According to social scientists and political practitioners, people are less loyal to products and political parties than they were in the past…a trend that is likely to affect the next election.

Think about it…Everyone knows people who have abandoned their religion, been divorced, or changed their political affiliation. Americans today are more likely to make such important changes than ever before.

Peter Hart, Democratic pollster, found that college students are more willing to transfer schools and that 40% of Americans will change their religion at least once. Linda Lea Viken, divorce attorney, has found a clear increase in the number of divorces among the elderly, even after being married for fifty years.

So how does this affect elections? When running Howard Dean’s campaign in 2004, Joe Trippi witnessed the fickleness of Americans. After coming in third place in the Iowa caucuses, Dean lost his supporters as quickly as he gained them. According to Morris Fiorina, political science professor at Stanford University, “Obama benefited from the looser ties people have today…” (Not a surprise considering the distrust of the Bush administration.) However, “…the flip side is that he cannot count on the depth of support that a winning candidate might have had a generation ago…And, of course, if ties are looser, then change can occur faster than if the ties bind more tightly.”

After all, didn’t we learn not to trust politicians? It may not be fair to say that it’s bad to be fickle and good to be loyal. Of course, fickle isn’t exactly a positive adjective but blind allegiance isn’t something we want either. What do you think? Is it good that Americans aren’t bound to a specific politician or should we be more loyal?

Lets say you drive a hybrid car, bring your own mug to Starbucks, and always turn the lights off when you leave a room. Why? To save the environment? To conserve energy? Or is it really just to be like everyone else?

According to a study conducted by a professor at Arizona State University, people are more likely to “go green” if they think other people are doing it. He compared the results of hotel-bathroom signs asking guests to reuse towels. The signs stated….  1.) Do it for the environment. 2.) Cooperate with the hotel/Be our partner in this cause.  3.) The majority of guests in the hotel reused towels at least once during their stay.  4.) The majority of guests “in this room” reuse their towels.

The final two signs produced a significant increase in the amount of towels that were reused. Is this really much of a surprise? Of course, we don’t want to ADMIT to being followers… But who really wants to be the only eco-Unfriendly neighbor on the block? So come on and go green….everyone else is doing it.

Perry County, Tennessee decreased their unemployment rate by at least 3% by following a New deal model. Started by FDR during the Great Depression, the Work Projects Administration (WPA) put thousands of people to work building bridges, parks, and highways while also employing writers and artists. The WPA was particularly successful in rural areas…

No wonder why Perry County is following its example.

In using welfare money from the stimulus package, Perry County was able to subsidize 300 new and diverse jobs. Jobs were created for both adults and students, in areas such as transportation, hotel work, and even mural painting.

Just as in the thirties, Perry County is seeing the benefits of such employment…And not simply in the numbers. Although their employment rate has increased, the benefits are displayed throughout the county. From new art work created by young people employed by local artists to an increase in hotel bookings, the advantages are giving the county new hope. As stated by recently employed Scott Kimble, “This job here is not a permanent fix…We still need some kind of industry to look and come into Perry County. But for right now we’ve got hope, and when you’ve got hope, you’ve got a way.”

“It must be difficult to love an adopted child as much as your own,” states the original “Orphan” trailer. As someone who is adopted, my only response is SERIOUSLY??? People had to complain in order for Warner Bros. to realize that this was a bad idea? No one raised their hand during that board meeting and said, Hey, maybe this might be offensive?

I’m obviously not ashamed of being adopted so I have no problem mentioning it when relevant. However, EVERY time I mention it, I can depend on being asked one question. Do you know your real parents? Ughhhh. Anyone who is adopted will know EXACTLY what I’m talking about. I know that the question is not meant to be offensive, yet it somehow implies that the family I have now, on some level, is “fake.” Like I’ve been deprived a “real” family. (I have not.)

