If you read the news, you’ll often see one country compared to others using many different indices (measures; the singular is “index”). Many times, these indices have to do with political, economic, and social comparisons (looking for similarities and difference between two or more things).
I’ve come across an easy way for each of us to compare countries for a rough (approximate; not precise) idea of what it would be like living another country. If you visit the ifitweremyhome.com website, you can compare your country with another country using several common indices. First, look at the thin blue box in the center of the homepage to make sure the website has automatically determined (found; decided) that you’re in the correct country. Then, click on the name of any other country you see below.
The first thing you’ll see is a size comparison. For example, when I compare the United States with Japan, the outline (shape without the details) of Japan is superimposed (visually placed on top of) over a map of the United States, showing its relative (compared to each other) size. Then, I see a list of comparisons using several common factors.
The website uses several different sources of information for its data (information in numbers), but here are some definitions for common indices.
– Unemployment rate: The number of adults who don’t have jobs out of the total workforce (total number of people who can and are available to work).
– Infant mortality rate: The number of deaths of children under one year old out of every 1,000 live (not dead) births.
– Rates of incarceration: The number of people in prison out for every 100,000 people.
– Resource consumption: The amount of electricity, oil, and other resources people or households (everyone living in one home) uses.
– Murder rate: The number of people killed out of every 100,000 people.
– Birth rate: The number of live babies born for every 1,000 people.
There are others, but these are the main comparisons.
Try doing a few comparisons yourself. If nothing else (even if you don’t benefit any other way), the size comparisons between countries are interesting, at least they were to me. Are you finding any surprising results?
You may have heard of the Running of the Bulls (male cows) in Spain, especially the most famous in Pamplona, or seen it on television. This yearly event began many years ago to solve the problem of moving bulls from the corrals (a place to temporarily keep animals) to the bullring, where bullfights are held. The bulls are released from the corrals and allowed to run through the streets to the bullring. Foolhardy (taking unnecessary risks) – in my opinion – young people run in front of the bulls and try to get to the bullring before the bulls. Many are hurt every year. Occasionally some are killed.
The running of the interns (someone who works for a short time in a job in order to get experience), in Washington, D.C., solves a different problem and may seem a little crazy to some. But no one, as far as I know, has been hurt or killed.
The U.S. Supreme Court announces many of its decisions near the end of their yearly term (time of meeting) – in May and June. Some of the decisions are important enough to attract reporters from around the world.
Here’s the problem. The Supreme Court has banned (doesn’t allow) all recording devices – video cameras, audio (sound) recorders, etc. – from the Supreme Court building. Reporters sit in the press room and listen to the Supreme Court proceedings (series of things that happen). When the justices (judges) announce an important decision, reporters in the press room quickly write a report, print it, hand it to an intern, and the running begins. Every television network wants to get their report on air first.
The interns race down a short hallway and out of the Supreme Court building. They cross the courtyard (open area outside), dodging (moving quickly to avoid someone/something) tourists, protestors, and others until they make a hard (sudden) left turn at the sidewalk and sprint (run at full speed) the final yards (meters) to where they breathlessly hand the report to a reporter waiting in front of the television cameras.
The running of the interns is only for the young and fit (in good physical condition). It’s about a quarter of a mile – approximately 400 meters – from the press room to the cameras. And in June, it’s usually hot and humid in Washington.
The winning intern last week, when the Supreme Court announced its decision on Obamacare – the Affordable Care Act – was Lauren Langille from CNBC, an American television business news channel. Congratulations, Lauren!
Here and here are two articles – both with animated (action) photos – that will help you experience this year’s running of the interns.
~ Warren Ediger – ESL tutor/coach and creator of the Successful English web site, where you’ll find clear explanations and practical suggestions for better English.
I’m trying a little video experiment today. I decided today that instead of writing my blog post, I’d just shoot a little video. I did this first thing this morning, as I was drinking my morning coffee (and before I shaved, as you’ll see!). I love reading the newspapers when I drink my coffee, so I combined all of that with a little lesson about the English that appears in some of today’s headlines.
I recorded it on my iPad, edited in a video editing app right on my tablet (iMovie), then published it to YouTube. The whole thing took less time than it normally takes me to write a post, although I did have a little trouble getting the YouTube connection to work.
So, there you go! Tell me what you think.
UPDATE: I just realized that I misspelled the name of the U.K. Labor Party leader in the video. It should be “Miliband.”
Here’s a headline from a recent Wall Street Journal article:
Private Equity’s Latest Fix: Auto-Body Repair
A lot of newspaper headlines (titles of articles) are based on a “double meaning” of one of the words, where one word has two different meanings. Here the key word is fix.
The verb to fix means to repair, to take something that is broken (such as part of a car) and make it so that it works again, or looks the same as it did before.
But “fix” can also be a noun to describe something that you are addicted to, usually an illegal drug like cocaine or heroin. (To be addicted means you feel you MUST have something, even if it is causing you harm or injury.)
