(토요모임) [16. July. 2016] Saturday meeting topic

[Scarlet]

Howdy ! 

It's me Scarlett !   

This week we have 4 selections of topics. Do not be obsessed about all the articles too much. Just pick some articles what you have interests and prepare your opinions related to articles. :) 

◈ Living style : These next-level underwater villas are making waves

◈ Health : Short Answers to Hard Questions About Antibiotic Resistance

◈ Social value : Where Trust is High, Crime and Corruption are Low

◈ Social trends: Raising Kids and Running a Household - How Working Parents Share the Load

Hope you enjoy the topics. 

With luv 

Scarlett 

---

These next-level underwater villas are making waves

By Kate Springer, for CNN/ Updated 0554 GMT (1354 HKT) July 11, 2016

(CNN)From the Burj Khalifa to the Infinity Tower, Dubai is famous for its astonishing architecture. But the city's most innovative structures yet aren't reaching for the sky -- they're diving into the ocean.

Originally introduced at the Dubai International Boat Show in 2015, the Floating Seahorse villas are unlike anything you've seen.

For starters, the villas float like anchored boats -- albeit without listing from side to side.

And each three-story retreat features an entire floor submerged beneath the sea, with two enormous windows -- each measuring 269 square-feet (25 square-meters) -- that provide front-row seats to marine life.

"This is an original idea, to have a boat villa with a submerged floor where you can experience the feeling of stepping down into the master bedroom, be in contact directly with the walls, and see the reef, the marine life all around you -- you're surrounded by it," says the project's architect, Gianfranco Rasile.

A lifelong project

Designed and constructed by real estate and property development company Kleindienst, the villas are part of the Heart of Europe resort, which comprises six man-made islands, more than a dozen hotels, and the world's first climate-controlled streets.

Around 50 floating abodes will be ready at the end of this year, with a total of 131 villas expected by the end of 2017.

The chairman of Kleindienst, Josef Kleindienst, says he has been dreaming of these underwater retreats for more than 30 years. Surprisingly, the imaginative entrepreneur is not a diver or a sailor -- he's actually afraid of the ocean.

"I never go diving, or swimming even, but I have always been interested to see what's under the sea -- and why [people] go around the world to dive," he says.

Inspired by the mysteries of the deep, Kleindienst studied underwater projects for decades until he finally had the chance to bring his vision to life in 2008 as part of the "The World" -- an ambitious mega-development off the coast of Dubai that features 300 reclaimed islands that mimic a map of the globe.

"We started designing the villas in 2008 but the design changed several times. We could not find the 'wow' effect, so we started a competition. We invited architects from 10 different countries to submit ideas, and Gianfranco's theme was the one that really made us all say 'wow'," says Kleindienst.

It all hangs in the balance

You might expect the Floating Seahorse villas to bob up and down like a boat and cause sea sickness in a storm. But on board, it's unexpectedly still.

The project architect, Gianfranco Rasile says the architectural team grappled for months to achieve this neutral buoyancy. The work required careful calculations and dozens of trial runs in a simulated environment in Dubai Maritime City.

"People think it's sitting on the seabed," says Kleindienst. "But it's [anchored] at least 1.5 meters off the bed, and it's always going up and down every day with the tide movement."

As for the underwater windows -- at just 9.5 centimeters thick, it looks as if there's nothing between you and the fish.

However they're not made of glass, as that could not withstand the water pressure. Searching for a solution, the team looked to aquariums and submarines and used acrylic instead. As a result, the construction has crystal-clear views and the durability to withstand years in salt water.

"The Arabian Sea is very salty so we're really restricted in the material we can use," says Rasile. "Inside, if you look at the material we're using — it's teak and marble. You have to use materials that can resist the temperature and the salt in the atmosphere."

Under the surface

If you're familiar with the Arabian Gulf, you might be surprised to hear it is associated with abundant marine life. But Kleindienst planned ahead, creating his own underwater world.

"For several years we have been going to areas where construction is affecting coral reefs, and relocating them to the Gulf in order to save them," says Kleindienst. "We will have more than 100,000 corals across 2 million square feet of seabed."

With the coral came coral fish, and with the fish came predators. The Gulf is now teeming with marine life -- including the villas' namesake creature -- although the endangered species needed some help from marine biologists to breed.

"It's like a surprise in the ocean," says Kleindienst. "Sometimes it's turtles, many times barracudas hunting the smaller coral fish, groupers, and at least 30 different species that you can watch from the underwater rooms."

Scroll through the gallery above to see images of other floating homes from around the world.

Article source : http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/10/architecture/floating-underwater-villas/index.html?sr=fbCNN071116floating-underwater-villas0608AMStoryGalLink&linkId=26410957

---

<Questions>

Q1. How do you think about the concept of house under the water? 

Q2. When you are waking up, if there is a shoal of fish through the transparent window, how would you feel about that? How about your reaction to shark instead of a group of fish? 

Q3. What is your definition of home?

Q4. Where is the most attractive place to live for you? 

Q5. Could you find one of the most attractive landmark in your country? How about in your province or in your regional-level? Why you choose that? 

*** A landmark is a building or feature which is easily noticed and can be used to judge your position or the position of other buildings or features.

Q6. What kinds of building style do you prefer the most?

---

Short Answers to Hard Questions About Antibiotic Resistance

By SABRINA TAVERNISE, ERICA GOODE and DENISE GRADYMAY 27, 2016

The idea of people dying from infections that were once easily cured may seem outlandish. But it is happening already — taking about 23,000 lives in the United States a year — and experts warn that things will get worse because bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics faster than we can make new drugs to fight back.

