Final Final Draft – Advocacy and Argument Proposal

Nick Fischer

Instructor: Michael Moore

WRD 103

The Necessity of Slot Machines at Racetracks

The vast majority of states in the United States all have at least one racetrack. However, there is one very big difference between the successful and non-successful facilities; slot machines. (Timmons 76) The role of having slot machines inside the racetrack is the ingredient for success. Some of the largest racetracks are beginning to fail because of economic times and not having slot machines. Every racetrack is struggling, but having slot machines balances out the deficit which is causing many facilities to go under.  Little states such as Indiana and Pennsylvania are becoming growing destinations for horsemen. On the other hand, the largest racing states such as New York and California are going out of business. Why is this so? Not having slot machines to make income. Thus, passing a law to obtain the legal rights of slot machines is far more difficult than many are aware of. The life of the racing industry is in the hands of nationwide state legislatures in ordinance of passing the one law the industry has ever asked for; slot machines.

Many horsemen and backside workers livelihood are at stake if slot machines are not passed. With slot machines not being legal in a large majority of the state’s nationwide, racetracks have to shut down due to a shortage of funds. States such as New York were threatening to shut down if they do not receive money, which the slot machines could make up for. Bill Finley stated “the struggling New York Racing Association informed its employees late Thursday that it will cease operating June 9 if it does not receive an infusion of cash from the state in the way of a loan.” If the racetrack shut down a very large amount of workers would lose their job.  Letters were already made out, “the notices, sent to some 1,400 employees, are requirements of the Federal and New York State Workers Adjustment and Retraining Notification Acts.” Slot machines take in over 150 million dollars on average a year. This, however, is much more complex than just 150 million dollars more of revenue per year. The 150 million that racetracks are profiting from slot machines is going towards raising the purse structure of the racetrack, which is luring many horsemen to stable their horses at the racetrack. Wherever the horsemen can make the most money they bring their horses, it is common sense. But, this leaves a larger issue for tracks not having slot machines because even though their purse structure is still the same, other tracks are racing for a lot more money.

That causes the horsemen to remove their stables from these racetracks, which makes the average horses per race lessen. With less horses running per race, the general public, besides visitors and tourists, choose to gamble their money at racetracks that attract large fields with big purses. It is an extremely harsh chain effect as the most prominent racetracks can crumble in the blink of an eye if they do not receive legal rights for slot machines. Who though has a problem with slot machines being allowed at racetracks?

This is actually a very complex landscape due to the large amount of stockholders invested in racetracks. The main objectors towards slot machines involve state legislatures who already have casinos or gambling rights in their county. It is very evident that they would not want to vote for slot machines as it would cause their county to lose revenue and increase taxes.  Winning the vote of those specific legislatures is near impossible unless the state supreme court intervenes on the behalf of the general public. Another way to pass legislation is by the state having to approve slot machines because it is in such deficit the funds are necessary. Charles Bagli, a writer for the New York Times, stated “a crucial factor in the deal was Genting’s promise to pay a $380 million licensing fee upfront, giving the state money that it desperately needs.” The desperate need for money ended the 10 year dispute as it quote “after nearly a decade of false starts, squabbling and investigations, Gov. David A. Paterson and legislative leaders have approved a deal to bring casino gambling to New York City.” Thus, that was a blessing in disguise that would have not happened anytime in the near future if New York was financially stable.

Having slot machines at racing facilities would also greatly increase the lives of the horsemen and backside workers. With larger purses to run for, the trainers, jockeys, grooms, and other backstretch workers would be able to get paid more. The trainers and jockeys making a greater income would not be extremely life-changing, however the backstretch workers and grooms are working for minimum wage. Having larger purses would give them a greater income. The trainers would give them better wages, the owners would tip them more, and the racetrack would be required to pay them a higher wage. That would acknowledge that they too, even though they are working at the bottom of the barrel, have human dignity and are being valued as individuals. The benefits for the horsemen would be endless as it would create a chain reaction of benevolence that otherwise would remain shallow.

Also, the citizens of the county would benefit from having slot machines as their taxes would decrease marginally and would raise property values. In the current financial market living near a gambling facility, especially slot machines, increases property values significantly. With unemployment being so high, many citizens would have the opportunity to become employed as a significant number of jobs would be created. Once again, having a casino would benefit the citizens of the county in all areas.