This headline is using both meanings of “fix.”
Let’s go back to the beginning of the headline: private is used here to refer to what does not belong to the government. (Things run by or owned by the government are called public.) Equity refers to money that people want to invest in something. (Remember to invest means to give money to someone in the hopes of getting even more money back.)
So private equity refers to people and companies whose main job is to invest money. This headline is telling us about one of the latest or most recent interests of these investment companies.
In the original article (paid subscription required), we read about equity firms (companies) buying auto-bodyrepair places. An auto is a car (from “automobile”). The body of an auto is the outside of it (not including the engine or the wheels, for example).
If someone hits you with his car, you need to get your car’s body repaired or fixed. Private equity companies are buying these repair “shops.” In fact, they are buying lots of them, almost as if they were addicted, as if they needed their “fix” of them. That’s the double meaning of “fix” in this headline.
The word shop doesn’t appear in the headline, but usually we refer to businesses that do auto body repair as repair shops. A shop can be a place you buy something, but another meaning of “shop” is a place where you get something fixed. We even sometimes say, “My car is in the shop” when we mean our car is being fixed by a mechanic at an auto repair shop.
So, to summarize: Some investment managers are interested in buying lots of small auto-body repair shops and combining them to form a large company with the hopes of making more money.
I just hope no one hits my car so I don’t have to use one.
As people get older, one of their biggest concerns is the loss of memory, of not being able to remember things. Most people know that keeping active is important, but not all activities are created equal (are the same; have the same results).
In a recent study about memory, groups of older adults learned new skills, either 1) quilting, a type of sewing activity where different pieces of fabric are sewn together to make a thick blanket called a quilt–see photo); or 2) digital photography, taking photos with a digital (electronic; using a small computer) camera.
The participants took memory tests before and after they learned these new skills, and their results were compared to other groups who had participated in enjoyable social or leisure (free time) activities, such as watching movies, listening to music, and playing easy games, but that did not involve learning new skills.
After three months of doing these activities for over 15 hours a week, the group that learned digital photography made the most improvement in the memory tests, perhaps because it was the more difficult of the new skills. It not only involved learning to use a digital camera, but also involved learning the photography software Photoshop and, for some, using a computer, since some of the participants had never used a computer before.
The psychologists (researchers studying the mind) who conducted the study believe that learning new skills helps to strengthen the connections in the brain. Learning new skills is better, they believe, than the games and computer programs marketed (sold) to older adults these days that tout (say is a benefit) improvement in memory. They say that those commercial (sold to customers) games only improve short-term (recent) memory to a small degree (a little bit), but learning new skills — such as learning a new hobby — helps to strengthen connections in larger portions (areas; sections) of the brain.
In the past 30 years or so, there have been many media (news) reports about the benefits of keeping active as we get older. Physical exercise is important and so, it seems, is exercising the mind. Picking activities that challenge (present problems and difficulties to solve) the mind garners (gets) the greatest benefits.
If you’re an older adult, do you have hobbies that challenge your mind? If you’re younger, what new skills would you like to learn when you retire and have more time?
The World Cup is in full swing (is already in progress), and millions of people around the world are watching their favorite teams compete (play against each other). Even here in the U.S., there are millions who watch soccer (or “football“). You can’t go to a bar here in Los Angeles – a city of immigrants, after all – without seeing a group of people gathered around (next to) a large-screen TV watching a game (and yelling or screaming).
To win the World Cup, you need talent and probably a little luck. But what if the World Cup were not decided by two teams kicking a ball on a field, but rather some other measure or factor?
For example, if we took the 32 countries that are competing in this year’s World Cup and decided to give the victory to the country with the biggest population instead of the best team, the winner would be the United States (with 318.9 million people).
Here, then, are the “winners” of what we could call Alternative World Cups, according to a recent article by the Wall Street Journal:
Highest population density (most number of people per square kilometer): Korea, at 468.8 people per square km.
Lowest population density: Australia, with 2.9 people per square km.
Fastest-growing population: Nigeria, with 2.8% yearly increase.
Slowest-growing population: Italy, with -2% yearly change.
Most traffic deaths: Iran, with 34.1 deaths per 100,000 people.
Fewest traffic deaths: England, with 3.7 deaths per 100,000 people.
Most murders: Honduras, with 90.4 murders per 100,000 people.
Fewest murders: Japan, with 0.3 murders per 100,000 people.
Longest life expectancy (how long you will probably live): Japan, at 84.5 years.
Most unmarried women ages 45 to 49: Brazil, with 44.6%.
Fewest unmarried women ages 45 to 49: Iran, with 12.6%.
Most tourists per person: Croatia, with 2.45 visitors per person.
Cellphones per capita (for each person): Russia, with 1.84 phones per person.
Biggest smokers: Greece, with 2,795 cigarettes smoked per person per year (that’s 7.6 cigarettes per day).
Biggest drinkers: Russia, with 15.1 liters per person per year.