We have ourselves to blame, for overusing the drugs in people and squandering them on livestock. Now, a dangerous form of drug resistance has reached the United States, leaving us just one step away from infections that are completely untreatable.

What are antibiotics?

Antibiotics are medicines that fight or prevent infection caused by bacteria. Antibiotics can’t fight viral infections such as cold and flu.

What is antibiotic resistance?

It used to be that infectious diseases were the biggest killers of Americans — illnesses like tuberculosis and pneumonia. The invention of antibiotics, which were developed for medical use in the 1940s, changed all that. But they became overused, and the bugs they were invented to fight started to develop ways of resisting them. For some years now, infectious disease doctors have been warning that unless we rein in use of antibiotics in both people and livestock, there will come a day when they will be powerless against the most ferocious bugs, turning the clock back to the early years of the 20th century.

What kinds of infections are caused by viruses and should not be treated with antibiotics?

Viral infections that should not be treated with antibiotics include:

• Colds
• Flu
• Most coughs and bronchitis
• Sore throats (except for those resulting from strep throat)
• Some ear infections; the illness can lead to serious disability or even death.

What is CRE?

CRE, which stands for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, is the most fearsome family of germs because it is resistant even to last-resort antibiotics.

The only drug that reliably treats CRE is colistin, an old and inexpensive drug that came on the market more than 50 years ago. This week researchers reported that they had discovered a gene in a bacteria that makes bugs resistant to colistin. It was found in a strain of E. coli in the urine of a patient in Pennsylvania. The patient was successfully treated, but if that gene makes its way into a strain of CRE, the bug would be unstoppable.

“We depend on colistin for the worst of the worst,” said Dr. James Johnson, a professor of medicine and an infectious disease expert at the University of Minnesota. “If it is knocked out, in most cases we really have nothing.”

Should I be scared?

Not yet. The discovery does not mean that an otherwise healthy person with a urinary tract infection is in danger of dying from it. (The Pennsylvania woman eventually recovered because her infection was treatable with antibiotics.) But the gene is mobile and can be picked up by other bugs — in sewer systems, in animal feed lots, in people’s guts or urinary tracts. That can make more bugs more resistant. The biggest worry is that a strain of CRE will pick up the gene. That could be devastating for anyone who is suffering from a CRE infection. “That is the combination we are all afraid of,” said Dr. Lance Price, a researcher at George Washington University.

For now, CRE is rare. The CRE germs cause about 600 deaths a year, usually strike people receiving medical care in hospitals or nursing homes, including patients on breathing machines or dependent on catheters. Healthy people are rarely affected.

How has antibiotic resistance changed medicine?

Dr. Johnson from Minnesota says the spread of resistant bugs means doctors are having to blast patients’ infections with increasingly stronger antibiotics. That has led to more patients coming in with infections caused by the C. difficile, a gut germ that flourishes when the patient has taken a lot of antibiotics. (The germ was estimated to cause almost half a million infections in the United States in 2011, and 29,000 people died within 30 days of the initial diagnosis.) Doctors now frequently send patients home with setups for intravenous antibiotics because pills no longer do the trick. Sometimes the specter of resistant infections can delay or cancel surgeries.

Why aren’t there more new antibiotics?

Most drug companies are not eager to make them. Compared with other drugs, antibiotics are not big moneymakers, and some manufacturers have gotten out of the business. Most people take antibiotics just once in a while, for a short time — unlike drugs for blood pressure, high cholesterol or diabetes, which most patients will take every day for the rest of their lives. When a new antibiotic comes out, doctors may hesitate to prescribe it, wanting to keep it in reserve for tough infections that older drugs cannot cure. Once the drug gets more widespread use, germs may become resistant to it, and doctors will quit prescribing it. So an antibiotic that required lots of time and money to develop may have a short life on the market. Infectious disease experts are working with Congress and the Food and Drug Administration to try to find ways to create financial incentives for drug companies to invest in making new antibiotics.

Is there anything I can do to protect myself?

A few simple steps can help reduce your risk of picking up a dangerous bug, says Dr. Brad Spellberg, chief medical officer for Los Angeles County+USC Medical Center. Wash your hands frequently. If you get sick, try not to use antibiotics. “What you should be doing is saying to the doctor, ‘Do I really need these antibiotics?’ ” he said.

Since hospitals are incubators of dangerous germs, if you end up in one, try to get out as fast as you possibly can. As for whether to avoid meat raised with antibiotics, Dr. Spelling says there is some evidence that such meat is more likely to have resistant germs, but those are avoidable with proper cooking.

Is there any real harm in taking an antibiotic for a cold?

There are several risks. An important one is based on the fact that healthy people normally carry billions of bacteria in their noses, throats, skin, genitals and gut. Antibiotics change the balance of those microbes, killing off susceptible ones and allowing drug-resistant ones to flourish. Even after a person finishes a course of antibiotics, the excess of drug-resistant bacteria can persist for months. If those drug-resistant bacteria find their way into the urinary tract — and normal gut bacteria are a common source of urinary infections — they can cause a drug-resistant infection that may be difficult to treat. In addition, people constantly pass bacteria — including drug-resistant ones — to their close contacts, so they may put others at risk.

Why are antibiotics given to livestock?