The state legislatures who already encompass casinos in their counties are the black sheep of the matter. Convincing those politicians is near impossible as there are no perks that can possibly come out of this bill. They always vote in favor of the “citizens of their county” as they see the legality of casinos in another county besides their own as a financial burden. Their casino would lose a substantial number of business in their minds as the people who are commuting from a distance to get to their enterprise would no longer have to drive so far. Being allowed to have a vote in this bill is the biggest falsity as there is literally no way to persuade these politicians to vote in favor. Even though their counties property tax may raise a couple bucks, thousands of jobs would be created. Yet, they refuse to vote for the bill in fear of not being reelected. This is where the vicious circle of this bill begins as winning the confidence of these politicians is 1/100 as they refute the option of benefiting any other county but their own. Some would say that it is an act of greed and malice being they already have a casino, but with the way the current legislation is set up it is very difficult to bypass their vote.

Reflecting on the pros and cons, it is clearly evident that the cons are slim to none, while the pros have an endless list. With the economy being in such poor condition it only seems to make sense to benefit the greater good, even though it is in the matter of gambling. Few would argue ethical objections towards the passing of this bill as the ends would be much greater than the means. People would be gambling regardless of where the facility is and regardless of the economic times. Others would continue to just go out to have a fun evening. The difficult role in all of this rubbish is bypassing the state legislation to improve the lives of many, but what does it take to go around the murky waters (legislators)? Thousands of jobs, an increase in the lives of thousands of currently employed workers, a decrease in county taxes, an increase in property values, and the human dignity of all being met seems to be a great tradeoff for keeping the racing industry alive.

 

Works Cited

Bagli, Charles V. “Aqueduct Slot Deal May Give New York a Casino.” The New York Times – Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 12 Aug. 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/nyregion/13aqueduct.html?_r=1&ref=horse_racing&gt;.

Finley, Bill. “Without Loan, NYRA Warns Employees Of a Shutdown.” The New York Times. 21 May 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/sports/22racing.html?ref=horse_racing&gt;.

Timmons, Heather. “CAN SLOT MACHINES RESCUE RACING?.” BusinessWeek 3810 (2002): 76-77. Business Source Complete. EBSCO. Web. 20 Oct. 2010.

Advertisements

Final Draft – Essay and argument Proposal

Nick Fischer

Instructor: Michael Moore

WRD 103

The Necessity of Slot Machines at Racetracks

The vast majority of states in the United States all have at least one racetrack. However, there is one very big difference between the successful and non-successful facilities; slot machines. The role of having slot machines inside the racetrack is the ingredient for success. Some of the largest racetracks are beginning to fail because of economic times and not having slot machines. Every racetrack is struggling, but having slot machines balances out the deficit which is causing many facilities to go under.  Little states such as Indiana and Pennsylvania are becoming growing destinations for horsemen. On the other hand, the largest racing states such as New York and California are going out of business. Why is this so? Not having slot machines to make income. Thus, passing a law to obtain the legal rights of slot machines is far more difficult than many are aware of. The life of the racing industry is in the hands of nationwide state legislatures in ordinance of passing the one law the industry has ever asked for; slot machines.

Many horsemen and backside workers lives are at stake if slot machines are not passed. With slot machines not being legal in a large majority of the state’s nationwide, racetracks have to shut down due to a shortage of funds. States such as New York were threatening to shut down if they do not receive money, which the slot machines could make up for. Bill Finley stated “the struggling New York Racing Association informed its employees late Thursday that it will cease operating June 9 if it does not receive an infusion of cash from the state in the way of a loan.” If the racetrack shut down a very large amount of workers would lose their job.  Letters were already made out, “the notices, sent to some 1,400 employees, are requirements of the Federal and New York State Workers Adjustment and Retraining Notification Acts.” Slot machines take in over 150 million dollars on average a year. This, however, is much more complex than just 150 million dollars more of revenue per year. The 150 million that racetracks are profiting from slot machines is going towards raising the purse structure of the racetrack, which is luring many horsemen to stable their horses at the racetrack. Wherever the horsemen can make the most money they bring their horses, it is common sense. But, this leaves a larger issue for tracks not having slot machines because even though their purse structure is still the same, other tracks are racing for a lot more money. That causes the horsemen to remove their stables from these racetracks, which makes the average horses per race lessen. With less horses running per race, the general public, besides visitors and tourists, choose to gamble their money at racetracks that attract large fields with big purses. It is an extremely harsh chain effect as the most prominent racetracks can crumble in the blink of an eye if they do not receive legal rights for slot machines. Who though has a problem with slot machines being allowed at racetracks?

Very simple, the main objectors towards slot machines involve state legislatures who already have casinos or gambling rights in their county. It is very evident that they would not want to vote for slot machines as it would cause their county to lose revenue and increase taxes.  Winning the vote of those specific legislatures is near impossible unless the state supreme court intervenes on the behalf of the general public. Another way to pass legislation is by the state having to approve slot machines because it is in such deficit the funds are necessary. Charles Bagli, a writer for the New York Times, stated “a crucial factor in the deal was Genting’s promise to pay a $380 million licensing fee upfront, giving the state money that it desperately needs.” The desperate need for money ended the 10 year dispute as it quote “after nearly a decade of false starts, squabbling and investigations, Gov. David A. Paterson and legislative leaders have approved a deal to bring casino gambling to New York City.” Thus, that was a blessing in disguise that would have not happened anytime in the near future if New York was financially stable.