Biggest meat eaters: Argentina, with 570 calories per day of meat per person.
Biggest vegetable eaters: Korea, with 179 calories per day per person.
Biggest sugar eaters: United States, with 569 calories per person per day (as much as an Argentinian eats in meat!).
Fattest: United States, with approximately 33% of the population classifiedas (considered) obese (seriously overweight).
What else could we use to determine the World Cup winner?
I have always thought that the five-second rule was stupid. The five-second rule is the belief that if food falls on the floor and you pick it up within five seconds, it’s safe to eat. Well, there’s actually some evidence now that shows that I may be wrong.
Researchers at Ashton University in the United Kingdom conducted a study in which they had students drop food on the floor, food such as toast (heated, crisp bread), pasta (Italian dish with noodles or other shapes made with flour), cookies, and candy. Then, they measured how much bacteria (very small living things that can cause illness and disease) gets on each type of food for different durations (periods of time) ranging from three to 30 seconds.
The longer the food remained on the floor, the more bacteria there was on it. How much bacteria gets on it depends on two other things.
Not surprising, wet foods pick up more bacteria.
Hard flooring also resulted in more bacteria. Tile (hard flooring in squares, made of material that has been baked) or laminate (hard flooring made of several layers of pressed material, usually made to look like wood) floors resulted in more bacteria on food than carpet (soft covering on the floor installed wall to wall).
However, the researchers say that this doesn’t mean it’s okay to eat off the floor, because your risk (chance of being harmed) depends also on what type of bacteria is on the floor at that time.
But these results are good news to most people. About 87% of people surveyed (asked questions for research purposes) in the study said that they ate food that had fallen on the floor.
Given (as a result of) these results, I will do my best to only eat dry foods while sitting on carpet, and not worry about the extra flavoring (something placed on food to enhance its taste) and garnish (something put on food to make it look more attractive) I get from that carpet if my food falls on it. Yum!
When we think of IDs (identification documents), we often think that having our photo on it makes it impossible for anyone else to use it. That’s not necessarily (100%) true.
A study published recently tested how well people spotted (identified; found) fake (not real or authentic) IDs, especially in real-world (true; actual) situations. For example, one place where you want to know if someone is using a fake ID is in an airport security line.
But in that sort of real-world situation, the person looking at IDs is unlikely to come across (see) many fake IDs. The overwhelming (by a large amount) majority of people use their real IDs at an airport.
And that’s precisely the problem. According to the results of this study, the less frequently a person comes across a fake ID, the less likely he or she is able to spot one. In the study, when the frequency of fakes was high, the study participants were wrong only 20% of the time. But when there were fewer fakes, they were wrong 40% of the time.
Part of the difficulty in using photo IDs to identify people is that people age (grow older), change their hairstyles, wear glasses or not, or wear make-up or not (cosmetics worn on the face to improve one’s appearance). In the study, many of the photos were taken months or years before the time of the study, which also match real-world conditions. In the U.S., many passports and drivers licenses are valid (acceptable by law or rule) for 10 years or more.
I recently renewed (extended the period for) my California driver’s license. When I got my previous license, it was good for (valid for) 10 years. I was able to renew my license for five more years using the government website without having a new photo taken. This means that at the end of the five-year period, my picture will be 15 years old. Without plastic surgery (medical procedures to improve my appearance) or a wig, I will look very different and much older than when I first had the picture taken back in the Clintonadministration (when Bill Clinton was president of the U.S.).
Who might be good at spotting fake IDs? In other words, what kind of person sees a lot of fake IDs as part of his or her job? One answer will not surprise you: bouncers, people hired by nightclubs and bars to keep out people who are underage (younger than the legal drinking age, usually 21) or who are causing problems. They encounter fake IDs all the time, especially here in the U.S.
Perhaps the solution is simply: Hire more bouncers as security screeners (people who check documents to be sure that person is safe to allow into a place)!
Wikipedia is a useful, though not always reliable (able to be trusted), source of information about people in the news, in history, and popular culture. Now, it may also become a place to go to find out what people sound like (the characteristics of their voice).
Recently, Wikipedia started soliciting (asking for) 10-second sound recordings for the people who have entries (individual pages) on Wikipedia. People and organizations are being asked to supply (give for use) open-licensed (with its use not restricted) and open-format (not restricted by file type) recordings that can be added to entries. The main request is that the recording include the notable person pronouncing their own name to show their own preference, since there is often disagreement.
So far, only a few Wikipedia entries have sound recordings. Among them are those of Emma Thompson, an English actress, and Dustin Hoffman, an American actor. But there are also voices of non-celebrities (people known in popular culture, usually from TV, films, and sports), such as English scientist Jane Goodall, Burmese political figure Aung San Suu Kyi, and American author John Updike.
Unfortunately, so far, there is no recording of Charlie Chaplin, but the project is still in its infancy (at its beginning; only just begun).
Whose voice from today or from history would you most like to hear?