The vast majority of antibiotic use in the United States is in livestock —cows, pigs, chickens, sheep, even farmed fish — either for medical reasons, like treating or preventing disease, or to promote growth. Most of the antibiotics used for humans are also used for livestock, said Dr. Karin Hoelzer, a veterinarian and microbiologist at the Pew Charitable Trusts, who has extensively studied antibiotic resistance.

Antibiotics are believed by many in the food production industry to promote overall health, increasing the number of animals that can be sold for food and improving the quality of the meat.

How can the use of antibiotics in animals pose a risk to humans?

There are several ways. The genes that produce resistance to antibiotics can be easily transferred between bacterial species. So resistant bacteria can pass their resistance to other strains.

Humans can come in contact with resistant bacteria through eating insufficiently cooked meat or other food products: Manure from animals fed antibiotics is commonly used as fertilizer for crops. Farmworkers and people who work in slaughterhouses may also come in contact with the bacteria, providing an opportunity for genes to be exchanged.

Have bacteria resistant to the antibiotic colistin been found elsewhere?

Colistin-resistant bacteria have been found in humans or livestock in countries on every continent, including China, Malaysia, South Africa, Egypt, Italy and several South American nations. Scientists have also reported finding colistin resistance in CRE in some countries, said James Spencer, a senior lecturer in microbiology at Bristol University in England who was a co-author on a 2015 study that reported for the first time finding the colistin-resistance gene in a form that could be easily transferred to other bacteria. The study looked at the presence of the gene in food animals in China.

Has the Food and Drug Administration regulated the use of antibiotics in agriculture?

Under F.D.A policies that will take effect Jan. 1, antibiotics that are considered “medically important” for humans will no longer be approved for use to promote growth in livestock.

The policies also require that a veterinarian supervise the use of antibiotics in feed or water for livestock. Currently, many of the drugs are sold over the counter and do not require the involvement of a veterinarian.

Compliance is voluntary. But the 25 drug companies that manufacture about 283 antibiotics approved for use in livestock have all agreed to change their drug labels to reflect the requirements.

Some critics, however, say they are concerned that the new policies will leave loopholes that could allow food producers to circumvent them.

What else can I do to reduce the risk of antibiotic resistance?

Wash your hands with soap and water before you eat and after you use the bathroom. Regular hand washing will help keep you healthy and reduce the need for antibiotics.

How can I prevent antibiotic-resistant infections?

It is important to understand that, although they are very useful drugs, antibiotics designed for bacterial infections are not useful for viral infections such

1. Talk with your healthcare provider about antibiotic resistance:

   • Ask whether an antibiotic is likely to be beneficial for your illness
   • Ask what else you can do to feel better sooner
2. Do not take an antibiotic for a viral infection like a cold or the flu.
3. Do not save some of your antibiotic for the next time you get sick. Discard any leftover medication once you have completed your prescribed course of treatment.
4. Take an antibiotic exactly as the healthcare provider tells you. Do not skip doses. Complete the prescribed course of treatment even if you are feeling better. If treatment stops too soon, some bacteria may survive and re-infect.
5. Do not take antibiotics prescribed for someone else. The antibiotic may not be appropriate for your illness. Taking the wrong medicine may delay correct treatment and allow bacteria to multiply.
6. If your healthcare provider determines that you do not have a bacterial infection, ask about ways to help relieve your symptoms. Do not pressure your provider to prescribe an antibiotic.

How can healthcare providers help prevent the spread of antibiotic resistance? 

1. Only prescribe antibiotic therapy when likely to be beneficial to the patient
2. Use an agent targeting the likely pathogens
3. Use the antibiotic for the appropriate dose and duration

Articel source : http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/health/answers-antibiotic-resistance.html?_r=0

http://health.mo.gov/safety/antibioticresistance/faq.php

---

Antibiotic resistance: World on cusp of 'post-antibiotic era'

By James Gallagher/ Health editor, BBC News website/ 19 November 2015

The world is on the cusp of a "post-antibiotic era", scientists have warned after finding bacteria resistant to drugs used when all other treatments have failed.

They identified bacteria able to shrug off the drug of last resort - colistin - in patients and livestock in China.

They said that resistance would spread around the world and raised the spectre of untreatable infections.

It is likely resistance emerged after colistin was overused in farm animals.

Bacteria becoming completely resistant to treatment - also known as the antibiotic apocalypse - could plunge medicine back into the dark ages.

Common infections would kill once again, while surgery and cancer therapies, which are reliant on antibiotics, would be under threat.

Key players

Chinese scientists identified a new mutation, dubbed the MCR-1 gene, that prevented colistin from killing bacteria.

The report in the Lancet Infectious Diseases showed resistance in a fifth of animals tested, 15% of raw meat samples and in 16 patients.

And the resistance had spread between a range of bacterial strains and species, including E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

There is also evidence that it has spread to Laos and Malaysia.

Prof Timothy Walsh, who collaborated on the study, from the University of Cardiff, told the BBC News website: "All the key players are now in place to make the post-antibiotic world a reality.

"If MCR-1 becomes global, which is a case of when not if, and the gene aligns itself with other antibiotic resistance genes, which is inevitable, then we will have very likely reached the start of the post-antibiotic era.

"At that point if a patient is seriously ill, say with E. coli, then there is virtually nothing you can do."

Resistance to colistin has emerged before.

However, the crucial difference this time is the mutation has arisen in a way that is very easily shared between bacteria.

"The transfer rate of this resistance gene is ridiculously high, that doesn't look good," said Prof Mark Wilcox, from Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust.