Having slot machines at racing facilities would also greatly increase the lives of the horsemen and backside workers. With larger purses to run for, the trainers, jockeys, grooms, and other backstretch workers would be able to get paid more. The trainers and jockeys making a greater income would not be extremely life-changing, however the backstretch workers and grooms are working for minimum wage. Having larger purses would give them a greater income. The trainers would give them better wages, the owners would tip them more, and the racetrack would be required to pay them a higher wage. That would acknowledge that they too, even though they are working at the bottom of the barrel, have human dignity and are being valued as individuals. The benefits for the horsemen would be endless as it would create a chain reaction of benevolence that otherwise would remain shallow.

Also, the citizens of the county would benefit from having slot machines as their taxes would decrease marginally and would raise property values. In the current financial market living near a gambling facility, especially slot machines, increases property values significantly. With unemployment being so high, many citizens would have the opportunity to become employed as a significant number of jobs would be created. Once again, having a casino would benefit the citizens of the county in all areas.

The state legislatures who already encompass casinos in their counties are the black sheep of the matter. Convincing those politicians is near impossible as there are no perks that can possibly come out of this bill. They always vote in favor of the “citizens of their county” as they see the legality of casinos in another county besides their own as a financial burden. Their casino would lose a substantial number of business in their minds as the people who are commuting from a distance to get to their enterprise would no longer have to drive so far. Being allowed to have a vote in this bill is the biggest falsity as there is literally no way to persuade these politicians to vote in favor. Even though their counties property tax may raise a couple bucks, thousands of jobs would be created. Yet, they refuse to vote for the bill in fear of not being reelected. This is where the vicious circle of this bill begins as winning the confidence of these politicians is 1/100 as they refute the option of benefiting any other county but their own. Some would say that it is an act of greed and malice being they already have a casino, but with the way the current legislation is set up it is very difficult to bypass their vote.

Reflecting on the pros and cons, it is clearly evident that the cons are slim to none, while the pros have an endless list. With the economy being in such poor condition it only seems to make sense to benefit the greater good, even though it is in the matter of gambling. Few would argue ethical objections towards the passing of this bill as the ends would be much greater than the means. People would be gambling regardless of where the facility is and regardless of the economic times. Others would continue to just go out to have a fun evening. The difficult role in all of this rubbish is bypassing the state legislation to improve the lives of many, but what does it take to go around the murky waters (legislators)? Thousands of jobs, an increase in the lives of thousands of currently employed workers, a decrease in county taxes, an increase in property values, and the human dignity of all being met seems to be a great tradeoff for keeping the racing industry alive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Bagli, Charles V. “Aqueduct Slot Deal May Give New York a Casino.” The New York Times – Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 12 Aug. 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/nyregion/13aqueduct.html?_r=1&ref=horse_racing&gt;.

Finley, Bill. “Without Loan, NYRA Warns Employees Of a Shutdown.” The New York Times. 21 May 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/sports/22racing.html?ref=horse_racing&gt;.

Rough Draft of Advocacy and Argument Proposal

Nick Fischer

Instructor: Michael Moore

WRD 103

The Necessity of Slot Machines at Racetracks

The vast majority of states in the United States all have at least one racetrack. However, there is one very big difference between the successful and non-successful facilities; slot machines. The role of having slot machines inside the racetrack is the ingredient for success. Some of the largest racetracks are beginning to fail because of the economic times and not having slot machines. Every racetrack is struggling, but having slot machines balances out the deficit which is causing many facilities to go under.  Little states such as Indiana and Pennsylvania are becoming growing destinations for horsemen. On the other hand, the largest racing states such as New York and California are going out of business. Why is this so? Not having slot machines to make income. Thus, passing a law to obtain the legal rights of slot machines is far more difficult than many are aware of. The life of the racing industry is in the hands of nationwide state legislatures in ordinance of passing the one law the industry has ever asked for, slot machines.

