The College Experience Essay Example for Free

The College Experience Essay The years spent in college are a big transitional stage in every ones life. The years in college are spent in preparation for future endeavors in the real world. Choosing a college is imperative in that it can potentially effect your level of preparation for a professional career or in some cases graduate study. Your choice will impact the quality of education you will be receiving as well as shape your independence. When it came time for me to begin looking at schools I wasnt sure where I wanted to go. I felt that their were so many choices and I found it difficult narrowing my choices down. Factors such as the schools size, the schools locale, and the cost were all part of my decision process. Up until this point schools such as Xavier University of Louisiana, Hampton University, North Carolina State University, Howard University, and North Carolina Central University were all realistic choices for school. North Carolina Central became my top choice by virtue of its close proximity to my hometown Raleigh, the cost of attendance, and the predominately black enrollment . The location was important because I knew that I would be surrounded with people who shared similar experiences and back grounds while at the same time I would be exposed to students with different experiences and back grounds from that of my own. I felt that North Carolina Centrals location would make it easier adjusting to college simply because being a citizen of Raleigh I am naturally familiar with the area. The size of the institution was also a big factor in my choosing North Carolina Central. I felt that in large schools there was little student teacher interaction, in or out of the classroom but in a smaller school like NCCU I would have an easier time developing a relationship with my professor. In retrospect I feel that this hold true because of teacher to student ratio encourages a more intimate learning environment. When I arrived at Central in January I was surprised by the familiar faces I saw. In my first couple weeks I got reacquainted with many former friends from high school and various summer programs I had participated in. Having acquaintances prior to my attending school made my transition considerably smoother. Having a friend that was familiar with my surroundings was beneficial to me. Living with roommates was an adjustment because I am the only child I never had to really share my space with anyone. The independence and responsibility that comes with living in dorm benefited me and helped me adapt to the new environment and new people. By virtue of my experiences both academically and socially I truly feel that I am in an institution that embraces people like myself and I am anxious to create a legacy of my own to add to the rich tradition here at North Carolina Central University. Overall I am completely satisfied with choosing North Carolina Central University as my school because I researched schools and made the decision best for me. I knew that my choosing Central was an important step in my life and my actions that followed would have to reflect my goal of graduating.

