Scroll through the page, or search it, to find past articles and stories that
may be of interest to you.
Noise Cancelling Headphones For Kids
Airplanes, trains and vehicles are challenging conditions for children. Once the action figures, books along with other assorted toys fail to amuse your boy or girl, you should have an iPad or other electronic device full of kid-friendly activities. And also make sure you have got a pair of kid-friendly headphones too -- preferably noise cancelling headphones.
When it comes to kids headphones, the kid-friendly advice is important. Based on a government survey, more than 12 percent of children ages six to 18 (close to 5 million children) have long-lasting problems because of exposure to high decibel sounds. Noise-induced hearing loss occurs whenever children were exposed briefly to a extremely loud noise or over time to noisy settings. Many MP3 devices max out at about one hundred decibels (dB), although some can achieve sound levels of up to 115dB, which is like standing 100 feet behind the engine of a jet airplane as it's about to take off. As per the National Institute on Deafness , past one minute of experiencing 105 dB treatens long lasting hearing loss, as can 15 minutes at 95dB or prolonged subjection at or above 80dB.
For a very young kid, such as a 2 or 3 year old, Kidz Gear Wired Headphones are a great pick. These traditional-style kids headphones possess a built-in volume control, fit the children comfortably and deliver good audio. There are also wireless models and noise cancelling models available for a bit more. The wireless models function with infrared-based car entertainment equipment.
A kid that's a bit older, such as a 6 or 7 year old, can be more stimulated and may tend to stroll around the home holding a video system. In this case you should make certain the kid is aware of his setting. A good solution here is the Mad Catz Airdrives Fit Interactive for Kids, which is ranked at a maximum of seventy-five dB within the inner ear. The speaker rests away from ear canal, so he can hear what is happening around him, and it's held in place by a wire that loops over the ear and is cinched for a perfect fit.
For an older youngster that may want to retire to her room with her music or video, an in-ear model is okay. For this case the Logitech Ultimate Ears Loud Enough Volume Limiting Earphones is one great choice. The earphone physically inhibits ambient sound, so she’s not enticed to crank the volume. In addition, the kids headphones themselves knock twenty dB off any audio source. A set of noise cancelling headphones is also a great option for this age group.
To check your young one's headphones and music player, try on the kids headphones and crank the player to maximum volume. Should you be unable to hear another person talking to you from the same room, the player is too loud. Experts in addition suggests taking periodic 15 to 20 minute breaks when listening at higher volume to let the inner ear recuperate.
Let's Here It For Anarchy
Left alone, good people tend to do good things. And, when unobstructed by coercion, force, violence or any other tool employed by the state in order to foster and maintain a more “responsible,” “socially conscious” citizenship, most people tend toward being good people…all on their very own.
Nowhere was this sentiment better expressed during the past few weeks than in the flood-stricken state of Queensland, Australia (and, more lately, in the state of Victoria, to Queensland’s south). The rains that inundated an area the size of France and Germany (combined!) across the Sunshine State wrought havoc and destruction upon its people. Lives were lost, property damaged and industry crippled.
When the worst of Mother Nature’s wrath had subsided, Queensland residents were left with a monumental clean up.
To their credit, these individuals, in the face of near-immeasurable disaster, performed admirably. They did what came naturally. Contrary to the patriotic rally cries of politicians, they didn’t do what Queenslanders do; they did what good people do. And it was beautiful.
The general feeling was perhaps best summed up by Wally “The King” Lewis, a retired national football hero, who spent the last week of his holidays helping his fellow Brisbane residents prepare sandbags and to bail rising flood waters out of their homes. (It is worth pointing out here that, for many Australians, there is no higher office to be attained in the land than that of venerated sporting legend.)
Speaking to National Nine News from the waterlogged front yard of a neighbor – whom he had never met – Wally said, “If someone’s doing it tough, I think it’s the right thing to do to put the hand up and ask them if they want any help.”
The interviewer then turned his microphone to another volunteer. “What was your reaction when Wally Lewis turned up?”
Typifying the laid back disposition of the crowd, the young man casually replied, “[Laughs] Yeah, I was a little surprised but…you know…people help out. It’s all good.”
The Australian people appeared to be perilously close to discovering something very important about themselves; something, perhaps, they’ve always known; an instinctual tendency toward human solidarity, the natural urge to help a neighbor in distress, to lend a hand; in short, to volunteer.
Alas, barely had the first piece of debris been cleared away when the media, as it typically does, lost sight of the bigger picture. Alongside inspirational stories of non-violent, voluntary cooperation, the local papers turned their attention to the state’s role in the cleanup. Should the state and federal governments remain focused on returning “their” budgets to surplus, or should they deploy funds to assist those in need of help? In other words, how “best” should the state spend its citizens’ money…as if the only just, honest option had not already expired on point of expropriation in the first place? [The answer, in other words, is not to steal it.]
While sifting through the news reports and reading comments about what the state “should” do, we wondered how people who are so ready to do what is natural, to cooperate freely with neighbors and “mates down the street,” could so miss the overarching lesson in all this tragedy. Why do hostages of the state turn to their captor when it comes to arbitrating issues of freedom, issues they are, individually and through voluntary cooperation, demonstrably capable of resolving for themselves?
Perhaps it has to do, at least in part, with the misrepresentation of the concept of anarchy itself; a misrepresentation that serves not the interests of individuals, but of the state itself. We are taught that “anarchy” means violence, looting and the aggressive form of chaos that all-too-often flourishes in the wake of natural disasters. We are told that this is what happens given the absence of state control. Nothing could be further from the truth. The state IS control. It is the very incarnation of force and violence from which it purports to protect us.
As Murray Rothbard, the man credited with having coined the term anarcho-capitalism, expressed in Society and the State:
“I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of any individual. Anarchists oppose the State because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.”
We can expect nothing more from an agent of force than that which is its primary, defining characteristic; namely, more force. A mule is no more capable of giving birth to a unicorn than the state is capable of “granting” freedom.