Many horsemen and backside workers lives are at stake if slot machines are not passed for a good majority of states. With slot machines not being legal in a large majority of the state’s nationwide, racetracks have to shut down due to a shortage of funds. States such as New York were threatening to shut down if they do not receive money, which the slot machines could make up for. Bill Finley stated “the struggling New York Racing Association informed its employees late Thursday that it will cease operating June 9 if it does not receive an infusion of cash from the state in the way of a loan.” If the racetrack shut down a very large amount of workers would lose their job, many were already scared.  Letters were already made out, “the notices, sent to some 1,400 employees, are requirements of the Federal and New York State Workers Adjustment and Retraining Notification Acts.” Slot machines take in over 150 million dollars on average a year. This, however, is much more complex than just 150 million dollars more of revenue per year. The 150 million that racetracks are profiting on average from slot machines is going towards raising the purse structure of the racetrack, which is luring many horsemen to stable their horses at the racetrack. Wherever the horsemen can make the most money they bring the horses, it is common sense. But, this leaves a larger issue for tracks not having slot machines because even though their purse structure is still the same, other tracks are racing for a lot more money. That causes the horsemen to remove their stables from these racetracks, which makes the average horses per race lessen. With less horses running per race the general public, besides visitors and tourists, choose to gamble their money at racetracks that attract large fields with big purses. It is an extremely harsh chain effect as the most prominent racetracks can crumble in the blink of an eye if they do not receive legal rights for slot machines. Who though has a problem with slot machines being allowed at racetracks?

Very simple, the main objectors towards slot machines involve state legislatures who already have casinos or gambling rights in their county. It is very evident that they would not want to vote for slot machines as it would cause their county to lose revenue and increase taxes.  Winning the vote of those specific legislatures is near impossible unless the state supreme court intervenes on the behalf of the general public. Another way to pass legislation is by the state having to approve slot machines because it is in such deficit the funds are necessary. Charles Bagli, a writer for the New York Times, stated “a crucial factor in the deal was Genting’s promise to pay a $380 million licensing fee upfront, giving the state money that it desperately needs.” The desperate need for money ended the 10 year dispute as it quote “after nearly a decade of false starts, squabbling and investigations, Gov. David A. Paterson and legislative leaders have approved a deal to bring casino gambling to New York City.” Thus, that was a blessing in disguise that would have not happened anytime in the near future if they were financially stable.

Having slot machines at racing facilities would also greatly increase the lives of the horsemen and backside workers. With larger purses to run for, the trainers, jockeys, grooms, and other backstretch workers would be able to get paid more. The trainers and jockeys making a greater income would not be extremely life-changing, however the backstretch workers and grooms are working for minimum wage, and having larger purses would give them a greater income. The trainers would give them better wages, the owners would tip them more, and the racetrack would be required to pay them a higher wage. That would acknowledge that they too, even though they are working at the bottom of the barrel, have human dignity and are being valued as persons. The benefits for the horsemen would be endless as it would create a chain reaction of benevolence that otherwise would remain shallow.

The citizens of every county would benefit from having slot machines as their county taxes would decrease marginally and would raise property values. In the current financial market living near a gambling facility, especially slot machines, increases property values significantly. With unemployment being so high many citizens of the counties would have the opportunity to become employed as a significant number of jobs would be created. Once again, having a casino would benefit the citizens of the county in all aspects, and consist very little to no downsides.

The state legislatures who already encompass casinos in their counties are the black sheep of the matter. Convincing those politicians is near impossible as there are no perks that can possibly come out of this bill. They always vote in favor of the “citizens of their county” as they see the legality of casinos in another county besides their own as a financial burden. Their casino would lose a substantial number of businesses in their minds as the people who are commuting from a distance to get to their enterprise would no longer have to drive so far, but rather go around the corner.  Being allowed to have a vote in this bill is the biggest falsity as there is literally no way to persuade these politicians to vote in favor for another county. Even though their counties property taxes may raise a couple bucks and create jobs for thousands in another county, they refuse to take the less in fear of not being reelected. This is where the vicious circle of this bill begins as winning the confidence of these politicians is 1/100 as they refute the option of benefiting any other county but their own. Some would say that it is an act of greed and malice being they already have a casino, but with the way the current legislation is set up it is very difficult to bypass their vote.

Reflecting on the pros and cons on both sides of the spectrum, it is clearly evident that the cons are slim to none, while the pros have an endless list. With the economy being in such poor condition it only seems to make sense to benefit the greater good, even though it is in the matter of gambling. Few would argue ethical objections towards the passing of this bill as the ends would be much greater than the means. People would be gambling regardless of where the facility is at being some have an addiction, and others just go out to have a fun evening. The difficult role in all of this rubbish is bypassing the state legislation to improve the lives of many, but what does it take to go around the murky waters (legislators)? Thousands of jobs, an increase in the lives of thousands of currently employed workers, a decrease in county taxes, an increase in property values, and the human dignity of all being met seems to be a great tradeoff for keeping the racing industry alive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Bagli, Charles V. “Aqueduct Slot Deal May Give New York a Casino.” The New York Times – Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 12 Aug. 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/nyregion/13aqueduct.html?_r=1&ref=horse_racing&gt;.

