Wells And Darwin Essays - Herbert Spencer, H. G. Wells,

Wells And Darwin Herbert George Wells was born in Bromley, Kent, a suburb of London, to a lower-middle-class family. He attended London University and the Royal College of Science where he studied zoology. One of his professors instilled in him a belief in social as well as biological evolution which Wells later cited as the important and influential aspect of his education. This is how it all began. Maybe without this professor Wells wouldn't be the famous author he is today. Most of Wells novels are science fiction and have a great deal of some kind of human society theme, or Darwinism in mind. It is a theme that is seen in his most famous science fiction writings. H.G. Wells seems to convey a sense of Darwinism and change in the future of society in his major works. Wells has been called the father and Shakespeare of science fiction. He is best known today for his great work in science fiction novels and short stories. He depicted stories of chemical warfare, world wars, alien visitors and even atomic weapons in a time that most authors, or even people for that matter, were not thinking of the like. His stories opened a door for future science fiction writers who followed the trend that Wells wrote about. His most popular science fiction works include The Time Machine, The Invisible Man, The War of the Worlds, and The Island of Doctor Moreau. His first novel, The Time Machine, was an immediate success. By the time the First World War had begun his style of writing and novels had made him one of the most controversial and best-selling authors in his time. In the story The Time Machine, Wells expresses his creativity with images of beauty, ugliness and great details. In this novel Wells explores what it would be like to travel in this magnificent and beautiful machine. "The criterion of the prophecy in this case is influenced by the theory of "natural selection." (Beresford, 424) He uses Darwin's theory in the novel and relates it to the men living in the novel. The men are no longer struggling to survive, they have all adapted and there is no termination of the weak. It had practically ceased. His fascination with society in biological terms is also mentioned, "Shows Wells horizon of sociobiological regression leading to cosmic extinction, simplified from Darwinism." (Beresford, 424) He took the idea from Darwin but instead of making it "survival of the fittest", the weak have already died off and only the fittest are left, which leads to the extinction. His fascination with Darwinism was one that had not been thought by many in that time, because there were questions of ethics and religion. "From The Time Machine on, it was generally recognized that no writer had so completely or so perceptively taken Darwin to heart." (McConnell, 442) He wasn't the first man to realize and acknowledge the importance of Darwin's theory for the future of civilization, but he is said to be the first to assimilate that theory into his stories. Concerning society with the future, The Time Machine is said to be seen as "a prophecy of the effects of rampant industrialization on that class conflict that was already, in the nineteenth, century a social powder keg." (McConnell, 438) Wells always touched upon the subject of society, the destruction of it, and how it would become in the future due to this destruction and chaos. His view on society was that the classes would clash and ultimately "they might become two races, mutually uncomprehending and murderously divided," (Suvin, 435) His predictions of future societies were all much alike, war-torn class problems, much like what is seen now a days. The narrator of The Time Machine says of the Time Traveler that he "saw in the growing pile of civilization only a foolish heaping that must inevitably fall back upon and destroy its makers in the end." (McConnell, 439) This is another reference to society's survival of the fittest, as he depicts civilization tearing at each other, and in the end, doing away with their creator. Not all of his predictions and social clashes were horrid and horrendous with violence. In some of his foretelling of what society would do, he recommended things that could be done to avoid such things and maybe in the end reach some kind of peace or togetherness. "That the human race, thanks to its inherited prejudices and superstitions and its innate pigheadedness, is an endangered species; and that mankind must learn-soon-to establish a

