Too many vulnerable child-free adults are being ruthlessly (无情的) manipulated into parent-hood by their parents, who think that happiness among older people depends on having a grand-child to spoil. We need an organization to help beat down the persistent campaigns of grandchildless parents. It’s time to establish Planned Grandparenthood, which would have many global and local benefits.
    Part of its mission would be to promote the risks and realities associated with being a grandparent. The staff would include depressed grandparents who would explain how grandkids break lamps, bite, scream and kick. Others would detail how an hour of baby-sitting often turns into a crying marathon. More grandparents would testify that they had to pay for their grandchild’s expensive college education.
    Planned grandparenthood’s carefully written literature would detail all the joys of life grand-child-free a calm living room, extra money for luxuries during the golden years, etc. Potential grandparents would be reminded that, without grandchildren around, it’s possible to have a conversation with your kids, who—incidentally—would have more time for their own parents.
    Meanwhile, most children are vulnerable to the enormous influence exerted by grandchildless parents aiming to persuade their kids to produce children. They will take a call from a persistent parent, even if they’re loaded with works. In addition, some parents make handsome money offers payable upon the grandchild’s birth. Sometimes these gifts not only cover expenses associated with the infant’s birth, but extras, too, like a vacation. In any case, cash gifts can weaken the resolve of even the noblest person.
    At Planned Grandparenthood, children targeted by their parents to reproduce could obtain non-biased information about the insanity of having their own kids. The catastrophic psychological and economic costs of childbearing would be emphasized. The symptoms of morning sickness would be listed and horrors of childbirth pictured. A monthly newsletter would contain stories about overwhelmed parents and offer guidance on how childless adults can respond to the different lobbying tactics that would-be grandparents employ.
    When I think about all the problems of our overpopulated world and look at our boy grabbing at the lamp by the sofa, I wish I could have turned to Planned Grandparenthood when my parents were putting the grandchild squeeze on me.If I could have, I might not be in this parenthood predicament (窘境). But here’s the crazy irony, I don’t want my child-free life back. Dylan’s too much fun.

    Ask most people how they define the American Dream and chances are they’ll say, “Success.” The dream of individual opportunity has been home in American since Europeans discovered a “new world” in the Western Hemisphere. Early immigrants like Hector St. Jean de Crevecoeur praised highly the freedom and opportunity to be found in this new land. His glowing descriptions of a classless society where anyone could attain success through honesty and hard work fired the imaginations of many European readers: in Letters from an American Farmer (1782) he wrote. “We are all excited at the spirit of an industry which is unfettered (无拘无束的) and unrestrained, because each person works for himself ... We have no princes, for whom we toil (干苦力活)，starve, and bleed: we are the most perfect society now existing in the world.” The promise of a land where “the rewards of a man’s industry follow with equal steps the progress of his labor” drew poor immigrants from Europe and fueled national expansion into the western territories.
    Our national mythology (神化) is full of illustration the American success story. There’s Benjamin Franklin, the very model of the self-educated, self-made man, who rose from modest origins to become a well-known scientist, philosopher, and statesman. In the nineteenth century, Horatio Alger, a writer of fiction for young boys, became American’s best-selling author with rags-to-riches tales. The notion of success haunts us: we spend million every year reading about the rich and famous, learning how to “make a fortune in real estate with no money down,” and “dressing for success.” The myth of success has even invaded our personal relationships: today it’s as important to be “successful” in marriage or parenthoods as it is to come out on top in business.
    But dreams easily turn into nightmares. Every American who hopes to “make it” also knows the fear of failure, because the myth of success inevitably implies comparison between the haves and the have-nots, the stars and the anonymous crowd. Under pressure of the myth, we become indulged in status symbols: we try to live in the “right” neighborhoods, wear the “right” clothes, eat the “right” foods. These symbols of distinction assure us and others that we believe strongly in the fundamental equality of all, yet strive as hard as we can to separate ourselves from our fellow citizens.