His hospital is now dealing with multiple cases "where we're struggling to find an antibiotic" every month - an event he describes as being as "rare as hens' teeth" five years ago.

He said there was no single event that would mark the start of the antibiotic apocalypse, but it was clear "we're losing the battle".

The concern is that the new resistance gene will hook up with others plaguing hospitals, leading to bacteria resistant to all treatment - what is known as pan-resistance.

Prof Wilcox told the BBC News website: "Do I fear we'll get to an untreatable organism situation? Ultimately yes.

"Whether that happens this year, or next year, or the year after, it's very hard to say."

Early indications suggest the Chinese government is moving swiftly to address the problem.

Prof Walsh is meeting both the agricultural and health ministries this weekend to discuss whether colistin should be banned for agricultural use.

Prof Laura Piddock, from the campaign group Antibiotic Action, said the same antibiotics "should not be used in veterinary and human medicine".

She told the BBC News website: "Hopefully the post-antibiotic era is not upon us yet. However, this is a wake-up call to the world."

She argued the dawning of the post-antibiotic era "really depends on the infection, the patient and whether there are alternative treatment options available" as combinations of antibiotics may still be effective.

New drugs are in development, such as teixobactin, which might delay the apocalypse, but are not yet ready for medical use.

A commentary in the Lancet concluded the "implications [of this study] are enormous" and unless something significant changes, doctors would "face increasing numbers of patients for whom we will need to say, 'Sorry, there is nothing I can do to cure your infection.'"

Article source : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-conversation-africa/seven-hard-facts-about-an_b_8580356.html

http://climatedesk.org/2013/12/8-scary-facts-about-antibiotic-resistance/

---

<Questions>

Q1. What are antibiotics?

Q2. What do you know about Antibiotic resistance?

Q3. Do you think what caused the antibiotic resistance mostly? Human medical misuse or a large volume of antibiotics is inappropriately used in livestock?

Q4. Why are antibiotics given to livestock?

Q5. According to an article, Asia would have the biggest number of deaths attributable to antimicrobial resistance by 2050. Do you think Korean livestock use proper level of antibiotics? 

Q6. How often do you eat meat or eggs? Have you ever worried about antibiotic resistance? 

Q7. What can you do to protect yourself from antibiotic-resistance?

Q8. When you come down with any disease, do you usually inject antibiotics without questioning? 

Q9. If major global pandemic involving antibiotic-resistant superbug is spread out, how would you deal with it? 

Q10. How can I prevent antibiotic-resistant infections?

---

Where Trust is High, Crime and Corruption are Low

Since Communism's Fall, Social Trust Has Fallen in Eastern Europe

APRIL 15, 2008

by Richard Wike, Associate Director and Kathleen Holzwart, Research Analyst, Pew Global Attitudes Project

“Trust,” political scientist Eric Uslaner has written, “is the chicken soup of social life.”1 Over the last two decades, social scientists have repeatedly suggested that good things tend to happen in societies where people tend to trust each other — they have stronger democracies, richer economies, better health, and they suffer less often from any number of social ills.

As the 2007 Pew Global Attitudes survey highlighted, the degree of trust in societies varies considerably around the world.2 Moreover, while the survey finds that social trust is not strongly correlated with our measures of democracy or economic performance, it is strongly correlated with views about two other important issues: crime and corruption. In countries where people generally trust one another, there are fewer worries about crime or corrupt political leaders.

The survey also found that in Eastern Europe — a region where concerns about corruption are widespread — the tumultuous changes that followed the fall of communism have taken their toll on social trust. The percentage of Russians, Ukrainians and Bulgarians who believe most people are trustworthy has declined steeply since the early 1990s.

Chinese, Swedes Most Trusting

Among the 47 countries included in the 2007 poll, China had the highest level of social trust: Almost eight-in-ten Chinese (79%) agreed with the statement “Most people in this society are trustworthy.” Although no other Asian nation matches China’s score, levels of trust are relatively high in the region, with majorities in Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, and India saying most people in their respective countries can be trusted.

Swedes (78%) came in a very close second to the Chinese on the social trust scale. The results from elsewhere in Western Europe indicated something of a north-south divide — while most Swedes, Brits, and Germans said people in their countries are generally trustworthy, fewer than half in France, Spain, and Italy agreed. Meanwhile, Eastern Europeans tend to resemble their more southern neighbors on this issue. At 50%, Russians exhibited the highest level of trust among the Eastern European countries included in the study.

Trust also tends to run low in the Middle East, Latin America, and Africa, although in all three regions substantial variation is seen. For instance, while nearly six-in-ten Egyptians (58%) believed most people can be trusted, only 27% of Kuwaitis took this position. Similarly, in Latin America levels of trust ran from 51% in Venezuela down to 28% in Peru. Among African nations, Malians were roughly split between those who agree (49%) that most of their fellow citizens are trustworthy and those who disagree (51%), while Kenyans, with 25% agreeing and 75% disagreeing, were much more pessimistic in this poll, which was conducted several months before the outbreak of violence that followed last December’s contested presidential election.

Since Harvard’s Robert Putnam advanced his “bowling alone” thesis in the mid-1990s, numerous researchers have found evidence suggesting that America’s social capital has declined over the last half century.3 However, as the Pew survey demonstrates, when it comes to social trust (one indicator of social capital), Americans still compare quite favorably with other publics — 58% believe others in this society can be trusted. Only the Chinese, Swedish, Canadian, and British publics express greater levels of social trust.