Reasons Raising the Minimum Wage Can Hurt the Economy

Reasons Raising the Minimum Wage Can Hurt the Economy According to the left, raising the minimum wage and providing a fair wage is the best way to eliminate poverty and address income inequality. But doing so has consequences far beyond an employee simply getting a raise on their paycheck one day and thats the end of it. Weve already seen the consequences of the poorly thought out, expensive, and lousily executed Obamacare laws and drastically raising the minimum wage the way liberals are proposing could lead to equally unfortunate outcomes for the very people the law is supposed to help. 1. Attempting to artificially raise incomes through a minimum wage increase is more about electoral politics than it is about actually helping people achieve the American Dream. Indeed, when polled people regularly support such a raise, because who would oppose people making more money? But economics realities are more than what sounds nice, and everyone would be better off by supporting true pro-growth policies that open up opportunities for everyone willing to work for the American Dream, rather than expect it be handed to them. Artificial wage increases can set the economy back while not even finding true relief for those the increase are intended to help. 2. If the goal is to lift people out of poverty, this will not do that. Figure that a huge chunk of minimum wage jobs are part-time, and the number of part-time jobs as a percentage of the workforce are only increasing already because of Obamacare. How many people would rather make $8.50 an hour and work 40 hours a week with a company-sponsored insurance plan over making $10 an hour with hours cut back to 28 per week and left to shop at an Obamacare exchange for excessive and costly insurance they might not need? (And even if the plans are cheap because of subsidies, the Obamacare deductibles are probably out of reach for these people anyway.) 3. Do this math equation: Obamacare Higher Wages for Unskilled Labor - Cost to Replace Said Worker with a Machine Adios jobs. The high costs of Obamacare plus increased wages (which also means higher payroll taxes paid by the employer) makes it more attractive to replace low-skilled jobs with machines. Self-service food-ordering machines are already being implemented in many restaurants nationwide. 4. Minimum wage jobs are typically low-skill or entry level jobs. If the costs to fill low-skill positions become to high, consolidation can occur and businesses are likely to replace two or three employees with one employee who excels and can do multiple jobs quicker. In other words, it would probably be more attractive to hire an ambitious and talented self-starter at $18 an hour to replace 2-3 less ambitious or inefficient employees making $10 an hour each. A business could even pay the one employee some solid over-time and still be ahead in the end. The more an employee is paid, the more is expected of them. Making jobs artificially more expensive also makes employees with less skill or who are new to the workforce more expendable. And these are the people the new laws are intended to help. 5. Believe it or not, the money needed to pay these employees has to come from somewhere. Retailers - who probably employ the greatest percentage or minimum wage earners - would simply be forced to raise the price of goods and services. So even if someone makes an extra $28 bucks a week, how much more are the same workers going to have to pay for food, gas, or clothing to make up for increased labor costs? 6. Different states have different economies and the cost of living in New York is different than the cost of living in Texas. It simply does not make sense to have a one-size plan for completely different economies. This is why, of course, conservatives believe in federalism and believe that Alabamans have the right to live how they want to and Vermonters have the right to live how they want to. Nationally centralized policies rarely work when their are so many factors in play. 7. Many small businesses already struggle to survive with the current burdensome regulations offered up by the federal government. Many rely on part-time help from high-schoolers to scoop ice cream, work the car wash, or deliver flowers. Small businesses are already at a disadvantage as they typically have higher overhead costs and must make more margin on products sold just to survive. This would only make it more difficult for them to succeed. 8. The minimum wage is seemingly raised every few years, and its never enough in the long run. After all, a minimum wage at $10 is still a minimum wage. And if higher labor costs cause the price of everything to go up anyway, the power of the dollar is merely weakened and no progress has been made. Which brings us back to our first point: The American economy needs true economic growth that enables people to succeed, not a policy based on a bumper-sticker slogan that offers a temporary feel-good fix that will be just as worthless and new minimum wage increase demands roll around. 9. Higher paid employees will want raises equal to those of the minimum wage employees. If people at the bottom of the pay chain get a 20% raise, everyone who makes more than that will also expect - and perhaps rightly so - a 20% raise as well. Imagine having worked in a job for a few years and earned increases only to have some guy hired at the same rate on day one because the government says so. Now businesses either pay all of their employees more or enjoy a disgruntled workforce. In the end, minimum wage increases go beyond increasing labor costs for just the targeted group. 10. This is where the harsh reality sets in: Minimum wage jobs are not intended to enable people to raise a family of five on. They simply arent. Yes, there are circumstances where people are forced to take jobs at minimum wage, perhaps more now than ever. But minimum wage jobs are designed for entry-level workers, kids in high school (who Id assume shouldnt have the need for $20K/yr jobs), or those looking to add a little extra money through a second job. The point is to move up from there into intermediate jobs, and with enough hard work a very well-paying job. Thats pretty much the point of a minimum wage job, and the point is not to support families. Its nice to say that a full week of work means everyone who does so gets a house, SUV, and an iPhone (and how many struggling minimum wage workers have the last one?), but the reality is that is not what those jobs are intended for. The problem with the lefts over-simplified solution to the economy is that the more expensive these jo bs get, the more likely those that need them will be able to get them. And how does that help anyone?