The Externalizing Machine Essay Example for Free

The Externalizing Machine Essay In todays mostly capitalistic world people who are consumers think that they have power to decide what products to purchase; people who are stockholders are only interested in the profit; people who run corporations make that profit regardless of the price others have to pay; and people who live in developing countries work for 3c per hour making brand name cloths which then are sold for $20, $60, $100, $200, $500, making at the same time the corporations profit skyrocketing. It is widely known that there are sweatshops in developing countries, where people are treated like slaves but practically they are not slaves because they always can walk off the job. It is known that in such countries there is exploitation of child labor, but practically what can a citizen of other country do to help if they have enough their own problems. It is also known that work conditions in such factories are horrible, but what one can do if those companies offer lower prices. Is it fair towards society as a whole that some people are exploited so others can make skyrocketing profits? Is it fair that your TV was partially made by a 6-year-old child? Is it fair that the product you bought harms or even kills you or one of your family member? Is it fair if this does not happen to you but to some other people in some other countries? Is it fair that infants are given harmful baby-formula prohibited in developed countries? There are many questions that can be asked whether it is fair or not, but what happens if we interchanged the word fair with legal and instead we ask whether all those actions are legal or not, and who makes them legal or not. The author Joel Bakan of The Corporation tries to find an answer to those questions and tries to show what impact corporations actions may have on human beings and environment. Joel Bakan in his book brings up issues of sweatshops, environment pollution, externalities, government regulations, advertisement, and many others. He uses concepts of corporation as a psychopath and doom machine. By this Bakan means that corporations, in its pursuit of maximizing the profit at any cost, they destroy people, environment, and themselves at the same time. Even thought there are many important issues throughout the book my focus will be on chapter three Externalities. As the title of the chapter says the most important issue in it is externalities, the effect that corporations have on third parties. The author explains the concept of externalities and gives some examples; this chapter also focuses on the process of how corporations make decisions regarding the products safety, how they make decisions whether to improve products safety or not, or how they make decisions regarding the possible corporate options in the light of profit. The author used some concept and theories in this chapter so lets start with identifying and explaining them. First the concept of externalities. An externality is the effect of a transaction on a third party who has not consented to or played any role in carrying out of that transaction. ; the effect can be either good (creation of new jobs, lowering unemployment) or bad (pollution, diseases, deaths, etc). They literally mean other peoples problems. Whether or not exernalitie have good or bad impact they are only the result of pursuit to make higher profits, and are only the result of self-interest; furtheremore it does not matter for corporation whether the results of corporations decisions are good or bad externalities, as long as the profit raises. (pg60,61) Bakan uses the concept of doom machine (example of paper mill) to explain why corporations are successful in destroying world they operate in. The concept means that corporations dynamic does not take into account the concerns of flesh-and-blood human and that in our search for wealth and for prosperity, we create a thing thats going to destroy us (Monk pg71) The author also uses the concept of corporation as a pschopath which means that corporations are ego-centric, irresponsible or refuse to accept responsibility, have asocial tendencies, and they will do anything to satifsy their goal which is to maximize profit at all costs regardless what harm it may cause. The author assums that many, if not all, corporations make harmfull decisions that will eventually destroy the world, and at the same time will destroy the corporatins themselves. I think that Joel Bakans assmumptions are that all corporations do not care about the environment they operate in, that they would pollute everything to maximize profit, that the only guideline corporations use in making a decision is a cost-benefit analysis, and that eventhough corporations are made of individuals who would not want to harm other people together they would kill other people if it maximizes the profit. The author takes for granted that all corporations do not care, and that if they pretend they care, it is because they want to maximize the profit, and that if they comply with the law it is beause it would cost more not to obey the law, the author takes for granted that all decisions made by corporations are based solely on cost-benefit analysis not on ethical or moral codes or guidelines. The author assumes that corporations eventhought they are made up of individuals with ethical codes they do not use