Trust and Crime

High levels of social capital and social trust have been linked to any number of positive social outcomes, including low crime rates. Looking at research on crime in U.S. states and neighborhoods, Putnam finds that places with low social capital tend to be more dangerous. More recently, sociologists Steven Messner, Eric Baumer, and Richard Rosenfeld have found a link between a community’s level of social trust and its homicide rate.4 And, as data from the 2007 Pew survey demonstrates, there is evidence that the relationship between social trust and crime exists outside the U.S. as well.

As the figure below illustrates, in countries with high levels of trust, people are generally less likely to say crime is a very big problem for their country (the correlation coefficient for responses to the two questions is -.56). Most of the countries surveyed fit the overall pattern, including the United States, where concerns about crime are about where one would expect, given the relatively high degree of social trust.

There are, however, some outliers. For example, South Africans — who have been plagued by crime in recent years — are more concerned about crime than would be expected, based solely on their level of social trust. Meanwhile, crime fears are even less common in Sweden and China than their high levels of trust would have predicted.

Trust and Corruption

The 2007 Pew survey found that in countries where people generally trust one another, there is also more confidence in the integrity of political leaders. As the figure below shows, the relationship between trust and corruption resembles the one between trust and crime. The percentage of people rating corrupt political leaders as a very big problem tends to be lower in countries that have high levels of trust such as Sweden, Canada, and Britain (the correlation coefficient is -.54). On the other hand, in nations such as Nigeria and Lebanon, trust is rare and concerns about political corruption are widespread.

Again, there are outliers. Kuwait is both a low trust and low corruption society. Indonesia is a high trust, high corruption country. And the Swedes are once again even less concerned about corruption than their high score on the trust measure would predict (the question about political corruption was not asked in China, the only country to top the Swedes on trust). Meanwhile, Americans — who have witnessed more than a few high profile political scandals over the last few years — were slightly more concerned about corrupt politicians than would have been expected, based on their reasonably high degree of social trust.

Eastern Europeans also tend to be more worried about corruption than one might anticipate given the level of social trust in the region. In all six Eastern European nations included on the survey, more than half say the issue of corrupt political leaders is a very important problem facing their country. Concern runs especially high in the Czech Republic, where nearly eight-in-ten (78%) see political corruption as a very important problem — only Nigerians express more concern about this issue.

Trust Down in Eastern Europe, Up in West

In the years that have followed the end of communist rule, social trust has waned considerably in several former Eastern Bloc countries. Since the 1991 Pulse of Europe survey conducted by the Times Mirror Center for the People & the Press (a predecessor of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press), the percentage of people saying most of their fellow citizens can be trusted has declined by double digits in Bulgaria, Russia, and Ukraine. In 1991 — two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and just months before the final collapse of the Soviet Union — solid majorities in all three countries said most people could be trusted, but by 2007 these numbers had slipped to 44% in Bulgaria, 50% in Russia, and 47% in Ukraine.

The pattern has been quite different, however, in Western Europe, where social trust has increased significantly in France, Britain, and Italy. In 1991, both France and Italy scored quite low on this measure — only 33% of Italians and even fewer Frenchmen (29%) trusted most people in their countries. By 2007, these figures had risen to 41% in Italy and 45% in France, still generally lower than elsewhere in Europe, but significantly improved from the early 1990s. With the highest level of trust in Europe, the percentage of the British who agree that most people can be trusted has also increased significantly, jumping from 55% in 1991 to 65% in 2007.

Despite concerns about decreasing social capital, the degree of social trust in the United States is basically the same as it was in 1991. Then, 55% of Americans said most people in society can be trusted, compared with 58% who expressed this view in the 2007 poll.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Uslaner, Eric. 2000-2001. “Producing and Consuming Trust.” Political Science Quarterly. 115:4. ↩
2. The 2007 Pew Global Attitudes survey was conducted April-May 2007 among representative national samples in all countries except Bolivia, Brazil, China, India, Ivory Coast, Pakistan, South Africa, and Venezuela, where the samples were disproportionately or exclusively urban. For more details see pewglobal.org. ↩
3. See Putnam’s Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2000). ↩
4. Messner, Steven F., Eric P. Baumer, and Richard Rosenfeld. 2004. “Dimensions of Social Capital and Rates of Criminal Homicide.” American Sociological Review. 69:6. ↩

Article source : http://www.behaviouralinsights.co.uk/uncategorized/social-trust-is-one-of-the-most-important-measures-that-most-people-have-never-heard-of-and-its-moving/

---

<Questions>

Q1. How would you define trust? 

Q2. Do you trust your boy friend or girl friend? or How about your spouse? 

Q3. Do you trust your neighbors? How about your family members? 

Q4. Do you trust politicians? Can you find any politicians you trust? Why do you trust him?

Q5. Are you individualistic or collectivistic? 

Q6. Do you think you are a reliable person? 

Q7. Who is the worst person who you never trust? Why you do not trust him?

Q8. What is the most important value to live as a one good citizen in your region? 

---

Raising Kids and Running a Household: 

How Working Parents Share the Load

In Close to Half of Two-Parent Families, Both Mom and Dad Work Full Time

NOVEMBER 4, 2015

Family life is changing, and so, too, is the role mothers and fathers play at work and at home. As more mothers have entered the U.S. workforce in the past several decades, the share of two-parent households in which both parents work full time now stands at 46%, up from 31% in 1970. At the same time, the share with a father who works full time and a mother who doesn’t work outside the home has declined considerably; 26% of two-parent households today fit this description, compared with 46% in 1970, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of Current Population Survey data.