Finley, Bill. “Without Loan, NYRA Warns Employees Of a Shutdown.” The New York Times. 21 May 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/sports/22racing.html?ref=horse_racing&gt;.

Final Final Copy of Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend

Nick Fischer

WRD 103

Michael Moore

Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend

In Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend multiple post undergraduate, mostly Ph.D. students, contextualize their college experiences and propose strong arguments in order to improve the college experience. Even though all of their ideas may differ, each student offers rich advice on what they thought highly improved their college experiences. Some of these experiences include breaking up with your boyfriend, getting involved, removing technology temporarily, being comfortable, and enjoying college. The ways in which these arguments are stated is very different as some students take a more mellow approach, while others do not only suggest, but rather demand they know what is best for the individual.

Writers like Tim Novikoff suggest that the best way to enhance the college experience is to be involved in many extra curriculars and activities. He found that involving himself in as much as possible was a key to success as he discovered interests that he would not have been able to otherwise. He illustrates his article in a way to make the reader feel a bit behind and left out. He applies that tactic when he makes statements such as “college is your chance to see what you’ve been missing,” and when he claims “if you were raised in a protected cocoon, this is the time to experience the world beyond.” He does all of this guilt tripping in order to try and make the reader feel a sense of obligation to getting involved and “catching up on life.”

On the other hand, Evan LaLonde urges that it is necessary to be easy on yourself and not let college be your whole life. The student needs to “relax and enjoy the ride.” The ability to smoothly transition into the college world is crucial.  Even though a student may feel they are completely lost, knowing they are not alone, but rather amidst many others feeling the same way can relieve tension. That knowledge is extremely valuable and rewarding because it will decrease unnecessary stresses that would not be healthy to the mind and body. He takes a more subtle, stress-free approach. He applies this by saying “be comfortable with the fact that you don’t know anything. Nobody does.” That is a very teamwork based approach as it can make the reader feel like they are in this transition with everyone else and not alone.

Christine Smallwood and Rebecca Elliot, the only two ladies writing articles, claim that it is necessary to remove technology and or a significant other. Both clearly state that being involved in a relationship or having an addiction to “Facebook” will hold the student back from pursuing new, innovative opportunities. Christine Smallwood and Rebecca Elliot can be tied into one as both of their arguments illustrate various similarities in how to approach the college experience. Elliot defines a clear example of why breaking up is a smart choice when she states “oh yeah, the joke is kind of hard to explain. See, it started that weekend you were out of town.” Also, “if you were here” you wouldn’t have missed out on fun, but instead “you were gone with your significant other.” That was the icing on the cake as it implies a sense of rudeness and lesser importance. On the other hand, Smallwood strengthens her argument of removing technology by laying out the idea that “you really are not that special, your just a student you don’t need all of this fancy equipment.” That idea is reflected when she states “All that clack, clack, clacking… you’re a student, not a court reporter.” Those are constant reminders he/she is only a student and to not act otherwise.

The intended audience can vary between three categories. Intellectual freshmen can be looking for advice from students who already graduated in order to follow their successful strategies. Also, this can also be targeted towards parents sending their students off to college as they may use these articles as suggestions in conversation with their student on how they believe they should begin their college careers. Last but not least, professionals in the college industry. These professions can form and adjust how the orientation process flows. With advice from previous students they can build their programs and incorporate discussions or activities that can reduce stress and nerves. A solid orientation is necessary as students need to feel comfortable and adjusted. The writers attract the audience’s attention by not being too harsh in their arguments, but being very clear and efficient with their choice of words. Doing so allows the writer to attract a more broad audience as it is easily understood. However, not all of the writers go out of their way to make a friendly connection with the audience. Some are more critical as they provide pure facts, and say it as it is. Thus, the reader gets the best of both worlds.

Interestingly enough, there are quite a few connections that this article has to do with what we have been doing in class. We are all freshmen beginning our sixth week of college, and we still need all of the help we can get. Starting class with Michael asking “what do you guys want to talk about” is one of the most beneficial concepts. This is so because when given the opportunity to release thoughts into a welcoming atmosphere is a huge weight off my shoulder and stress reliever. Also, LaLonde commenting that it is very necessary to relax and enjoy the start of college is noticeable. The way in which class is taught, both vocally and work-wise, makes the transition very smooth. Treating students as dignified adults has also been a very large plus as it makes the students feel welcome and not little kids.