them in making decisions regarding profit. Therefore the author is asking why they make such decisions, why they only consider profits that can be made in near future but do not consider their future existance. The author asks how corporations make such decisions that in long run will destroy human beings, environment and corporations themselves. Joel Bakan is asking why people as a corporation harm other people and themselves. As an example, the author gives Monks story. (Monk is one of Americas most important and influential businessmen, he worries about what is going on in modern corporations. ) Monk was staying in a motel in a small town. He was shocked when he discovered that paper mill is polluting the river in that town. Monks says that he knew everyone there, the mayor, the mill employees and owners, and he also knew that no one wanted the river to be polluted and yet it was being polluted every night. (pg71) Therefore, why if no one wanted it to be polluted they were still polluting it? The question is why corporations make such decisions that harm other human beings. If there is no person in a given corporation who would want to harm others, why as a corporation they not only harm people but even kill them. What is the difference between murdering someone by using a firearm or a knife and murdering someone by letting him drive unsafe vehicle or drink polluted water or eat poisoned food. Who assigns the difference and who lets those murders happen everyday around the world. The question is why corporations are not prevented from doing harm, and why they decide to harm others in the first place. To back up the issues raised in The corporation Joel Bakan uses a lot of data, information, and facts regarding corporations and the legal breaches that they did. Two most important informations include data used by GM in calculation of cost-benefit analysis of improving products safety; and General Electrics major legal breaches including many contaminations of the environment and the amount that they had to pay between 1990 and 2001 for those legal breaches. GM in deciding whether to improve cars safety calculated how much it would cost them. Therefore they calculated how many accidents would happen on US highways, how many fatalities it would cause, and how much it would cost the company in lawsuits and other expenditures, mainly meaning the cost of a fatality. The calculation was as follows: 500fatalities x 200,000 per fatality / 41,000,000 = $2. 4 per automobile. To make the car safer, it would cost company $8. 59 per car. Therefore, it was cheaper not to improve vehicles because GM would save $6. 19 per car in production. Armstrong and her children, that had second- and third degree burns resulting from a rear-end accident in 1993 due to the fire caused by unsafe positioning of the gas tank in GM Malibu, were awarded $1. 2 billion. (pg63) Two significant orders for GE to pay was i 2 billion for asbestos cleanup and related pollution, and $95 million in damages for contamination from dumping of industrial chemicals. (pg75-78) The total GE had to pay for contamination of the environment alone, between 1990 and 2001 was approximatelly $3 000 106 million (over $3 billion); total for violations of safety rules at nuclear fuel plant, for design flow in nuclear plants, for illegal sal of fighter jets, and for overcharging on defense contracts was $300 million. GE was also ordered 14 times to clean up contamination of drinking water (ground water, river, water supply) and soil. The assumptin is that General Electric makes huge amounts of profit, because GE is able to exist on the market even though it was ordered to pay over $3 billion puls the cost of cleaning up contamination. The broader assumption, based on GE example, is that corporations make huge amounts of profit at the cost of environment and human lives and they continue to do so even though they are ordered to pay millions or billions of dollars in fines. Given the information regarding corporations actions and the impact they have on developing countries, on societies, on environment we all live in, and on individuals, who should care the most and why should we care at all. Joel Bakan is trying to make the reader think about the reality we live in, about what is really going on in the world, about bigger picture than only ones family, job, or friends. I think that in Joel Bakans opinion everyone should care about what he says, everyone should care aout future generations, and future of this planet, therefore everyone should take an action in order to make this world a better place. If we take his line of reasoning and accept his arguments it would mean that we should stand against the big corporations and their exploitation of people and environment. We should not agree with their actions and should do something to stop those big corporations destroying the world. We as people and customers have lots of power, however we are lazy to use our collective power to stop those corporations in their harming actions, instead we prefer to pay less for products eventhough we know that those products were made by child labouer. If we agree with Bakans arguments it means that we say no to corporations and to their exloitation of people and environment not to business in itslef, we do not stand against the business but against those corporations that are overtaking the world.

