Technology is not distinct from and should not be distinguished from science since they both complement each other and are mutually inclusive. For instance, success in science depends on developments and advancements in technology. Science is not just about working in the lab and coming up with a formula; science is also an interdisciplinary system as scientists work with statisticians and bioinformatics to discover new ideas to be employed by various corporations and passed on to several customers who benefit from these enterprises. Furthermore, science and technology interact with the American social and political culture in order to influence individual needs or choices in a way that develops the power of several corporations. The political
…show more content…
This negatively impacted the choice of the poor class to abandon their impoverished state and lead an affordable and comfortable life. The financial sector interacted with science to make the rich richer and increase the struggles of the poor. For instance, the financial sector constantly ensured that the market is failing and not being regulated; no laws are being enforced or limiting anticompetitive behaviors. The private sector was simply looking forward to “make markets work for [it], to make [it] more profitable” (Stiglitz 398). Firms also designed a tax system that allows the rich to pay a lower amount of taxes than the poor. Furthermore, the financial sector was involved in several forms of “rent seeking”, getting income at the expense of the rest of society rather than through one’s efforts, by obtaining hidden and open grants from the government, establishing laws that shape the marketplace in a way that is more profitable (to the firms), and ignoring existing competition laws. Through these fraudulent practices, firms managed to increase their influences by formulating a “negative-sum game, where the gains to winners are less than the losses to the losers” (Stiglitz 397). In other words, the financial sector gained more income with no social contributions in return. Moreover, firms acquired such economic power through …show more content…
Corporations set recruiting criteria to choose students who would be suitable for the job from specific colleges. Karen Ho’s “Biographies of Hegemony” provides an example of a financial firm that created individual needs rather than meeting them. For instance, Wall Street initiated the Princeton students’ desire to work as bankers by dominating career fairs at Princeton, using its recruiters or political culture, and creating an environment that matched the elite lifestyles that students experience at their colleges. Wall Street influenced students’ minds significantly that Princeton graduates did not consider other professions anymore since they were convinced that “banking firms…[provide] avenues to wealth and power that other professions do not,” (Ho 179) thus allowing them to maintain their prestigious status. Furthermore, it can be inferred from Stiglitz’ case that Ivy League students are the wealth of the markets, which Wall Street was targeting through methodologies that allow it (Wall Street) to increase its power and reduce competition, giving other professions less opportunities to even make an appearance at Ivy League schools or to gain the interest of some of the students, though these careers can draw much more attention if given the chance to
This negatively impacted the choice of the poor class to abandon their impoverished state and lead an affordable and comfortable life. The financial sector interacted with science to make the rich richer and increase the struggles of the poor. For instance, the financial sector constantly ensured that the market is failing and not being regulated; no laws are being enforced or limiting anticompetitive behaviors. The private sector was simply looking forward to “make markets work for [it], to make [it] more profitable” (Stiglitz 398). Firms also designed a tax system that allows the rich to pay a lower amount of taxes than the poor. Furthermore, the financial sector was involved in several forms of “rent seeking”, getting income at the expense of the rest of society rather than through one’s efforts, by obtaining hidden and open grants from the government, establishing laws that shape the marketplace in a way that is more profitable (to the firms), and ignoring existing competition laws. Through these fraudulent practices, firms managed to increase their influences by formulating a “negative-sum game, where the gains to winners are less than the losses to the losers” (Stiglitz 397). In other words, the financial sector gained more income with no social contributions in return. Moreover, firms acquired such economic power through …show more content…
Corporations set recruiting criteria to choose students who would be suitable for the job from specific colleges. Karen Ho’s “Biographies of Hegemony” provides an example of a financial firm that created individual needs rather than meeting them. For instance, Wall Street initiated the Princeton students’ desire to work as bankers by dominating career fairs at Princeton, using its recruiters or political culture, and creating an environment that matched the elite lifestyles that students experience at their colleges. Wall Street influenced students’ minds significantly that Princeton graduates did not consider other professions anymore since they were convinced that “banking firms…[provide] avenues to wealth and power that other professions do not,” (Ho 179) thus allowing them to maintain their prestigious status. Furthermore, it can be inferred from Stiglitz’ case that Ivy League students are the wealth of the markets, which Wall Street was targeting through methodologies that allow it (Wall Street) to increase its power and reduce competition, giving other professions less opportunities to even make an appearance at Ivy League schools or to gain the interest of some of the students, though these careers can draw much more attention if given the chance to