The Public Reception of Mark Twains Adventures of...

The Public Reception of Mark Twains Adventures of Huckleberry Finn Upon its publication in 1884, Mark Twains Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was met with mixed reviews. Some reviewers called it flat, trashy, and irreverent. Others called it Twains best work yet, hailing his humor and style throughout the novel. Though obscure at first, reviews began to appear in many newspapers throughout the country as more and more became interested in the novel as a result of these reviews. Huckleberry Finn was published at a time when the nation was deeply concerned about the effects of literature on young minds. Dime novels appeared in abundance, and had moved from western stories to more modern stories, like those of Pecks Bad Boy and His†¦show more content†¦More harsh criticisms pronounced the book irreverent and trashy. They claimed that the novel was completely without plot of moral. The novel, they claimed was fit for the slums rather than the intelligent, moral ranks of society. The novels greatest criticism, however, did not come in the form of a review. In March 1885, the Concord Free Public Library banned the book from its shelves because of its irreverence and lack of morality. One member of the committee which decided to ban the book was quoted as saying: I have examined the book and my objections to it are these: It deals with a series of adventures of a very low grade of morality; it is couched in the language of a rough, ignorant dialect, and all through its pages there is a systematic use of bad grammar and an employment of rough, coarse, inelegant expressions. It is also very irreverent. As news of the ban spread, more newspapers began to print editorials on the ban and the novel itself. Some papers encouraged the ban of the books, but many others found it amusing and laughable. Many papers printed editorials which made jokes about the bans. Some of the papers immediately printed editorials which joked that the Concord Free Public Library had given Huck Finn its greatest advertisement to date, saying that the ban wasShow MoreRelatedAn Analysis of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn3099 Words   |  12 Pagesï » ¿HUCKLEBERRY FINN The adventures of Huckleberry Finn is one of the finest works of Mark Twain and probably the most controversial too. This is because it is by no means an ordinary story of Huckleberrys adventures; it is essentially a social commentary on the slavery and post civil war era in the United States. T. S. Eliot in 1950 acknowledged the book as,  ¦the only one of Mark Twains various books which can be called a masterpiece. I do not suggest that it is his only book of permanent interest;Read MoreEssay on Mark Twain and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn2535 Words   |  11 PagesMark Twain and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn      Ã‚   Samuel Clemens was an American writer and humorist whos best work is shown by broad social satire, realism of place and language, and memorable characters.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Clemens was born November 30, 1835, in Florida, Missouri. His family moved to Hannibal, Mississippi when he was four. There he received a public school education. Samuel Clemens was a difficult child, given to mischief and mis adventure. He barely