Comparing Parliamentary Systems with Presidential

Comparing Parliamentary Systems with Presidential The Parliamentary system vs. Presidential system is a frequently debated topic, and often the debate is based on which system brings about the most success. Unarguably, the success rate of a system is an adequate way of measuring its right to be implemented. However, success is broken down into many components, and one of the most vital elements of success is stability. The question here is: what makes a stable system? Stability consists of political security, how well public demand is met, the difficulty level of being overthrown, the economic state of the country, and as a source simply put it a stable political system is one that survives through crises without internal destruction  [1]  . These are just a few of the criteria points from a vast array of fundamentals which construct the definition of stable. In the case of the UK and the US governmental systems, comparing both democracies, it becomes obvious that they share the same values and virtues to a certain extent. Perhaps one of the most stand-out similarities shared amongst the two systems is the responsibility they have for the people. Similarly the citizens ruled under these two different democracies are provided with the same, laws, rules and rights. However, there are several crucial differences between these two liberal democracies which make them so distinct. The election process of the two diverse governmental systems is one of the key differences which make them incomparable to each other. While within a presidential system the voters vote directly for the president, within the parliamentary system such as in Britain, the prime minister is elected indirectly; constituents essentially vote for a representative, a member of parliament to represent them in parliament; the leader of the majority party which wins becomes the prime minister. This is seen to be undemocratic in comparison to the election process of presidential systems which is seen to be more direct as it is directly voicing the voters opinions on who they want to lead the country. However, there are many advantages to a parliamentary system in comparison to the presidential system. For example, with the parliamentary system of government, it is fairly easy and more rapid to pass legislation through. However, there are other factors which can play a role in the power of these systems, for example if a party has a majority in parliament it will become easier to pass legislation through. In the case of the UK, this was the situation with Labour in 1997 under Tony Blair, Tony Blairs New Labour had gained a staggering 179-seat overall majority in the Commons as the Conservatives were tossed aside by the voters.  [2]  The Sweet and Maxwell research shows that In total Tony Blairs administration was the most prolific, introducing a total of 26,849 new laws over his entire premiership. This argues that, majority leadership within parliament is a factor which leads to legislation passed through much faster. So, A government with a secure majority can ensure its leg islation passesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ã‚  [3]  this supports the claim that there are other factors which play a role into guaranteeing that legislation passes through, such as the majority in parliament or other elements which include an emergency or unseen events such as an economic crisis. An example of this is the Northern Ireland Act 1972, which took only seven hours and eleven minutes to reverse the effects of a court decision that undermined the powers of the armed forces in Northern Ireland.  [4]  Additionally, within a parliamentary system, the public is being represented while passing laws; as the House of Commons is a body which consists of representatives elected by constituents. If it is the case that, the House of Commons defy their constituents and try to pass a law through which is not in the interest of their constituents, they will get hassled by the media and pressure groups that have an immense influence on parliament. This is another factor and a very important on e as it verifies that the parliamentary system is stable as it is a struggle to pass legislation through if it is not in the interest of their constituents. RSPA is an example of a pressure group which influenced legislation; The Animal Welfare Act 2006 came about as a result of campaigning by animal welfare groups such as the RSPCA  [5]  . Conversely, within a presidential system which has been adopted by countries such as USA, the elaborate system of checks and balances within the presidential system makes it very challenging to pass legislation through as it often leads to gridlock. This is due to different parties controlling different branches within the presidential system, as it could be the case that legislation is controlled by one party and the presidency is controlled by the other. The paper, Divided government and the Legislative productivity of Congress states that, Divided government is thought to lead to gridlock, paralysis, and legislative slumps.  [6]  This supports the claim that the presidential system is unstable as it leads to negative outcomes such as gridlock and paralysis where nothing gets solved making it an unstable system due to the fact that it is a struggle to pass legislation even if it is in the benefit of the people. On the other hand, the checks and balances within a presidential system also have its gains as, Each branch of the government can check, or control, some parts of what the other branches do. This creates a balance of power in which no one person or group can become too powerful.  [7]  However in the case of a parliamentary system, the easiness of passing legislation through can also mean that a government is unstable as, legislation made in haste can result in problems. For example, terrorists were able to avoid having their photographs and DNA taken because of faulty (hasty) drafting of legislation  [8]   Nevertheless, even though a presidential system proves to be stable as it prevents a single branch becoming excessively powerful, this can also have negative impacts as it is considered as a flaw, separation of power helps restrain the centralization and abuse of power, but with the loss of efficiency and the fragmentation of responsibility.  [9]  Going back to the initial question, this expresses that the presidential system is unreliable and unstable as there would be confusion to who would be held liable if anything does occur. Furthermore, within a parliamentary system it is very easy to get rid of an unsuitable prime minister as this can be easily done through a vote of no confidence. This argues that a parliamentary democracy is fairer and stable for the reason that it is very easy to get rid of a prime minister who is corrupt and does not rule a country as he or she promised to do. This is the case with the Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra as according to the Telegraph Newspaper, The no-confidence vote, due on Wednesday, has been called by the opposition Democrat Party. They accuse Ms Yingluck and her ruling Pheu Thai party of ongoing corruption and are questioning her links to her brother, exiled former Thai premier Thaksin Shinawatra.  [10]  So within the parliamentary system you can stop the ruling of an unsuitable prime minister, whereas with the presidential system it is very difficult to get rid of the president as he or she has a fixed term of office and the only way to get rid of him/ her is through impeachment however In almost all countries presidential impeachment is difficult  [11]  its a very tough process and it is much more difficult to get rid of an unsuitable president than it is to get rid of an unsuitable prime minister. Perhaps it is safe to say that semi-presidentialism is a more stable governmental system rather than the two discussed throughout this essay as it is a combination of both systems. Also, Semià ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ presidentialism is an increasingly popular form of constitutional government.  [12]  If more and more countries are adjusting themselves to this particular system, it is fair to say that this might be a more stable system than the presidential or parliamentary systems. Though, in the book, Parliamentary versus Presidential Government the author quotes, Parliamentarism is the most widely adopted system of government  [13]  This supports the claim that, Parliamentarism must be very popular if it is the most widely adopted system of government, if it is that widespread it must have good features to it which make it so popular. So, when reaching a conclusion regarding which system is more stable, taking into account all the advantages and disadvantages, I believe it is justifiable to say that the parliamentary system can be considered as more stable than the presidential system. However, it all depends on what the country considers as a stable government. As some may argue that both of these systems have become unstable as sovereignty is lost. In the case with Britain and its parliamentary system, the European system overlaps the parliamentary system and can enforce its own laws onto Britain. However, in theory Britain could always withdraw from th e EU. Nonetheless, the UN and the power it has, undermines both systems. Therefore, it really depends on a country itself, and what it considers as a stable system.