    Public distrust of scientists stems in part from the blurring of boundaries between science and technology, between discovery and manufacture. Most government, perhaps all governments, justify public expenditure on scientific research in terms of the economic benefits the scientific enterprise ha brought in the past and will bring in the future. Politicians remind their voters of the splendid machines ‘our scientists’ have invented, the new drugs to relieve old ailments (病痛), and the new surgical equipment and techniques by which previously intractable (难治疗的) conditions may now be treated and lives saved. At the same time, the politicians demand of scientists that they tailor their research to ‘economics needs’, that they award a higher priority to research proposals that are ‘near the market’ and can be translated into the greatest return on investment in the shortest time. Dependent, as they are, on politicians for much of their funding, scientists have little choice but to comply. Like the rest of us, they are members of a society that rates the creation of wealth as the greatest possible good. Many have reservations, but keep them to themselves in what they perceive as a climate hostile to the pursuit of understanding for its own sake and the idea of an inquiring, creative spirit.
    In such circumstances no one should be too hard on people who are suspicious of conflicts of interest. When we learn that the distinguished professor assuring us of the safety of a particular product holds a consultancy with the company making it, we cannot be blamed for wondering whether his fee might conceivably cloud his professional judgment. Even if the professor holds no consultancy with any firm, some people many still distrust him because of his association with those who do, or at least wonder about the source of some his research funding.
    This attitude can have damaging effects. It questions the integrity of individuals working in a profession that prizes intellectual honesty as the supreme virtue, and plays into the hands of those who would like to discredit scientists by representing then a venal (可以收买的). This makes it easier to dismiss all scientific pronouncements, but especially those made by the scientists who present themselves as ‘experts’. The scientist most likely to understand the safety of a nuclear reactor, for example, is a nuclear engineer declares that a reactor is unsafe, we believe him, because clearly it is not to his advantage to lie about it. If he tells us it is safe, on the other hand, we distrust him, because he may well be protecting the employer who pays his salary.

    In many ways, today's business environment has changed qualitatively since the late 1980s. The end of the Cold War radically altered the very nature of the world's politics and economics. In just a few short years, globalization has started a variety of trends with profound consequences: the opening of markets, true global competition, widespread deregulation (解除政府对…的控制) of industry, and an abundance of accessible capital. We have experienced both the benefits and risks of a truly global economy, with both Wall Street and Main Street (平民百姓) feeling the pains of economic disorder half a world away.
    At the same time, we have fully entered the Information Age, Starting breakthroughs in information technology have irreversibly altered the ability to conduct business unconstrained by the traditional limitations of time or space. Today, it's almost impossible to imagine a world without intranets, e-mail, and portable computers. With stunning speed, the Internet is profoundly changing the way we work, shop, do business, and communicate.
    As a consequence, we have truly entered the Post-Industrial economy. We are rapidly shifting from an economy based on manufacturing and commodities to one that places the greatest value on information, services, support, and distribution. That shift, in turn, place an unprecedented premium on “knowledge workers,” a new class of wealthy, educated, and mobile people who view themselves as free agents in a seller's market.
    Beyond the realm of information technology, the accelerated pace of technological change in virtually every industry has created entirely new business, wiped out others, and produced a Pervasive (广泛的) demand for continuous innovation. New product, process, and distribution technologies provide powerful levers for creating competitive value. More companies are learning the importance of destructive technologies—innovations that hold the potential to make a product line, or even an entire business segment, virtually outdated.
    Another major trend has been the fragmentation of consumer and business markets. There's a growing appreciation that superficially similar groups of customers may have very different preferences in terms of what they want to buy and how they want to buy it. Now, new technology makes it easier, faster, and cheaper to identify and serve targeted micro-markets in ways that were physically impossible or prohibitively expensive in the past. Moreover, the trend feeds on itself, a business's ability to serve sub-markets fuels customers' appetites for more and more specialized offerings.

    Every week hundreds of CVs (简历) land on our desks. We’ve seen it all: CVs printed on pink paper, CVs that are 10 pages long and CVs with silly mistakes in first paragraph. A (S1)good CV is your passport to an interview and, ultimate, to (S2) the job you want.
    Initial impressions are vital, and a badly presented CV could mean acceptance, regardless of what’s in it. (S3)
    Here are a few ways to avoid end up on the reject pile. (S4)
    Print your CV on good-quality white paper. CVs with flowery backgrounds or pink paper will stand out upon all the wrong reasons. (S5)
    Get someone to check for spelling and grammatical errors, because a spell-checker will pick up every. (S6) mistake. CVs with errors will be rejected—it shows that you don’t pay attention to detail.
    Restrict your self to one or two pages, and listing any publications or referees on a separate sheet. (S7) If you are sending your CV electronically, check the formatting by sending it to yourself first. Keep up. (S8) the format simple.
    Do not send a photo unless specifically requested. If you have to send on, make sure it is one taking in a. (S9) professional setting, rather than a holiday snap.
    Getting the presentation right is just the first step. What about the content? The Rule here is to keep it factual and truthful-exaggerations usually get find out. And remember. (S10) to tailor your CV to each different job.

A Letter Declining a Job Offer