In economic terms, families with two full-time working parents are better off than other families. The median household income for families with two full-time working parents and at least one child under 18 at home is $102,400, compared with $84,000 for households where the father works full time and the mother works part time and $55,000 for households where the father works full time and the mother is not employed. But as a new Pew Research Center survey shows, balancing work and family poses challenges for parents. In fact, more than half (56%) of all working parents say this balancing act is difficult. Among working mothers, in particular, 41% report that being a parent has made it harder for them to advance in their career; about half that share of working fathers (20%) say the same.

The survey, conducted Sept. 15-Oct. 13, 2015, among 1,807 U.S. parents with children younger than 18, also shows that in two-parent families, parenting and household responsibilities are shared more equally when both the mother and the father work full time than when the father is employed full time and the mother is employed part time or not employed.1 But even in households where both parents work full time, many say a large share of the day-to-day parenting responsibilities falls to mothers.

About half (54%) of parents in households where both the mother and the father work full time say that, in their family, the mother does more when it comes to managing the children’s schedules and activities; 47% also say this is the case when it comes to taking care of the children when they’re sick. But most parents in this type of household say the mother and the father share tasks about equally when it comes to household chores and responsibilities (59%), disciplining (61%) and playing or doing activities with the kids (64%).

In households where the father works full time and the mother works part time or not at all, the distribution of labor when it comes to childcare and housekeeping is less balanced. These moms take on more of the responsibility for parenting tasks and household chores than those who work full time.

It is important to note, however, that there’s a significant gender gap in how mothers and fathers describe their household’s distribution of labor. Mothers in two-parent households, regardless of work status, are more likely to report that they do more on each of the items tested in the survey than fathers are to say their spouse or partner does more. For their part, fathers are generally more likely than mothers to say that these responsibilities are shared about equally. For example, 64% of mothers in two-parent households say that they do more than their spouse or partner when it comes to managing their children’s schedule and activities. And while many fathers (53%) concede that the mom in their household does more of this than they do, dads are much more likely than moms to say this responsibility is shared equally (41% vs. 31% of moms).

While mothers and fathers offer somewhat different views of the division of labor in their household, there is general agreement about who in their family is more job- or career-focused. For example, in two-parent households where the mother and father work full time, 62% say both are equally focused on work, while about one-in-five (22%) say the father is more focused and 15% say the mother is. Differences in the responses to this question between mothers and fathers in this type of household are modest.

In households where the father works full time and the mother works part time, a 63% majority, including 71% of fathers and 57% of mothers, say that, in their family, the father is more focused on his job or career than the mother; about a third (32%) say both are equally focused and 4% say the mother is more focused.

Across all two-parent households where both parents are employed at least part time, 59% say the father earns more than the mother, 17% say the mother earns more, and 23% say they earn about the same. Perhaps not surprisingly, 83% of parents in families where the father is employed full time and the mother is employed part time say the father earns more, while 3% say the mother does and 14% say they earn about the same. Yet, even in families where both parents work full time, half say the father is the top earner, while 22% say the mother is and 26% say they earn about the same amount.

Striking a Work-Family Balance Is Hard, Most Parents Say

For many working parents, balancing their jobs and their family obligations can be a challenge. Among all working parents with children under age 18, more than half (56%) say it is difficult for them to balance the responsibilities of their job with the responsibilities of their family, with 14% saying this is very difficult and 42% say it’s somewhat difficult.

Working mothers (60%) are somewhat more likely than fathers (52%) to say it’s difficult for them to balance work and family, and this is particularly the case for mothers who work full time. In fact, one-in-five full-time working moms say balancing the two is very difficult for them, compared with 12% of dads who work full time and 11% of moms who work part time.2

There is a significant education gap in attitudes about balancing work and family, with college-educated mothers and fathers much more likely than those without a college degree to say it is difficult for them to balance the responsibilities of their job and their family. Among working mothers with a college or post-graduate degree, 70% say it is difficult for them to balance work and family life; 52% of mothers without a college degree say the same. Similarly, among working fathers, 61% of college graduates say this is difficult for them, compared with 47% of non-college graduates. These differences hold even when controlling for the fact that college-educated parents are more likely to work full time.

There is also a racial gap in these attitudes. White parents are more likely than those who are non-white to say it is difficult for them to balance work and family.3 About six-in-ten (57%) white working fathers say this is the case, compared with 44% of non-white fathers. Among working moms, 65% of those who are white say it is difficult for them to balance the responsibilities of their job with the responsibilities of their family; about half (52%) of non-white working mothers say the same.

For working parents, attitudes toward balancing their job and their family life are highly correlated with their experiences as parents. For example, parents who say it is hard for them to strike the right balance between work and family are far less likely than parents who don’t to report that being a parent is enjoyable all of the time (36% vs. 50%). And by a narrower but significant margin, working parents who find it hard to balance work and family are also less inclined than those who don’t to say being a parent is rewarding all of the time (48% vs. 57%).

Overall, relatively few working parents (9%) say parenting is stressful for them all of the time. But a significant share say that parenting is stressful all or most of the time, and that sentiment is much more common among parents who say they have difficulty balancing work and family life (32% compared with 15% of those who say achieving a work-life balance is not difficult for them). In addition, four-in-ten (39%) of those who say it is hard for them to balance their responsibilities at work and at home find being a parent tiring at least most of the time; of those who say it’s not difficult for them to strike a balance, 23% say being a parent is tiring at least most of the time.