Brians Search For The Meaning Of Life In W.o. Mitchells Who Has Seen :: essays research papers

Brian's Search for the Meaning of Life in W.O. Mitchell's Who Has Seen the Wind By Rodrigo Goller Through the brilliantly written book Who Has Seen the Wind, Mitchell is able to very effectively describe the tale of one boy and his growth on the Saskatchewan prairie. Brian's childhood revolves around aspects of everyday life, and in it he attempts to explain that which has evaded and mystified even the great minds of our times: the meaning of life. He is able to somewhat understand the meaning of life though his experiences with birth, particularly that of a pigeon, and a rabbit. His up-close-in-your-face learning of death, at an early age, when his dog, and subsequently his father dies. Lastly Brian's realization that it's all just sensations, and feelings complete his search for the meaning of life. Early in his life, Brian has many experiences with birth. The first of these comes to him at an early age when he sees newborn pigeons. When his father explains how these pigeons were made, Brian understands that birth is the beginning of life. Four years later, a similar conversation comes up when Brian asks his father how rabbits are born. With this new found knowledge, Brian also sees another newborn. But this time it was a two-headed calf, who dies at birth. Because of this, Brian comes to the realization that "God isn't very considerate"(166), for sometimes he lets things like the two headed cow come into this world, only to suffer and then die. The Second instance in which Brian is confronted with the meaning of life, comes to him when he sees death, and asks himself why. When Brian's pigeon died, he asked his father why it had happened. "Why?" said Brian. "It happens to things," his father said. "Why does it happen to things?" He turned up his face to his father, cheeks stained with drying tears. "That's the way they end up." Brian looked down at the baby pigeon in his hand. "It was an egg. Now it's stopped." "Yes Spalpeen, it's stopped." (56) Although this was hard for Brian to face, he was once again confronted with death. This second time, his dog Jappy dies crushed by a carriage of horses as "the front wheels of the dray missed Jappy. The hind ones did not. A shrill and agonized cry arose." (175) As Brian stood by, not able to help his dog, Brian "knew that this lifeless thing [ once had lived, but now ] his dog was dead,"(176) and that there was nothing he could ever do to bring Jappy back.

Victorian Schoolmistress :: Victorian Era

Victorian Schoolmistress Education It was preferred that the schoolmistresses were certified, particularly to work in the better schools during the latter half of the 19 th century. To become certified they were tested in grammar, geography, history, math, and writing from dictation. Additionally, their handwriting was analyzed for readability (Jackson). Appearance of Schoolhouse The focus on the appearance of the schoolhouse was mainly limited to the private schoolhouses, which wanted to attract the best students. Schoolmistresses decorated the school so that they looked relatively well-off, and conducted the school to give the appearance of a family/domestic setting. Unlike the public schoolhouses, the private schoolhouses aimed to attract a small number of the best students, whereas the public schools wished to attract enough students so as to collect an adequate amount of money for their salaries and other extraneous fees (Pederson 142). Salaries Generally, the pay was rather poor, barely ever being more than  £300 per annum. From this, lodging fees, repairs, taxes, and payment to assistants was removed, causing the profit for personal expenses to be well below  £100. Their salaries were garnered from the payments of their students. At the best boarding schools,  £70 for boarders and  £20 for day students was average. Conversely, in the poorer boarding schools,  £3 to  £10 was the average (Pederson 141). Public vs. Private School Lessons The public schools looked towards the public sphere for inspiration and trained students to be productive in the world and focused on their academics. On the other hand, the private schools tended to celebrate a life of leisure in the private setting. However, in public and private schools, music, French, arithmetic, writing and reading were the core subjects. Greater emphasis was put on domestic subjects and lessons were only taught to the point of being satisfactory in a social setting (Pederson 138, 144). The Typical Day in a Girls’ Boarding School 7:00 – Wake Up 8:00 – Breakfast is Ready, Usually Including Meat 9:00 or 9:30 – Day’s Studies Begin Noon – Girls Take a Walk After Having a Slice of Bread and Butter Dinner Follows the Walk 3:00 – Studies Continue Until 5:00 or 5:30

