Debating Myself

I’m on vacation right now to the Oregon Coast. After just graduating from Pacific University I am ready for a little break from school/reading/thinking by visiting the beautiful Oregon coast and relaxing with my family. I will be back home soon, for the summer, and ready to unleash a series of blog posts on all sorts of topics.

Until then…

My second senior thesis is finished. This paper, written in German, was much more of a challenge in some ways than the Politics and Government thesis. Having chosen specifically to write two senior theses instead of simply writing one larger thesis on a topic that overlaps both subjects, I had a hard time finding my way to a topic of interest to me involving Germany.

My main problem was finding available resources in German to conduct strong academic research from. In the end I chose as similar road as my POLS thesis–namely reanalyzing an existing case-study.

I am interested in theories of federalism, generally, and the European Union as a sort of interesting new experiment in multi-level governance. However, looking specifically at environmental policy within Germany and the EU is ironic, because it is perhaps the type of politics that interests me the least. Luckily I was able to focus my paper on the theoretical implications of the division of power between Germany, the EU and the German Länder in the realm of environmental policy, and avoid tedious discussions of allowable levels of pollutants in rivers and streams.

Mainly, it is just really hard to write a substantial research paper in a foreign language you have studied for only four years–and I am probably most proud of my thesis not for its clear and original analysis (of which it has much less than my POLS thesis) but for my use of the German language. Since coming back to Germany I think my mastery of written German has probably increased significantly due to the outstanding support of my German professor (Professor Lorely French) and the insane amount of papers I had to write in German this year.

Oddly, I wrote more pages/papers in German this academic year than in English. Crazy.

For comparison’s sake, here are the vital stats on my German thesis:

• Pages: 43
• Words: 10,773
• Footnotes: 30
• Words (with footnotes): 11, 476
• Sources Cited: ??
• Sources Consulted: 83
• Appendixes: 0

And, I’m done. If anyone out there is fluent in German and interested, please feel free to read the attached PDF below. For those of you not fluent in German here is an English description of the theme of the paper:

The Federal Republic of Germany is a founding member of the European integration project and a strong supporter of the European Union. Yet the rapidly increasing centralization of European policy in the form of mandates from the EU is particularly complicated for Germany due to its federal structure. The sixteen German states, or Länder, have become increasingly active in the politics of integration in the last twenty years in an attempt to protect their traditional constitutional sovereignty. The Länder have been particularly active, sometimes against the wishes of the federal German government. The struggle against European environmental standards exemplifies how integration can be burdensome and costly for the Länder to implement. This study analyzes the different strategies employed by the Länder in defending their sovereignty.

“Purely Administrative Entities”? The Role of the German Länder in the European Union (PDF)

Today I turned in the fruits of over a year of my labor–my senior thesis in Politics and Government at Pacific University. It is a good feeling and I am actually very proud of the finished product. It is not quite a publishable paper, largely due to a lack of data, but it is a good paper calling for further avenues of research in rural education policy. You can read the abstract below to find out what the paper is all about, but I thought it would be fun to take a statistical look at my thesis:

Vital Stats:

• Pages: 41
• Words: 11,857
• Footnotes: 42
• Words (with footnotes): 13, 337
• Sources Cited: 38
• Sources Consulted: 74
• Appendixes: 1

For those of you interested, here is a summary of the thesis and what it entails:

Rural education policy research has traditionally focused on the sociological aspects of rural areas and often failed to take into account analyses of politics and power. Utilizing a more formal political analysis, this study describes the political universe within which educational policy in rural areas is formed. Using two case studies of the implementation of a national grant program, the Reading First grant, this study seeks to explore the different intergovernmental relationships that rural and urban school districts experience, and the institutional features of No Child Left Behind that place rural areas at a disadvantage when implementing national educational policy. The study concludes by suggesting ways that policy makers and school districts alike can craft future policies to accommodate the unique advantages and disadvantages of both urban and rural school districts.

If that sounds interesting I invite you to download the PDF and take a glance. It is a bit dry, so if you want to be spared the details you can skip to the conclusion and find the most salient points summarized nicely there.

The Myth of the Oak Tree (PDF)

The important thing is that it is done, and that I am proud of the finished product.

I have been deeply immersed in critiques of the market system this month, and my reading and thinking on the issue has happened to occur at a time I am about to strike out on my own financially–graduating college this May.

Thinking about the financial entanglements already piling up immediately following graduation (car insurance, student loan debt, rent commitments, etc.), I started to wonder if I was prepared to manage these and begin thinking about investment, retirement and savings.

And then it hit me. I’m not.

When most people hit the workforce for the first time starting off their career they have little or no experience or training in financial planning. It is like giving someone a car and not teaching them how to drive it first. Except it is more like strapping them into the driver seat of a car hurtling down a NASCAR racetrack and warning them that if they don’t drive right they’ll crash into the wall and badly injure themselves.

See this post at the Western Democrat listing the “debtor society” as one of the biggest issues facing American society. I have to concur (I mean Warren Buffet agrees too!).

The market system is incredibly complex and learning how to take advantage of its tremendous opportunities while avoiding its many dangers is as vital as learning how to buy food and keep clean. Maybe even more important, if you made enough money in the market you could actually pay someone to do those things for you. Yet we receive little or no formal training on financial matters. We don’t really talk about financial literacy, and those of us that do probably enjoy a sizable advantage.