Even with a grand amount of unique articles, a larger question lies behind the wall of text. Adaptation, the ability to accept and recognize that everyone approaches college with different feelings and expectations. Some will get involved with activities, others will put forth a valiant effort to remain stress free, and finally certain people will enter college with a clean slate; no relationships and expectations. So what? College is a fresh experience that allows someone to truly be who they want, but also be accepted. Coming from all different backgrounds and walks of life, approaching college will never be the same for one person as it is another. Knowing who you are when walking into the university and flaunting your true colors will be the first step towards loving your new life; college.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Novikoff, Tim, Willie X. Lin, Aman Singh Gill, Christine Smallwood, Evan LaLonde, and Rebecca Elliot. “Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend.” The New York Times 26 Sept. 2010, National ed., Sunday Opinion sec.: 12. Print.

 

Advocacy and Argument Proposal

Advocacy & Argument Proposal

My proposition is pushing for the legalization of gambling at racetracks in order to raise income. The industry is going downhill quickly in states that have yet to pass gambling bills. The average casino brings in an extra 150 million dollars a year annually which would be more than enough to cover the racetracks losses as well as give the state a few more dollars income. This seems like a win, win situation, however state representatives who already have casinos in their counties are voting against this bill because they do not want to lose income. States like Illinois, Kentucky, New York, and California are all struggling greatly without slot machines. They need that little extra boost of income to keep functioning, but what is confusing is how and why representatives who have casinos in their neighborhood allowed to vote against them being placed on a racetrack? In better terms, how is it legal to vote against a source of state income when it is being used in their counties? The most difficult individuals to convince to pass the bill are legislation. A majority of the common people want these casinos because they will create thousands of jobs. Winning over the general public should not be fairly difficult. Winning over the horsemen would be guaranteed as it would benefit there industry and increase their income. However, convincing state legislature to approve this bill is extremely painful as it seems near impossible to convince certain representatives to vote in your favor when they believe it will affect them.

Final Draft of Ditch your Laptop, Dump your Boyfriend

Nick Fischer

WRD 103

Michael Moore

Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend

In Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend multiple different post undergraduate, mostly Ph.D. students, contextualize their college experiences and purpose strong arguments in order to improve your college experience. Even though all of their ideas may differ, each student offers rich advice on what they thought highly improved their college experiences. Some of these experiences include breaking up with your boyfriend, getting involved, removing technology temporarily, being comfortable and enjoying college. The ways in which these arguments are stated also is very different as some students take a more mellow approach, while others do not only suggest, but rather demand they know what is best for the individual.

Writers like Tim Novikoff suggest that the best way to enhance the college experience is to be involved in many extra curriculars and activities. He found that involving himself in as much as possible was a key to success as he discovered interests that he would not have been able to otherwise.

On the other hand, Evan LaLonde urges that it is necessary to be easy on yourself and not let college be your whole life. The student needs to “relax and enjoy the ride.” The ability to smoothly transition into the college world is crucial.  Even though a student may feel they are completely lost, knowing they are not alone, but rather amidst many others feeling the same way can relieve tension. That knowledge is extremely valuable and rewarding because it will decrease unnecessary stress that would not be healthy to the mind and body.

Christine Smallwood and Rebecca Elliot, the only two ladies writing articles, claim that it is necessary to remove technology and or a significant other. Both of their arguments involve the ability to remove someone or something from life. Both of them clearly state that being involved in a relationship or having an addiction to “Facebook” will hold the individual back from pursuing new, innovative opportunities.

Writer Tim Novikoff illustrates his article in a way to make the reader feel a bit behind and left out. He applies that tactic when he makes statements such as “college is your chance to see what you’ve been missing,” and when he claims “if you were raised in a protected cocoon, this is the time to experience the world beyond.” He does all of this guilt tripping in order to try and make the reader feel a sense of obligation to getting involved and “catching up on life.”

Christine Smallwood and Rebecca Elliot can be tied into one as both of their arguments illustrate various similarities in how to approach the college experience. Both writers are focused on “removing” certain things or people from life temporarily and or permanently. Elliot defines a clear example of why breaking up is a smart choice when she states “oh yeah, the joke is kind of hard to explain. See, it started that weekend you were out of town.” Another statement made “if you were here” you wouldn’t have missed out on fun, but instead “you were gone with your significant other.” Smallwood instates her belief of removing technology by laying out the idea that “you really are not that special, your just a student you don’t need all of this fancy equipment.” That idea is reflected when she states “All that clack, clack, clacking… you’re a student, not a court reporter.”

The other article, published by Evan LaLonde, takes a more subtle stress-free approach. He does this by making statements such as “be comfortable with the fact that you don’t know anything. Nobody does.” That is a very teamwork based approach as it can make the reader feel like they are in this transition with everyone else and not alone.

