Stuff YOU Should Know
A Champion Promise
LeBron James may be the best basketball player in the world. But now he’s contributing something to society that’s arguably even more meaningful: a school.
Situated in his hometown of Akron, Ohio, James’s school–called “I Promise”–is no ordinary educational facility. Focusing on academically “at-risk” youth, the program seeks to do more than just educate students. Its goal is to turn them into productive, contributing members of society. To that end, it focuses not just on academics, but on the social and economic needs of students (and their families) as well.
The I Promise School is public, meaning that tuition is free. But it offers benefits far beyond what is found at a traditional public school. On the economic side, students receive free meals and snacks, free uniforms, a free bike and helmet, free transportation, and upon graduation, free tuition to the University of Akron. On the emotional side, the school provides trauma support, as well as a food pantry and a family resource center, which helps parents in need earn their GED and secure a job.
The “I Promise” program was actually begun by the LeBron James Family Foundation in 2015. Since then, it has given Akron area high school graduates who meet certain guidelines free college tuition at the University of Akron. Now, the brick-and-mortar I Promise School holds 240 third- and fourth-grade students, but by 2022, it will expand to include 1,000 students in first through eighth grades. The Akron public school system has put forward $2.9 million for the project, but the remainder of the $8 million price tag will be covered by James’s Foundation.
What Do You Think? The I Promise School’s tagline is, “Nothing is given. Everything is earned.” Explain how this describes the school’s mission.
Apple Passes $1 Trillion Mark
Chances are, you either own an iPad or iPhone, or you know someone who does. More than 1.4 billion iPhones have been sold since the product was introduced in 2007. So it should come as no surprise to you that Apple is now the most valuable public company in the world. As a matter of fact, as of last week, it is the first-ever publicly-traded American to be worth over $1 trillion.
But does all of this success come at a high price? Possibly. Apple has long faced criticism over its use of cheap Chinese labor to build its products, both because of the harsh conditions faced by overseas workers, and because using foreign labor takes jobs away from Americans. The company also has been accused of some questionable tax practices. In 2016, the European Commission found the tax deal struck between Apple and Ireland to be illegal. The EC ordered Apple to pay Ireland 13 billion euros in back taxes, as well as 1 billion euros in interest. To date, Apple has only paid back two-thirds of that amount.
There is also the issue of wealth consolidation, which refers to the situation where a large portion of the nation’s economic worth is held by just a few companies–such as Apple, Disney, and Amazon. This leads to greater income inequality (in other words, a growing gap between the rich and the poor). It also means that if one of these giant corporations starts to falter economically, it could cause the entire stock market to plummet.
Dig Deeper If $1.00 is equal to 0.8612 euros, how much money in back taxes and interest (in U.S. dollars) does Apple still owe to Ireland?
Female Students Face Discrimination
Japan, with its more traditional society, has long been considered out-of-date in its views of gender roles in the workplace. However, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has attempted to turn this around with his “womenomics” policy, which seeks to advance Japanese women’s economic empowerment. And it seems to be working: in recent years, for example, a higher proportion of Japanese women have entered the workforce than American women. Women’s acceptance rates are also higher than men’s for most university degrees.
However, these statistics give a false picture of Japanese women’s economic advancement. For one thing, women still trail men in high-paying fields, keeping the pay gap between men and women high. And in one prestigious academic field–medicine–women are actively being kept out. It was recently revealed that Tokyo Medical University has been reducing the test scores of female applicants in order to keep it so that men continue to make up about 70 percent of each entering class. In 2018, for example, 1,596 men and 1,1018 women applied to the school. But only 2.9 percent of women were accepted, compared to 8.8 percent of men. Worse, this practice has gone on unchecked for years, and sources say that it is common practice at other Japanese medical schools as well.
School administrators have defended this policy by saying that female students are more likely than male students to drop out when they get married or have children. Unfortunately, this is often true. But rather than continue the practice of gender discrimination, experts argue, more resources should be spent on providing childcare so that female doctors can continue with their studies and careers.
Dig Deeper The following table from the Association of American Medical Colleges lists the number of female and male students at American medical schools. Skim through the table. Do you notice any overall trends? What measures do you think can be taken here in the United States to increase the number of women in the medical field?
Trump Deals Another Environmental Blow
In 2012, under the Obama administration, Congress passed a law to cut auto emissions and reduce oil consumption in an effort to limit greenhouse gases and combat climate change. The law stated that, by 2025, the fuel economy of passenger vehicles would need to reach about 54 miles per gallon. It also required automakers to build hybrids, electric cars, and other fuel-efficient vehicles.
LA Traffic
Credit: TIM MCCAIG/Getty Images
Now, the Trump administration and the EPA are attempting to undo this law, saying that it’s too much of a burden on automakers, and even making the claim that cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars aren’t as safe for drivers. The new rule freezes fuel efficiency at 37 miles per gallon. It also takes away the rights of states to make their own, stricter air pollution standards, which was granted to the states by the 1970 Clean Air Act.
While many major automakers initially were opposed to the Obama-era regulations, saying that they were too strict, they are now also opposed to the new rule for going too far in the other direction. Representatives of the auto industry have joined environmentalists and consumer groups in public outcry against the new rule, and the governor of California, Jerry Brown, has already said that his state is prepared to fight if it takes effect. In fact, the attorneys general of 19 states have announced that they will take the administration to court if the rule is passed.