Without getting into overarching judgments about the validity of the market system or the way capital is regulated (which is certainly a debate we as a society should always be having) we have to accept that we live in the here and now, and the here and now is dominated by a global capitalist economy. Shit. So how do you live well within that system? What are the instruments of that system, what are their functions?

One possible explanation for some degree of the growing inequality of wealth in the United States of America today may very well be the different levels of understanding of the market system. Wealthy people tend to impart their knowledge about the market system onto their children, who then use that information (and seed money from their wealthy parents) to generate their own wealth. If you and your parents were not fortunate to possess such knowledge (or seed money) then you are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to generating wealth.

Knowledge is power. In a market-based economy basic knowledge can make a big difference in the returns you see on your investment.

That is why new campaigns about financial literacy are one of the most important components of reducing inequality (because the whole socialist revolution might still take awhile). We need to teach people about generating wealth now, and let them decide to take that advice or not. And if they want they can work for change within the system too. But don’t miss out on your own financial well-being because of ignorance (out of principle, that’s your choice–but if you miss out because of ignorance that is society’s failure).

So here are four super easy steps to help you get started:

1. Save money. I know, it isn’t revolutionary, but the first step is to decrease your spending–give up your Coldstone ice cream habit for example–and begin putting your money away for the rainy days that inevitably occur in a market-based economy. You will live long enough to see them.
2. Put your money to work. After successfully saving up some money, gradually put some of those savings to work. Always keep cash on hand, but after you have a strong base of cash start putting some excess into long-term investment vehicles with tax benefits (there are an array of these: ROTH IRAs, IRAs, 401(k), 529s, etc. ). If you want, put money in stocks and bonds on your own, but don’t feel obligated–you can make money by keeping it simple.
3. Start now. This seems odd, especially if you are young, but the sooner you start saving the more time your money works for you and the greater returns you get. Compounding interest is the back on which many fortunes are built. Start using it to your advantage right now.
4. Keep it simple. Don’t try to beat the market. If you save early you can take very low-risk investments with high long-term yields and make money without ever worrying or gambling on the market. Stocks have an average annual rate of return of 10% over the last 50 years. There will be booms and busts, but you should wind up with about 10% per year over the life of a 40 year retirement account.

If you don’t trust me or want more information, here are some further resources that you should definitely look at seriously for all kinds of other advice–tax, insurance, etc.

• http://www.mymoney.gov/
• http://www.360financialliteracy.org/
• http://www.jumpstartcoalition.org/

If you want a book there is only one you need to read, John C. Bogle “Common Sense on Mutual Funds”. Its intelligently written, interesting, and it will change your financial life.

We take finances very seriously in America, but we don’t seriously discuss them. A great majority of people are wholly unprepared for the kind of sound financial planning that will protect them from lay-offs or sickness and prepare them for a wealthy and enjoyable retirement. These are easy steps.

Because of the seriousness of financial advice and financial security in American culture, however, I am compelled to give a disclaimer here that I am not liable for any financial losses you incur as a result of taking this advice–I’m not trained in any way. Just think of me as a friend telling you about some great resources you should look at that will help you with financial problems.

Seriously. Start saving now.

Just an update, the Economist ran an article on rural schools and their decay this week–the silent problem that my senior thesis attempts to partially explain.

I hope sometime soon to put up a longer post discussing both of my theses and giving some better analysis of the issues they contain.

Also, I will be putting the PowerPoint slides of my senior project presentations up sometime this summer, right now I am just trying to find the best way to convert them to Flash videos (probably using Camtasia Studio to take a screencast).

I will also be posting PDF files of my two senior theses–so be looking for that soon.

Technorati Tags: rural schools, PowerPoint

As you may know I have had my studies intermittently interrupted this semester with graduate school visits in an attempt to help crystallize what is a very difficult decision. After looking at the PhD programs in Political Science at both the University of Washington and the University of Wisconsin-Madison I felt like both programs were a great fit, great places to study, and a definite breath of fresh air.

But, I couldn’t attend both.

After returning from Wisconsin late Sunday I thought very intensely about what it is I want from a graduate school and what it is I expect from the next five years. I want a few things pretty clearly at the moment:

• Stability–I want to spend five years in relatively the same place and be able to really put down some roots and make some lasting connections
• Learning–I want a variety of opportunities both in and out of the classroom to learn–not just political science, but all of my other myriad of interests as well. I don’t want to be intellectually restrained.
• Research–I want a place that fits my own research interests in rural policy, rural politics, education policy, federalism, and poverty/inequality. Some of these things may comprise my dissertation someday.
• Freshness– I want some new scenery. I want to go somewhere new and dive in and see what I like and don’t like and learn from it.
• Activity– I want to go out and participate and do a variety of non-academic things. I want to find people I mesh with and who are interesting and I want to do interesting things with them. I need, sometimes, extra motivation for these things.

Both UWs would have provided me with these opportunities, but in the end I felt that the change of scenery to the Midwest and the academic tradition that Wisconsin offers would fit me better. Wisconsin’s Political Science department is great, but so is the whole institution which seems to have a real focus on academics, learning opportunities, and innovation.

So I’m a Badger now and I’m finally getting closer to the type of learning environment I have always craved.