Though the question is innocent, it definitely exemplifies a stigma; a stigma that is undoubtedly supported by the “Orphan” trailer. The trailer blatantly suggests that adopted children are less lovable than one’s “own,” just as my parents are somehow not “real.” Though the trailer may not be intentionally offensive (hopefully), they undisputedly promote the idea that a family with adopted children is inferior to one with biological children.

Such a statement, especially in today’s society, is not just offensive, it’s simply wrong. Let’s face it, there is no longer one specific familial mold. Couples get divorced; children have step-parents, step-siblings, maybe even half-siblings. Some children have parents who never married in the first place. Others may have foster-parents, adoptive parents, maybe even same-sex parents….

Thus, instead of seeing this movie, I will simply rejoice in the fact that I was not adopted by people from Warner Bros., who, for whatever reason, would not have enough love for someone who doesn’t have their DNA.

We’re always hearing about how the human race harms the environment. Between flying on airplanes that emit huge amounts of carbon dioxide, cranking up the air conditioning during the summer and turning on every light in our homes so our neighbors think we’ve got a lot of friends over, Americans tend to burn a lot of energy.

But one person can’t make a HUGE difference, right? WRONG. Find out how your individual lifestyle and consumption habits affect our environment and what steps you can take to reduce your ecological footprint.

The quiz is actually REALLY fun and so easy to do but the answers are shocking. It surprised me how big my footprint is and made me realize I’ve gotta take better actions to take care of our planet!

How big is your footprint? Take the quiz to find out!

This afternoon, Obama announced his plan to fund Michigan community colleges in an effort to boost both graduation rates and the economy. Approximately 9 billion dollars will go to programs that will better prepare students for jobs after graduation and increase the number of graduates. The program is expected to increase the number of community college graduates by 5 million within 12 years, part of Obama’s greater plan for the US to have the highest number of college graduates world-wide by 2020. Let’s hope Michigan is just the beginning! Read more here!

My friend recently interviewed for a job at a large economic firm in New York. While researching the company, he turns to me and says, “The CEO is a woman. Isn’t that weird?”

Rare? Perhaps. Weird? Absolutely not.

In fact, studies have shown that having more women in senior positions isn’t simply “fair,”  it is more profitable. According to studies conducted by Ernst & Young, Columbia University, McKinsey & Co, Goldman Sachs, and Pepperdine University, companies with more female senior members yield higher profits.  In fact, Pepperdine University found that Fortune 500 firms with women in charge profited 18 to 69 percent more than other companies.  In examining the top European companies, McKinsey found that more gender diversity led to higher stock performance. Similarly, “Catalyst, a research firm focused on women and business, found that Fortune 500 companies with three or more women in senior management positions score higher on top measures of organizational excellence. In addition, companies with three or more women on their boards outperformed the competition on all measures by at least 40 percent.”

Still not convinced? Let us put the numbers aside and be a little politically incorrect. Research has also found that women tend to be more cautious and collaborative while men are more likely to take risks. In a 30 year study conducted by the National Council for Research on Women, female investors had more consistent results than male investors. In being riskier, men’s results varied more. After all, winning big can also mean losing big.

You probably don’t need me to tell you that diversity is a good thing. Economists, however, can prove the benefits of variety. Scott Page, economist of the University of Michigan, used mathematical models to show how a more diverse group can solve business problems more effectively than one that is homogeneous.

Basically, a bunch of white, Ivy League males may not necessarily be the solution to our problems. Hiring people of diverse backgrounds isn’t simply “nice.” It’s just smart.

For years eating disorders have been considered a “white girl” problem. However, it has become more and more obvious that illnesses such as anorexia and bulimia do not discriminate, affecting males and females of all races.