Few Say Being a Working Parent Interferes with Career Advancement

While balancing work and family life can be difficult for many working parents, the survey suggests that being a parent doesn’t necessarily interfere with career advancement. When asked if being a parent has made it harder or easier to advance in their job or career or if it has had no impact, a majority (59%) of working parents say it has not made a difference. Three-in-ten say being a parent has made it harder for them to advance at work, and one-in-ten say being a parent has made it easier.

These overall numbers mask the disproportionate impact women say being a working parent has on their careers. Mothers are twice as likely as fathers to say being a working parent has made it harder for them to advance in their job or career. About four-in-ten working mothers (41%) say this, compared with two-in-ten working fathers. And mothers who work part time are just as likely as those who work full time to say being a working mother has made it harder for them to move ahead in their job.

For working mothers who have a spouse or partner who is more focused on his job than they are, being a working parent may have more of an impact on career advancement. About half (48%) of working mothers who say their spouse or partner is more focused on his work also say being a parent has made it harder for them to get ahead at work. By comparison, 30% of mothers who say they and their spouse or partner are equally focused on their careers say being a working parent has made it harder for them to advance in their job.

Four-in-Ten Full-Time Working Moms Always Feel Rushed

Most parents, including at least eight-in-ten mothers (86%) and fathers (81%), say they feel rushed at least sometimes. But for many mothers who work full time, feeling rushed is an almost constant reality. In fact, four-in-ten full-time working moms say they always feel rushed, even to do the things they have to do; an additional 50% say they sometimes feel rushed and just 10% never feel rushed.

In comparison, about three-in-ten mothers who are employed part time or not employed say they always feel rushed (29% in each group). But while 61% of moms who are employed part time say they sometimes feel rushed, fewer of those who are not employed (49%) feel similarly. In turn, mothers who do not work outside the home are about twice as likely as those who do to say they never feel rushed.

Full-time working moms are also more likely than mothers who are employed part time or not employed to say they spend too little time with their children and to say they don’t have enough time away from their children to get together with friends or pursue hobbies or interests. And among those who are married or cohabiting, mothers who work full time are more likely than other moms to say they spend too little time with their partners.

Among Full-Time Working Parents, More Dads Say They Don’t Spend Enough Time with their KidsAbout four-in-ten (39%) mothers who are employed full time say they spend too little time with their kids, while 58% think they spend the right amount of time and just 3% say they spend too much time with their kids. At least seven-in-ten mothers who are employed part time (77%) or not employed (72%) say they spend about the right amount of time with their children, while 18% and 11%, respectively, say they spend too little time. About one-in-six (16%) mothers who do not work outside the home say they spend too much time with their kids; fewer (6%) of those who work part time say the same.

Among those who are married or cohabiting, 44% of mothers who work full time say they spend too little time with their partners, compared with 27% of moms who are employed part time and 34% of moms who are not employed. At least half in each group say they spend the right amount of time with their partners, while few say they spend too much time.

Fathers who work full time are no more likely than those who work part time or are not employed to say they always feel rushed (29% and 27%, respectively).4 But fathers who are employed full time are somewhat more likely than other dads—and more likely than full-time working moms—to say they spend too little time with their kids. Half of full-time working dads say this, compared with 41% of dads who are employed part time or not employed and 39% of full-time working moms.

When it comes to leisure time, about half or more of all parents—whether they are employed full time, part time, or not employed—say there’s not enough of it. Full-time working mothers are somewhat more likely than other mothers to say this is the case; about six-in-ten (59%) say they don’t have enough time away from their children to get together with friends or to pursue hobbies and other interests, compared with about half of mothers who are employed part time (48%) or are not employed (47%). Among fathers, the same shares of those who work full time and those who work part time or are not employed say they don’t have enough leisure time away from their children (53% each).

Who Does More?

Most parents who are married or living with a partner with whom they share at least one child say that, in their household, the mother does more than the father when it comes to certain tasks related to their children. In particular, roughly six-in-ten (59%) say the mother plays a larger role in managing their children’s schedules and activities, while just 5% say the father does more and 36% say the parents share this responsibility equally.

Similarly, when it comes to taking care of sick children, 55% of married or cohabiting parents say the mother does more than the father; just 4% say the father does more, and 41% say both parents share this equally.

Mothers also tend to take on more household chores and responsibilities; 41% of married or cohabiting parents say this is the case in their households, compared with just 8% who say the father does more. Half say they and their partner share household chores and responsibilities about equally.

The division of labor between mothers and fathers is more even when it comes to disciplining and playing or doing activities with children. A quarter of married or cohabiting parents say the mother plays more of a disciplinarian role in their families, while 15% say the father does, and 59% say both share this role equally. About as many (27%) say the mother does more when it comes to playing or doing activities with their children; 11% say the father does more, and 61% say both play or do activities with their children about equally.

In households where both parents work full time, mothers and fathers tend to share some responsibilities more equally. For example, about six-in-ten (59%) parents in these households say this is the case when it comes to household chores and responsibilities. Still, about three-in-ten (31%) say the mother takes on more of this, while 9% say the father does. And while 47% of parents in two-parent households where both the mother and the father work full time say they and their partner play about an equal role when it comes to taking care of sick children, the same share says the mother does this more than the father. Just 6% in this type of household say the father does more.

Parents in households where both parents work full time report that mothers are doing more than fathers when it comes to managing their children’s schedules and activities. Some 54% say the mother does more in this area, while 6% say the father does and 39% say parents share this responsibility about equally.

