attention in the public spotlight. A new
two-minute video for Nikon's ad campaign portrays the family throughout moments in a typical day in their lives. The ad is powerful in its depiction of one outlet of a normal American lifestyle, and it should inspire other companies to create diverse campaigns.
As our society moves forward, it is essential that our media and advertisements take on a new form that is diverse and celebratory of our differences. Bringing to light the variances in individual lifestyles across the nation will foster empathy and equality over time, even if change only begins in something as seemingly trivial as advertisements.
Matthew Clough is a sophomore from Wichita studying English and journalism
National welfare system oppresses the poor
JOHN OLSON
@JohnOlsonUDK
When one hears the word "welfare," two images may come to mind: that of a lazy layabout, or of a kind government employee helping someone in desperate need. The problem is, however, that neither of these images are accurate.
There are many people in desperate need of fiscal assistance, so that image is appropriate. But according to the Los Angeles Times, the vast majority of welfare recipients are not "moochers," and in my view, the government is not helping them. Despite the good-sounding intentions of many politicians, the current welfare system in the United States is a punishing trap.
Several aspects of current welfare programs may create
cycles of poverty, through no fault of the poor. When an individual is on welfare, trying to better themselves by obtaining additional income, it sometimes leads to what feels like a punishment imposed by the American government. For example, according to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Kansans with no income are eligible for Medicaid. However, if an individual obtains work and earns more than $3,204 a year, they are pushed out of Medicaid, despite earning only one-fifth of the poverty line. Those with a severe health condition may choose not to work and stay on Medicaid. With structures such as low income requirements for who can receive Medicaid, the government discourages individuals from reaching
their full potentials.
Second, current delivery systems of welfare can wield obscene amounts of coercion. As evidenced by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, individuals oftentimes have to prove they are looking for work, report to supervisors if they have found a job (thus risk losing needed benefits), and are pushed into spending specific segments of their income on food and housing. Rather than letting each individual do as they see fit with the money given to them, state and federal governments assume that a bureaucrat knows how to live a poor person's life better than a poor person does.
Not only does the U.S. welfare system oppress the poor in its attempts to help them, but the aid it provides is done
so inefficiently. Consider this: using figures from the Office of Management and Budget, if the current wealth transfer system in America were eliminated and all its spending converted into direct payments, everyone in poverty could receive around $40,000 a year. Currently, the average amount a welfare beneficiary receives instead is $9,000 a year, according to the Congressional Budget Office. I am not necessarily advocating $40,000 as the set amount, but it does illustrate a point: $40,000 is not received by the poor, so the government must be spending elsewhere. After taxation, a great sum of money dedicated to welfare is spent by — and on — tens of thousands of inefficient bureaucrats before the money reaches the hands of the needy.
To me, the solution is simple: Poor people need money, and if we, as a society, agree with that, then we should give it to them — no strings attached. There is no need for a massive, coercive bureaucracy, or a system of regulations that discourages people from bettering themselves. We should instead formularize a direct payment to those in need.
In the latter half of the 20th century, a movement formed for replacing traditional welfare with a negative income tax. Perhaps now is the time to read up on and apply this idea, and possibly explore others, rather than continue oppressing those who can least afford it.
John Olson is a sophomore from Wichita studying economics
What concerns would you have if welfare was turned into direct cash payments rather than specifically segmented, like food stamps?
"I think it would make a big difference just because, obviously, as you probably know, people would buy alcohol, or cigarettes, or something like that. They could buy anything else but food, and try to get food some other way. So yeah, I think that would make a pretty big difference."
"I think handing out just cash to people wouldn't be the best idea, because there's already a lot of people out there who already take advantages of these type of programs. I know because I used to work in a grocery store and I would see people come in and use their food stamps and, they just, they wouldn't use it on the right types of things. So I think handing out just straight-up cash to people wouldn't be the best interest."
— Taryn Buechler freshman from Omaha, Neb.
— Becca Huerter junior from Chanute
"I feel like there is both positives and negatives with just giving cash payments. For instance, it would be easier to get the things that are essential to living, and the things that would help these people continue their lives, but it could also make it easier for them to get things that could be detrimental and negative toward their lives. So, I would see it more as a experimental thing to try out before, like, fully doing it."
Ryan Hoffman freshman from Los Angeles
"I don't think that it would be problematic or anything of that nature. It's basically the same thing whether you give it to them in segments or whether you give cash to them. Like, people find ways to maneuver around the system, so, people, some people could sell their food stamps, or some people could use it for what it's been given to them for. There's really no correct way to go about it, whether you give money, or segment it out."
Elden Mitchell senior from Kansas City, Kan.
HOW TO SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Send letters to opinion@kansan.com. Write LETTER TO THE EDITOR in the email subject line. Length: 300 words
The submission should include the author's name, grade and hometown. Find our full letter to the editor policy online at hansan.com/letters.
Brian Hillix, editor-in-chief bhillix@kansan.com
Paige Lytle, managing editor
olytle@kansan.com
Stephanie Bickel, digital editor sbicket@kansan.com
CONTACT US
Cecilia Cho, opinion editor
ccho@kansan.com
Cole Anneberg, art director
canneberg@kansan.com
Sharlene Xu, advertising director
sxu@kansan.com
Kriste Hays, digital media manager
khays@kansan.com
Jen Schitt, sales and marketing adviser jschitt@kansan.com
Jordan Mentzer, print sales manager jmentzer@kansan.com
THE KANSAN EDITORIAL BOARD
Members of the Kansan
Editorial Board are Brian
Hillix, Paige Lyle, Cecilia
Cho, Stephane Bickel and
Sharesu Xie.