According to Doctor Noelle Kerr-Price, eating disorder specialist, “One thing to keep in mind that we don’t even really know the full extent of how many people have eating disorders because many cases aren’t reported out of shame or people are misdiagnosed– if they are diagnosed at all. And those are the fortunate ones with access to health care and other recovery resources.” Kerr-Price, along with many other eating disorder specialists, argues that shame from other community members may prevent many minorities to fessing up about their EDs. Not to mention the problem of cost. The high cost of treatment can make it unrealistic for people with low-incomes. Even for those with health insurance, many policies have limits regarding care for mental illnesses. Some treatments can cost up to $10,000 a week, even forcing families to take out second mortgages. EDs may not be only for rich kids but the treatment sure is! If people of low-income backgrounds are ashamed to seek help or simply can’t afford it, they will not be accounted for statistically.

If black women feel pressure to conform to the prevalent body type of the “dominant culture”, they are more likely to develop eating disorders. Those with more education, for instance, are more at risk. Though EDs aren’t just a white girl problem, they do tend to plague a certain “type” of person. “People who are upwardly mobile and trying to assume power within the dominant culture are most likely to be subject to its norms,” states clinical psychologist, Deb Burgard. Though anyone can certainly struggle with forms of anorexia and bulimia, the more one assimilates to the “dominant culture”—the more that one tries to fit into size zero outfits that white designers created, and into (unfortunately) white-dominated offices—the more one equates thinness with beauty.

Who says we can only farm in rural areas? Despite the obvious challenges of urban farming, community gardens are popping up in parks, vacant lots, and even on rooftops across the nation.

And with good reason. While it may be difficult to find space, fertile soil, and even people interested in the cause, the benefits are endless. Researchers have found that urban farming can foster good health and community involvement, while being easier on the wallet. In fact, every $1 invested in community garden results in $6 of vegetables.

Yet saving money is just the beginning. Urban farming increases the sustainability of our cities, promotes concern for the environment, and fosters community involvement. Considering that most urbanites hardly even know their next-door neighbors, we certainly can’t expect to always know who produces our food. Urban farming, however, can alleviate both problems simultaneously.

In addition to the social and environmental benefits, growing our own food has positive effects on our health. And I don’t just mean physical health. Research has also shown that horticulture can lead to better mental health. Working with plants has even been proven to reduce stress, blood pressure, and muscle tension.

Urban Peak, a non-profit organization, is using such benefits to help the homeless youth of Denver. The organization provides young adults with food, shelter, and now, the advantages of urban gardening. “I think there’s a sense of accomplishment in the garden…This will be a sense of accomplishment that they can translate into other areas of their life like school or looking for a job,” states Anne Harris, member of Urban Peak. Though the long term benefits have yet to be determined, one thing is clear…Such feelings of accomplishment and involvement cannot be obtained at a McDonald’s or Burger King.

Don’t get me wrong; of course it’s nice to have access to fast food and delivery at any hour of the night. However, who’s to say that our favorite cities can’t offer both convenience and sustainability? There may be a certain satisfaction in consuming that pizza slice at 4am. Yet, maybe it’s time to experience the pride that comes along with consuming something we’ve cultivated ourselves.

Guess how many cows are killed every hour in the US, just so you can have your burger? A whopping 660 000 of them.

Paul McCartney, best known from his part in the Beatles, wants to change this. He believes we can fight global warming simply by not eating meat on Mondays.

McCartney supports the Meat Free Mondays campaign in order to encourage people to give up eating meat or at least to reduce their meat consumption. He states, “Having one designated meat free day a week is actually a meaningful change that everyone can make, that goes to the heart of several important political, environmental and ethical issues all at once.”

Sacrificing meat just once a week could cut greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, according to Greenpeace. But can sacrificing a burger or chicken sandwich just ONCE a week really affect change?

The answer is yes! 3 times as many fossil fuels are needed for a diet that includes meat than are needed for a vegetarian one. Depending on where and how it is produced the FAO estimates that the livestock industry is responsible for between 13.5 and 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions…Some of these are from the methane emitted from livestock. Half of all US water-usage is devoted to livestock, with each cow needing enough water to float a destroyer!