The intended audience can vary between three categories. Intellectual freshmen can be looking for advice from graduating students to follow successful strategies previously used. However, this can also be targeted towards parents sending their students off to college as they may use these articles as suggestions in conversation with their student on how they believe they should begin their college careers. Last but not least, professionals in the college industry as when forming how the orientation process may begin the key goal is to make students feel comfortable and adjusted to the big change they are about to make. The writers attract the audience’s attention by not being too harsh in their arguments, but being very clear and efficient with their choice of words .With advice from previous students they can build their programs and incorporate discussions or activities that can reduce stress and nerves.

Interestingly enough, there are quite a few connections that this article has to do with what we have been doing in class. We are all freshmen beginning our fourth week of college, and we still need all of the help we can get. Starting class with Michael asking “what do you guys want to talk about” is one of the most beneficial concepts I would never have dreamed of. This is so because when given the opportunity to release thoughts into a welcoming atmosphere it is a huge weight off my shoulder and a stress reliever. Also, with LaLonde commenting that it is very necessary to relax and enjoy the start of college it is noticeable that in class the transition has been very smooth. Treating students as dignified adults has also been a very large plus in class as it makes the students feel welcome and not little kids.

Even with a grand amount of unique articles, a larger question lies behind the wall of text. Adaptation, the ability to accept and recognize that everyone approaches and comes to college with different feelings and expectations. Some will get involved with activities, others will put forth a valiant effort to remain stress free, and finally, certain people will enter college with a clean slate; no relationships and expectations. So what? College is a fresh experience that allows someone to truly be who they want, but also be accepted. Coming from all different backgrounds and walks of life, approaching college will never be the same for one person as it is another. Knowing who you are when walking into the university and flaunting your true colors will be the first step towards loving your new life; college.

Works Cited

Novikoff, Tim, Willie X. Lin, Aman Singh Gill, Christine Smallwood, Evan LaLonde, and Rebecca Elliot. “Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend.” The New York Times 26 Sept. 2010, National ed., Sunday Opinion sec.: 12. Print.

Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend!

Nick Fischer

WRD 103

Michael Moore

Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your

In Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend six different post undergraduate, mostly Ph.D. students, contextualize their college experiences and offer mere suggestions on how to improve your college experience. Even though all of their ideas may differ, each student offers rich advice on what they thought highly improved their college experiences. Some of these experiences include breaking up with your boyfriend, getting involved, offering to do research, removing technology temporarily from your life, being comfortable and enjoying college, and last of all remaining patient and kind to yourself. The ways in which these arguments are stated also is very different as some students take a more mellow approach, while others do not only suggest, but rather demand they know what is best for the individual.

Oddly enough, some of these arguments seem to be a bit shaky. For example, would a college kid who is trying to be successful, but also enjoy college have any interest in offering to do research in their spare time?  Maybe, maybe not, but yet other arguments draw a bit more attention, both positive and negative. These may include breaking up with your boyfriend or girlfriend, and removing technology from one’s life. Both of the tasks above seem to be quite difficult to accomplish as ending a relationship with a significant other who has been through thick and thin can be considered extremely harsh or intelligent. Thus, removing Facebook from the lives of millions of students, which has become a habit, may also not pan out well for certain individuals or it could also get a student to get involved in more activities as they will have more spare time. The most interesting part of the arguments presented is that the door can swing both ways as each one can be viewed in negative and or positive aspects. Is there a definite “correct” way to enhance college life?

Six different students all offered their personal experiences and arguments into short brief articles that all include how they believe it is possible to greaten the college experience. All of their arguments are different from one another; however, each article is similar to at least one other article of the six. Writers like Tim Novikoff and Aman Singh Gill both believe that the best way to enhance the college experience is to involve yourself in many extra curriculars and activities, or to be involved in research with peers. They both found that involving themselves in as much as possible was a key to their success as knowledge was increased, but also possible interests are discovered that would not have been otherwise. On the other hand, Willie X Lin and Evan LaLonde take a stand that the ability to be easy on yourself not let college be your whole life, and also “relax and enjoy the ride.” The ability to smoothly flow into the college world is also a crucial key as even though a student may feel they are completely lost knowing they are not alone, but rather amidst many others feeling the same way can relieve tension. That knowledge is extremely valuable and rewarding because it will decrease unnecessary stress that would not be healthy to the mind and body. Christine Smallwood and Rebecca Elliot, the only two ladies writing articles, share the belief that it is necessary to remove technology and or a significant other. Both of their arguments involve the ability to remove someone or something from life, but this may just be a coincidence that they are the only two ladies writing, and their arguments are very similar in context. Thus, that is just an odd tidbit of food for thought.

All of the writers have a different way of presenting their arguments as some are very critical and demanding, while others are mellow, and finally the one writer who shows a lot of energy and excitement. Acknowledging how the writers present their arguments is a very valuable tactic as it can allow the reader to get a clue of the kind of person they are opening their minds to.