Perhaps not surprisingly, in households where the father is employed full time and the mother is either not employed or is employed part time, childcare responsibilities usually fall to the mother.

For example, about two-thirds of parents in these households say the mother does more when it comes to managing the children’s schedules and activities (69%) and caring for them when they’re sick (67%).

Perceptions of Division of Labor Vary by Gender

Mothers and fathers in two-parent households differ in their perceptions of how they split certain responsibilities. The gap is especially pronounced when it comes to household chores and responsibilities. Half of mothers in two-parent households say they do more than their partners in this area, compared with 32% of fathers who say their wives or partners do more. Fathers, for their part, are more likely to say they and their partners share household chores and responsibilities about equally: More than half (56%) say this is the case, while 46% of mothers agree.

Similarly, while about six-in-ten mothers say they do more than their partners when it comes to managing their children’s schedules and activities (64%) and taking care of their children when they’re sick (62%), fewer fathers agree that, in their households, mothers do more in each of these areas (53% and 47%, respectively). In these areas, too, fathers are more likely than mothers to say they and their partners share responsibilities about equally.

To varying degrees, these gender differences in perceptions of who does more are evident in two-parent households where both parents work full time as well as in households where the father is employed full time and the mother is employed part time or is not employed. Where there are differences, mothers are more likely to say they do more than fathers are to say that their partner does more, while fathers tend to say responsibilities are shared about equally.

Focusing on Career and Raising a Family

In households where both the mother and father are working at least part time, about half (52%) say that both are equally focused on their job or career. Where there is an imbalance, parents are nearly three times as likely to say that the father in the household is more focused on his career than the mother is focused on hers (35% vs. 13%).

Mothers and fathers in these households generally agree about who is more focused on work. For example, 10% of fathers say their spouse or partner is more focused on work and 34% say they are more focused. Among mothers, 15% say they are more focused on work, while 35% say their spouse or partner is.

Among full-time working parents with a spouse or partner who also works full time, most (62%) report that mom and dad are equally focused on their careers. Only 15% of parents in these households say that the mother is more focused on her job, and 22% say the father is more focused on his job.

The situation is much different in households where the father works full time and the mother works part time. A majority of parents (63%) in these households (71% of fathers and 57% of mothers) say the father is more focused on work than the mother is, while 32% say they are equally focused and just 4% say the mother is more focused than the father.

Among fathers in two-parent households, there is a significant racial gap in terms of how focused they say they are on their job compared with their spouse or partner. White fathers (39%) are much more likely than non-white fathers (19%) to say they are more focused on their career than their spouse or partner is. Among non-white fathers, a solid majority (69%) say they and their spouse or partner are equally focused on their jobs, compared with half of white fathers.

Who Earns More in Two-Parent Households?

Fathers Out-Earn Mothers in Most Two-parent HouseholdsWhile half of working parents say they and their spouses or partners are equally focused on their careers, the same is not true when it comes to compensation. Only 26% of parents in households where both parents work full time say they and their spouses or partners earn about the same amount of money. Half say the father makes more, and 22% say the mother makes more.

These findings are comparable to government data that show in 52% of married couples in which the mother and father worked full time, the father earned more in 2014. In 24% of these households the mother earned more, and in the remaining 23% the mother and father earned about the same amount. Fathers earned more in the vast majority of households (86%) where the father worked full time and the mother worked part time.5

In the Pew Research survey, among mothers in two-parent households, those who work full time (24%) are more likely than those who work part time (4%) to report that they earn more than their husband or partner. Even so, 44% of full-time working mothers in two-parent households say their spouse or partner earns more than they do; 32% say they earn about the same amount. Among part-time working moms, 78% say their husband or partner earns more than they do.

Similarly, working mothers with a college education are more likely than those who have not finished college to say that they out-earn their spouse or partner (23% vs. 8%). About half (51%) of college-educated working moms say that their spouse or partner earns more than them, and 25% say that they earn about the same amount.

In households where parents report that they are equally focused on their careers, half (50%) say that the father earns more than the mother. Some 18% say that the mother earns more in those households, and 30% say they earn about the same amount. In households where the father is more focused on his career than the mother, 84% say the father earns more, 5% say the mother earns more and 10% say they earn about the same amount. In families where the mom is more focused on her career than the dad is on his, a plurality (46%) say the mother earns more; three-in-ten in these households say the father earns more, and 24% say they earn about the same amount.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Throughout this report, mentions of Pew Research survey respondents in two-parent households refer to couples who are married or cohabiting and have at least one child under 18 together. ↩
2. The number of part-time working fathers in the sample is too small to analyze. ↩
3. White parents do not include Hispanics. Non-white parents include those who are Hispanic or any race other than white. ↩
4. Because only 43 fathers in the survey are employed part time and 78 are not employed, we are not able to look at these two groups separately. ↩
5. Based on the share of the couple’s salary and wage income in 2014 which was earned by the wife, among male/female married couples with children under 18 in the household. These data exclude the less than 1% of cases where neither the mother nor the father has positive wages or salary. ↩

Article source : http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/11/04/raising-kids-and-running-a-household-how-working-parents-share-the-load/

---

<Questions>

Q1. Would you like to work after your marriage? 

Q2. What is your priority in your lifetime for well-being?

Q3. Would you like to share house chores with your spouse after your marriage? 

Q4. Have you ever thought about using childcare leave after giving a birth?

Q5. Do you think which one is more important between working and having more time with your family members? 

Q6. Do you feel any difficulty in your career advancement while you are parenting your kids?