SOCIAL SECURITY PRIVATIZATION Essay Example For Students

SOCIAL SECURITY PRIVATIZATION Essay Christian De ChurchProfessor ZeckMicro-EconomicsWhen President John F. Kennedy said Americans would be the first to walk on the moon, incompetent people said it could not be done. NASAs technology lagged years behind Russias and the Russians never did put a man on the moon. But Neil Armstrongs one small step made the dream reality. When it comes to visionary social policy, beware of those incompetent people who would reject a great plan simply because it means doing something for the first time. Take the farsighted idea of transforming our troubled Social Security system into a system of personal accounts. Conservative estimates show that workers who invested their payroll taxes in personal accounts would get 3 to 5 times more retirement income than Social Security provides (http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/articles/dao-12-02-98.html). The Cato Institute has a long history of seeking alternatives to the current Social Security system. Since1979 the Cato Institute has published more than 40 books, articles, and reports outlining the programs problems and crafting innovative policy solutions. Founded in 1977, the Cato Institute is a nonpartisan public policy research foundation headquartered in Washington D.C. The Institute is named for Catos Letters, libertarian pamphlets that helped lay the philosophical foundation for the American Revolution (http://www.cato.org/about/about.html). The Cato experts examine the problems facing our current system, the methods that can be used to move towards a system of personal retirement accounts, and the effects that a new system would have on American workers (http://www.socialsecurity.org/about/about.html). On August 14, 1995 the Cato Institute launched its Project on Social Security Privatization, the largest undertaking in the organizations history. The objective of the projec t is to formulate a viable blueprint for privatizing the Social Security system. Rather than paying taxes into a government-owned fund, workers should be allowed to redirect their payroll taxes into individually owned, privately invested accounts, similar to 401(k) plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA). But skeptics, fearful of change, have attempted to smother the infant in the crib by latching onto the issue of the administrative costs. Imagine, they say, the logistical nightmare, the paperwork, of managing 140 million individual accounts. No system to date has the capacity to administer such a system, said the Employee Benefit Research Institute. To be sure, no one knows exactly what the costs will be, but we have plenty of experience with a variety of retirement programs that indicates that we have no need to worry (http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/articles/dao-12-02-98.html). Rockets scientists did not know exactly how to put a man on the moon in 1965 either, but it did not take them very long to figure it out. Economic and financial experts have the knowledge, experience, and foresight to overcome the hurdles that are inevitable with any new programs. We will write a custom essay on SOCIAL SECURITY PRIVATIZATION specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now This current system is acting as a drag on economic growth in two important ways. First, the payroll tax distorts the supply of labor and the type of compensation sought by workers. These losses are inevitable because of the low return implied by the pay-as-you-go character of the unfolded Social Security system. Second, the system reduces national savings and investment. But even if Social Securitys financial difficulties could be fixed by raising taxes or cutting benefits, the system would still need to be reformed because it is a bad deal for most Americans. Social Security simply costs too much and pays too little. Social Securitys rate of return on payroll taxes is a dismal 2 percent and declining (http://www.socialsecurity.org/faqs.html). Privatizing Social Security, transforming it from an unfolded pay-as-you-go system to a system of private savings accounts, would solve both of these problems and increase economic growth. Conservative assumptions imply that Social Security privatization would raise the well being of future generations by an amount equal to 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) each year as long as the system lasts. Although the transition to a funded system would involve economic as well as political costs, the net present value of the gain would be as much as $10-20 trillion (http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp7es.html). .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 , .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .postImageUrl , .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 , .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:hover , .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:visited , .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:active { border:0!important; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:active , .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734 .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u7ed47db4e86662e9a3e2db18a40c2734:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Environmentsl Sys EssayWomen are known to be disproportionately dependent on Social Security benefits in their old age and because of longer life expectancy and employment patterns, an elderly woman is twice as likely to be living in poverty as is an elderly man. Although the Social Security system is gender neutral on its face, it produces some financial outcomes that place women at a disadvantage in retirement compared with men. The employment patterns of women, characterized by fewer years in the labor force, lower earnings, and more frequent job changes, translate into lower Social Security benefits. The dual-entitlement rules of the system often impose a penalty on wi ves and widows of two-income couples. The loss of up to 50 percent of a couples benefits at the husbands death throws every fifth widow into poverty. The privatization system in fact would offer tangible financial benefits to women because the higher rates of return would boost the retirement savings. (http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp12es.html)Middle Class America would enjoy the higher retirement benefit, improved economy, and personal ownership of a personalized retirement account. For example, take Middle Class Mike who is a thirty-five-year-old union worker who makes about $33,200, which is the average salary for a union worker. He can expect just $1,559 from Social Security. In a system of personal retirement accounts, Middle Class Mike would enjoy an account of $411, 052 with a 5.75 percent rate of return (http://www.socialsecurity.org/faqs.html). Low wage workers will also benefit from the personalized accounts with their minimum wage earnings. Low wage Larry, in a system of personal retirement accounts, is a 28-year-old earning $13,500 a year. He would get just $815 from Social Security but would receive $2,292 if he invested in a mixed personal fund that would earn a 5.75 percent return (http://www.socialsecurity.org/faqs.html). In Conclusion, Privatizing Social Security would lead to an increase in national saving, with hundreds of billions of dollars invested through individual accounts every year. Those investments, in turn, would substantially increase national investments, productivity, wages, jobs, and overall economic growth. In addition, privatizing Social Security would amount to an effective cut in payroll taxes, boosting productivity, and employment. Works Cited1) It Can Be Done. Social Security. Online. Available: http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/articles/dao-12-02-98.html. April 3, 2000. 2) About the Cato Institute. Online. Available: http://www.cato.org.about/about/.html. April 11, 2000. 3) The $10 Trillion Opportunity. Online. Available: http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp7es.html. April 3, 2000. 4) FAQs About Privatization. Online. Available: http://www.socialsecurity.org/faqshtml. April 3, 20005) The benefits of Social Security for Women. Online. Available: http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp12es.html. April 3, 2000