Writer Tim Novikoff presents his article in a way to make the reader feel a bit behind and left out. He applies that tactic when he makes statements such as “college is your chance to see what you’ve been missing,” and when he claims “if you were raised in a protected cocoon, this is the time to experience the world beyond.” He does all of this guilt tripping in order to try and make the reader feel a sense of obligation to getting involved and “catching up on life.” On the opposite spectrum, writers like Willie X Lin implies that “amid the thrill and vertigo of change, be kind to and patient with yourself.” He builds on his opinion as the article goes on by remarking that “college should be a part of, but not the entire scope of your existence for the next few years.” All of this seems to be done in order to get the reader a sense of forgiveness within oneself and not feel over-pressured. Aman Singh Gill makes it very clear that his main goal is all in regards to pure success. He presents his argument by repeatedly reinstating the knowledge that is gained by doing research, but his conclusion is very interesting. He concludes his article by stating that “there are worse ways to prepare for life in an information age.” That reflects his opinion extremely clear as he is very focused on building up and increasing knowledge in order to be successful.

Christine Smallwood and Rebecca Elliot can be tied into one as both of their arguments share various similarities in how to approach the college experience. Both writers are focused on “removing” certain things or people from life temporarily and or permanently. Elliot shares a clear example of why breaking up is a smart choice when she states “oh yeah, the joke is kind of hard to explain. See, it started that weekend you were out of town.” That simple statement obtains within a large amount of guilt that “if you were here” you wouldn’t have missed out on fun, but instead “you were gone with your significant other.” Smallwood instates her belief of removing technology by laying out the idea that “you really are not that special, your just a student you don’t need all of this fancy equipment.” That idea is reflected when she states “All that clack, clack, clacking… you’re a student, not a court reporter.” The next article, published by Evan LaLonde, takes a more subtle stress-free approach. He does this by making statements such as “be comfortable with the fact that you don’t know anything. Nobody does.” That is a very teamwork based approach as it can make the reader feel like they are in this transition with everyone else and not alone.

All six of these readers have a very similar intended audience. This audience consists of incoming intellectual freshmen going off to college, mothers and fathers who are sending off their student to college, and also professionals in the college field considering how they can adjust their orientation programs to make students feel fit in, and ready to begin their next chapter in life. Even though all of these writers have different ways of presenting their arguments all of them have the same intended base. To have a very smooth transition into college life.

The intended audience can differ between the three categories above as intellectual freshmen can be looking for advice from graduating students to follow successful strategies previously used. However, this can also be targeted towards parents sending their students off to college as they may use these articles as suggestions in conversation with their student on how they believe they should begin their college careers. Last but not least, professionals in the college industry as when forming how the orientation process may begin the key goal is to make students feel comfortable and adjusted to the big change they are about to make. With advice from previous students they can build their programs and incorporate discussions or activities that can reduce stress and nerves.

Even though these six students all spent a fair share of time comprising these articles why does it actually matter what someone else thinks is the best way to begin college?  Everyone is unique and may strive in different environments so again why should the reader really even care why Tim Novikoff thinks getting involved is the best way to begin college? Very simple, hearing previous success stories of other people who have already had the college experience is a breath of fresh air. What they found to be successful does not by any means need to be done by everyone else. They are just offering suggestions and possible ideas to be considered for incoming students to try and smoothly transit into the college world. It is very different transitioning from high school into college and all of the advice that can be recommended should be taken with a grain of salt and considered.

Interestingly enough, there are quite a few connections that this article has to do with what we have been doing in class. We are all freshmen beginning our fourth week of college, and we still need all of the help we can get. Starting class with Michael asking “what do you guys want to talk about” is one of the most beneficial concepts I would never have dreamed of. This is so because when given the opportunity to release thoughts into a welcoming atmosphere it is a huge weight off my shoulder and a stress reliever. Also, with LaLonde and Willie X Lin commenting that it is very necessary to relax and enjoy the start of college it is noticeable that in class the transition has been very smooth. Treating students as dignified adults has also been a very large plus in class as it makes the students feel welcome and not little kids. Overall, this article is remarkable similar to how our class is lead and discussed.

A larger conversation that can be posed from these articles could also consist of a possible survey. If X amount of students tested out the recommendations given by these post-graduate students it would be interesting to find out if any of their ideas were extremely successful and beneficial. Undoubtedly, every opinion does not have be used, but rather can be taken with a grain of salt, and most of all it is very relieving to be able to view opinions constructed from previous students.

Works Cited

Novikoff, Tim, Willie X. Lin, Aman Singh Gill, Christine Smallwood, Evan LaLonde, and Rebecca Elliot. “Ditch Your Laptop, Dump Your Boyfriend.” The New York Times 26 Sept. 2010, National ed., Sunday Opinion sec.: 12. Print.