Just Because I Went to Community College Doesn't Mean I'm Lazy

Too often I see people sneer at the thought of going to community college in lieu of a four year school after graduating.  I remember watching the movie Accepted and wondering why these kids were acting as though the concept of going to community college was worse than not going to college at all.  I don't understand where this mentality comes from.  The fact that they cost less and let almost anybody in does not mean the quality of their classes is any less that that of comparable classes at a four year school.  In fact, I believe my decision to put off going to a four year school and attend community college was the best decision I could have made at that point in my life.

Upon graduating,  I had the option of going away for college or attending a community college less that twelve minutes from my parents' house.  I chose the later, and obtained a two year degree.  This experience was very rewarding.  The professors were very talented, and some of the best educators I've had taught at this school.  One professor joked that we could fail his Calculus class three times for the cost of taking the equivalent at a four year school once.  While still not a good thing to fail a class, doing so for a third of the cost at community college would allow for less dedicated students to realize they need to work harder without losing out on as much financially.  They say college is not for everyone, and isn't it better to realize it at a cost of $1500 worth of tuition versus $10,000 worth of tuition and room and board at a different school.  The two year degree I obtained allowed me to transfer to any school, and the counselors worked with me based on the program I wanted to go into at a future four year school.  When I graduated with a bachelors degree from a four year school, I did so with zero debt.  I had to finance only two years at the more expensive school rather than four.  I also had the benefit of a couple more years working at my job in my hometown to build up my savings.  Community college gave me the head start I needed.  It is the end result that matters in the long run, not the means one uses to achieve it.

Why Do Credit Cards Get Such A Bad Reputation?

I guess it is about time I shared an opinionated blog post.  I don't set out to offend, and I doubt this post will offend.  I just wanted to put it out there that what I am about to share is my opinion and nothing more.

I often see people speaking negatively of credit cards.  Most recently, I noticed this on the message boards for Confessions of a Shopaholic, which was essentially a film about a young woman who abused her credit card (review coming soon).  I have no problem with people not using credit cards.  That is a personal choice, regardless of the reason behind it.  That said, it does bother me when people mention their non- use of credit cards in a way that implies that people who do use credit cards are idiots for doing so.

I believe that when used properly, a credit card can be a valuable tool.  There are multiple reasons behind this.  First off, credit cards will not charge interest on any charges paid off by the due date specified on the bill.  This allows for me to purchase items without being forced to carry cash, and I earn cash back in return.  Both of those are very major perks.  Last June my wallet was stolen.  I had a small amount of cash and a couple credit cards.  The cash was gone, but it was an amount significantly less than it would have been had I not been using credit cards for the majority of my purchases.  I promptly canceled all of my cards, and found that one was used for over $200.  I was not liable for one cent of it.  Had I been carrying cash instead, I would have been out $200.

Using my credit card also earns me cash back.  Up to 5% on certain purchases.  Many times, this 5% is available in a category I often purchase anyway, such as gas or groceries.  It could add up to an easy $20 dollars a month, just for buying the same things I'd normally use cash for.

Understandably, credit cards aren't for everybody.  Not everybody can be handed this magical card the allows them to buy as much as they want without paying upfront.  I can imagine that it could be easy to lose track of charges as well.  This is when credit card companies become the bad guy by charging interest.  It is their right, though, as they are loaning a user credit, which in the long run, the credit company is accountable for.  They are also known for changing their terms in a way that is unfair to the user.  This can also be avoided if the user is careful.

Honestly, in spite of the negative aspects, I find credit cards to be very useful.  I also know many people who have gotten themselves into trouble with credit cards, and have written them off with good reason.  Others choose not to use them for a wide variety of reasons, and I hold no objections to that.  On the other hand, I just don't like hearing comments such as "oh, this is why credit cards shouldn't exist" and the next time I pull out my plastic, I hope those who have negative opinions of credit cards don't assume I am up to my ears in debt, because that is far from the truth.

Readers:  No specific questions this time, I would love for you to share you thoughts

Some Finale Thoughts About the Twilight Series So Far

I promise, this is the last post for a minute about Twilight.  Seeing the second movie and reading the second book brought up a couple of items that I figured blog worthy.  I feel as though Meyer should be given credit for coming up with such a great idea and she delivers it effectively enough.  On the other hand, she seems to play around with the rules of the Twilight world to fit her convenience.  Also, the main character is makes me roll my eyes a little too much.  Disclaimer:  There may be some spoilers.

Vampires

If you're anything like me and you read Twilight you probably had a similar reaction to the "sparkle" scene. I was reading the book  I remember reading the book, getting past that point, and setting the book down for a minute.  I looked at the nearest person at the time and saind "Okay, so the real reason vampires can't go into the sunlight is because they're shiny?"  Meyer is turning vampires into the next unicorn.  According to mythology, a unicorn was an untamable beast.  The only thing that could calm it was a virgin maiden.  But they weren't pretty white horses either.  They evolved into that overtime.  Originally, the description of the unicorn was similar to that of a Rhino, which may be where the myth had come from.  In the last few decades, unicorns were found postered on the walls in pre-teen girls' rooms all over the place.  Sound familiar?  Now Edward Cullen is postered on the walls in pre-teen girls' rooms all over the world.  In Meyer's defense, authors have been changing vampires to fit their story for years, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  To me, the sparkling thing just took the vampires too far.  Even the bad vampires glitter.  What point does it serve?

Continuity

This became very apparent to me in the book New Moon. Meyer attempted to explain that Bella is immune to the special abilities of vampires.  This is why Edward and Aro couldn't read her mind, and Jane couldn't torture her.  If this is the case, than why can Alice see her future?  Or Jasper calm her emotions?  Because it works for Meyer's story, that's why.  Same can be said for Alice's lack of seeing Jacob when he pulled Bella out of the ocean.  If werewolves were made only to fight vampires, it makes sense that he may be immune to their powers.  Then we find out Edward can read Jacob's mind...

Bella

When I read the first book, all I could think of was how much of a jerk Edward was, and how I couldn't stand his controlling nature. Then I found a lovely little article on cracked.com that explained it totally isn't Edward, it is all Bella. 

 Feminists often attack Edward for being a condescending, misogynistic jerk towards Bella. They often cite that fact that he treats Bella like a doe-eyed dipshit that needs to be kept on a leash to stop her from trying to play with oncoming traffic. What these people fail to realize is that Edward's treatment of her stems not from the fact that she's female, but because her favorite hobby consists of trying to find new and exciting ways to get killed by household objects. One of Edward's earliest encounters with Bella consisted of rescuing her from becoming roadkill, and subsequent outings have consistently shown her to have the intelligence and dexterity of an apricot. Edward treats her as if she is constantly in danger, not because he's sexist, but because her own ability to detect trouble usually kicks in about half an hour after it's been and gone. He can hardly be blamed for being a bit protective at times - although it is unlikely that Darwin would approve of Edward fucking around with his gene pool so much.

I hated that she spent most of the second book all "woe-is-me" and what not.  Now, it probably is normal for a teenage to be sad for a couple weeks, and tear up at reminders for maybe even a month or two.  Bella had a hole in her stomach for four odd months or so after being dumped, and spent so much time talking about it in the book.  Isn't that how long she had been with Edward before the dumping happened?  Honestly, I'm kind of insulted.  I love my fiance plenty, but I wouldn't ride motorcycles or jump off cliffs just to hear is voice if he left me.

Well, in conclusion, I really sound like I hate Twilight.  I don't.  I'll read the next book, and enjoy it, but for crying out loud Bella, pick the werewolf.  He's closer to human, and it isn't like cuddling with a slab of granite.