My dear friend Julia introduced me to a fantastic blog which has captured my attention. It's witty, wise, and pertinent to life, and I suggest checking it out when you get a chance. Here is the link: http://smartprettyandawkward.com/
Here are some of my favorites from smartprettyandawkward:
How to be (less) Awkward: If a boy takes you to the zoo, he likes you a lot. (truth. at least in my case. I adore anything outdoorsey, and what is cuter than a hot guy taking you to the zoo? Not much.)
How to be (less) Awkward: If you are going to have a facebook photo of you holding a small child, be sure to clarify in the caption whether the baby is yours, a niece/nephew, or a friend’s-to avoid confusion.
How to be Smarter: I really believe that one of the best compliments you can receive is “you’re fun.” Being called fun means that you are easygoing, reasonably humorous, cool to be around, social, chatty, and make others feel welcome and included. It is an all-in-one compliment. Trying to work to earn this compliment, and being generous in giving it out to those in your life who deserve it, is a great way to spend your days.
How to be Smarter: Don’t date boys that make a huge mess at the sugar/milk station at Starbucks and don’t clean it up themselves. People that make huge messes and expect someone else to clean it up, both at sugar/milk stations and in life, are to be avoided. (hahaha, I will NOT be someone's mother. unless, in fact, I actually AM their mother)
i also just really like this quote “If toast always lands butter-side down, and cats always land on their feet, what happens if you strap toast on the back of a cat and drop it?” — Stephen Wright
Goodnight, dear reader. Here's to being smarter, prettier, and (less) awkward. Although I believe a little awkwardness is good for the soul.
As I was studying for my epic economics final, I came across this lovely article "highlight" in my textbook. Naturally, I decided to transcribe it so all could bask in the glory. Enjoy.
"Suppose William Shakespeare gave up his job as a playwright to become the chair of the Federal Reserve System. In all likelihood, both the principles and practices of the FED and banking systems would be dramatically different.
Imagine Shakespeare writing his first position paper. His instruction to all banks would probably begin with: "Neither a borrower or a lender be, for loan oft loses both itself and friend and borrowing dulleth the edge of husbandry." Doesn't leave banks much room for creating loans, does it?
.....(blah blah blah, a bunch of math/formula stuff).....
With a reserve requirement of 100%, the bank has no excess reserves. It can make no loans. Without the ability to make loans on the strengths of its deposits, the banking system's money creation process grinds to a halt. And that's precisely what Shakespeare intended.
Shakespeare's 100% reserve requirement idea would probably not be the most ppular idea to hit the banking community....WHat would a Shakespere-run FED advise? Probably that would-be-borrowers should rely on their own savings, because using other people's money--borrowing from banks--"dulleth the edge of husbandry." Does such a FED option sound reasonable to you?
And even if most business people are prudent, regardless of whose money is involved, borrowing can end up being riskier than imagined. Shakespeare tells the story about Antonio, a Venetian merchant, who borrowed 3,000 ducats for 3 months from the moneylender Shylock. Unable to repay the loan because his own business ventures went awry--4 laden ships were lost at sea--Antonio would have forfeited his life were it not for a prejudicial court that, violating the spirit of the loan contract, ruled in his favor against Shylock....
...Shakespeare's FED presented the trade-off: monetary stability versus monetary creation--or in real terms, less GDP but less fluctuation in GDP."