If every human on Earth ate meat, our oil supplies would only last another 13 years, whereas if humans no longer ate any meant it would last 260 years. Still need more convincing? 20 million people will die of malnutrition this year. Yet if Americans reduced their meat intake by just 10%, the land freed up could be used to feed an extra 100 million people! You do the math–that’s 5 times as many people as die each year!

Paul McCartney is not alone in his quest to decrease meat consumption. Celebrities including Sheryl Crow and Alec Baldwin support the Meat Free Monday campaign as well. Even famous chefs such as Giorgio Locatelli and Yotam Ottolenghi have contributed meat-free recipes for the cause.

As stated by the campaign,“To build a better world in the future we all need to make changes in our lifestyles now. Not all the changes we have to make are easy; and not all the easy changes we can make are meaningful. But making just one day a week a meat-free day, really is the little thing that can make a big difference.”

You’ve cleaned out your locker, signed more yearbooks than you can count, and maybe even burned your notebooks. That’s right, school’s out. Could you be any happier? Now you can swim, bike, hang out with friends, and just RELAX.

For today’s urban youth, some worry that a lack of structure and guidance will increase the likelihood of engaging in criminal activities. Enter the good old American staple: the summer job. For Marc Morial, Mayor of New Orleans and President/CEO of the National Urban League, promoting summer employment is crucial in improving both the economy and the teen unemployment rate, while keeping kids off the streets and promoting a greater sense of well-being to their communities. While general teen unemployment is at 21.6%, African-American and low-income urban teen unemployment is almost double that, at 39.4%, which reiterates that promoting summer employment is even more crucial in urban areas.

But what if you don’t exactly have a stellar resume and applicable job experience? Don’t give up just yet.

As stated by Morial, “Summer youth programs receiving stimulus funds must give first priority to teens and young adults who come from low-income backgrounds, are high school drop-outs, have a disability or have no work experience or training.”

“From office work to day care to cleaning parks and highways, teens can play a crucial role in providing workers for many of the infrastructure and ‘Green’ jobs that are essential to the nation’s economic recovery.”

Translation: summer jobs don’t necessarily involve flipping burgers or washing dishes, even for the inexperienced. Enjoy working with children? Try being a camp counselor. Passionate about the environment, hunger, or human rights? Consider doing field work for organizations such as Grassroots Campaigns.  Or maybe you’re a good swimmer. Learn more about how to be a lifeguard in your area.

There you have it. While everyone is entitled to a vacation, the time has come to turn off the television, put your spare time to good use, make some extra money, and maybe even make a difference while you’re at it.

College is an investment. College graduates make more money. Blah. Blah. Blah. If you can’t afford college, it all sounds the same.

But what if you aren’t so eager to sign the next 25 years of your life away to Citibank or Sallie Mae? Is it still an “investment” if you decide to be a social worker or librarian?

Lets face it, some college students will choose to work for a non-profit organization. Some, a small newspaper. Others, Teach for America. Some college graduates will choose careers that have comparable annual salaries to non-college graduates.

In such cases, not going to college can definitely be easier on the bank account. Why take out $100,000 worth of loans if you’re going to spend the next 25 years of your life eating Ramen and living in a studio apartment smaller than a closet?

Fortunately, the government is catching on to the plight of the debt-ridden college graduate. According to the Education Department, jobs in public health, public libraries, early childhood education, nonprofit organizations, amongst others, could qualify for forgiveness of their federal loans. The new “income-based repayment” program allows graduates to make payments based on their income. The balance is ultimately forgiven if payments are made for 25 years.

According to consumer advocate Christine Lindstrom, “It enables all borrowers to be able to face their life circumstances and know there is some flexibility and responsiveness based on what life throws their way.”

So maybe college is an investment that doesn’t always result in a six-figure salary but at least changes are being made to make it a little more enticing for those who can’t necessarily afford massive amounts of debt.