Early government Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In early American government there were two emerging political views that were blatantly obvious in the new states; federalists and anti-federalists. In this paper two main topics of interest for each of the parties will be discussed, the role that government should have according to the differing views and the subject of foreign policy.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The role of government as a according to the Federalists They support a stronger federal government. They felt that people can't govern themselves and that a nation must have a way to get rid of debts. Federalists also believed that only a strong central government can ensure states participation in general good. Therefore representation is distributed more equally a single executive can govern better than multiple executives. They felt federal government provides common defense, raises revenue in time of war, and deals with other nations more effectively than a confederation. Federalists were respectable and embraced the cultured and propertied groups. They lived in settled areas along the seaboard, not in the raw backcountry. They were in outlook rather closely akin to the conservative Loyalist group of Revolutionary days. But by remaining Loyalists it assisted them in the ratification. Federalists strongly supported the Constitution. Anti-federalists were alarmed by the absence of a bill of rights. Federalists assured them it would be added by amendment. Federalists believed that the three branches of government-legislative, judicial and executive- effectively represent the people.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Anti-federalists, on the other hand, opposed the stronger federal government. The felt states had rights, which the central government threatened to trample. In their eyes the constitution is a tyrannical document without a Bill of Rights. The constitution granted too much power over taxation to the Federal government. The anti-federalists has strong opinions when it came to the branches on the federal government. Congress should not have the power to meddle in the commerce of the states. The federal legislature is designed as an aristocratic institution, determined to steal the political prerogative of the people. The Anti-federalists consisted primarily, though not only, of the states' rights devotees, the back-country dwellers, the one-horse farmers,... ...main backers of the party were wealthy and well-known, and thus would be able to weather conflicts with foreign countries. II.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Federalist Party position’s impact on nation A.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Washington and Adams were first two Presidents & also Federalists (although Washington to somewhat lesser extent); thus their actions were those of the Federalist Party and also the first major actions of the nation in foreign affairs. III.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Democratic-Republican position A.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Wanted to settle with French and British, due to America’s lack of a strong military. B.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Overall justification: America wasn’t a world power, and thus it was a poor idea to provoke Britain and France. Also, war would have an extremely negative effect on the farmers and merchants which made up the party. IV.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Democratic-Republican position’s impact on nation Constituencies of party were employed in the tasks of most of the nation (farming, mercantilism, etc.) Thus, the interests of the majority of the citizens seemed to be with the Democratic-Republicans.

Technology Impact on Family Time

The impact of technology on family time Nowadays technology is a part of our real life because most people have the same need that is the convenience. Although technology can provide and serve many functions and applications that support the human need but it also has an impact to our real life as well. The impact of Technology to our real life is time on family. Three technologies that have impact to family are computer, Mobile Phone, and Tablet. The static of tablet sales in U. S. on year 2011 from NPD Group they said â€Å"U. S. Tablet Sales excluding Apple Exceed 1. Million Units in First Months of 2011†,1 this is in one country, that mean tablet is a new technology which every people attend. Tablet is a device that suitable for individual person because it easy to take and easy for do a business, but if you use it in your family. You will concentrate only your tablet not attends to member in your family. The effect of this situation will decrease time and relationship on family. Therefore, if you are in the family you must use that device to make your family enjoy together or don’t use its.However, most of family still attend to tablet by doesn’t think about impacted on family time and relationship. On the other hand technology still has another device that can makes family time increasingly. Causes of computer applications are positive affected on family time. From past to present, there are many types of computer such as â€Å"Super Computer†, â€Å"Computer PC†, and â€Å"Computer Notebook†. Computer has an evolution of itself as you can see a new generation of computer has smaller size than the old computer. Even though new computer has smaller size, but functions and applications of it’s not small like size.It can do and serve many things by using functions and applications such as do transaction online, Facebook, E-mail, learning, or playing game. Due to this example, the article of Washington State Un iversity, Vancouver examines the perceived effect of computers on family time and relationships. The result said (89% perceived that the computer impacted their family relationships, 45% mostly positive impact; 24% mixed impact and 20% mostly negative impact). 2 From this article, Computer has positive impact more than negative impact.That means applications of computer not effect on family time and relationship. Communication by using mobile phone was cause on family time. The main function of mobile phone is used for communicate between 2 people. Because of mobile phone used for communicate and also support many functions like computer to make communicate easily. Things that new generation mobile phone can do more than old generation mobile phone is communicated by typing and video calling. This function is appropriate very much for communicate, so in part of family.Mobile phone was caused to makes family more talking, even though they can’t see or meet together in the hous e. To sum up, technology was caused on family time very much, because it has an advantage and disadvantage inside itself. it has an evolution all the time in term of components or applications. Therefore every family should learn and select the advantage of each technology such as use computer and tablet for learning more than playing game, or use mobile phone for participate and communicate in family more than chat to friend.If your family can do like the example your family will gain more time and reduce impact on family. ————————————————————————————————————————————– Reference 1 U. S. Tablet Sales excluding Apple Exceed 1. 2 Million Units in First Months of 2011: <http s://www. npd. com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/pressreleases/pr_111122b> 2Jane D. Lanigan, Washington State University, Vancouver <http://familyscienceassociation. org/archived%20journal%20articles/FSR_vol14_2008/2Jane_Lanigan. pdf>