I think it depends on a few factors. On one hand, having phones at school can be pretty distracting, especially if students are constantly checking social media or texting during class. But then again, phones can also be really useful tools for learning. They can help students look up information quickly, collaborate on projects, or even use educational apps. Plus, in emergencies, having a phone can be a lifeline for students to reach out to parents or guardians.

Phones have become a part of our society, work, economic, and political world. Having them out of high schools and colleges, in particular, would be rather far-fetched due to the technology these people are normally exposed to. Phones are also very distracting or addicting for students, causing them to periodically check their phones within 30-second intervals during or outside of class.

Personally, I think there's some merit to the argument that school starts too early for many students. Teenagers especially seem to struggle with early start times. Their bodies are wired to stay up later and sleep in, thanks to changes in their circadian rhythms during adolescence. There's actually been a fair bit of research suggesting that starting school later, say around 9 a.m. or so, could lead to better academic performance, improved attendance, and even reduced rates of depression among students.

A better question would be asking if school sessions last for too long since people typically wake up to work at around the same time students go to school. However, that question itself is rather similar to the original question because people with jobs or professions are often in working hours for longer than students. To note, an average day of school for a student is between 7 to 8 hours, what you could also call a "9 to 5" in working terms, also 8 hours. The difference between a "9 to 5" and the average school schedule is that hours are either pushed back or extended forward.

Absolutely, I think healthy food should be more affordable than junk food. It's a bit unfair that sometimes the cheapest options are the ones that are packed with sugar, salt, and unhealthy fats. This kind of pricing can make it really tough for people, especially those on tight budgets, to make nutritious choices for themselves and their families.

Absolutely. Health should be affordable, both food wise and healthcare wise. Obesity is a rapid problem in the United States, but most people don’t realize is the problem is the price of healthy food vs. junk food, not the will of the people. It also take time to prepare healthy food, and it perishes quicker. Not everyone has the privilege of affording time and affording to have food go bad.

I think it really depends on personal preference and the context of the story. Both good and bad characters can be incredibly compelling in their own ways. In many stories, it's the interplay between good and bad characters that really drives the plot forward and keeps us hooked. So, while both types of characters have their own allure, it's often the dynamic between them that makes a story truly captivating.

Both can be interesting depending on their backstories and motivations. Good guys' motivations and backstories are generally more developed, but villains' are often more interesting, leave more room for interpretation, and/or are more thematic for the narrative as a whole.

I think it's all about finding a balance that respects both the artists' creative rights and the fans' desire to capture and share their concert memories. As long as everyone's respectful of each other and mindful of the experience for everyone involved, I think there's room for both filming and enjoying live concerts.

Yes. I get the reason is that this is how the performers and theatre make money to have people come to the show and supporting artists is important and having videos maybe people won't buy as much. But some people can't afford to go to live concerts and the only way is bootlegs or other recordings people get at live shows. Maybe if there were official videos that people could get to after the live show so that people who can't get to the show can still enjoy parts of it, people would still go because there's a different feeling going to a live show than watching something on the internet.

Both? Like any tool, it can be used for good or for ill, depending on how it's wielded. The key is finding a healthy balance and being mindful of our own usage and the impact it has on ourselves and others.

Social media at its core is not meant to be harmful, instead marketed as a connecting software that allows for people to come together and share experiences. However, there certainly is a lot of dispute as to if this is truly the case. Cyber bullying and other problems can easily arise from such an expansive network of people and thus must be taken seriously by companies and users alike.

Absolutely. I think it's important for PE classes to be inclusive and accessible to all students, regardless of their abilities or interests. It's about promoting holistic well-being and helping kids develop the skills they need to lead healthy, active lives now and in the future.

Physical education should be required in schools for at least a trimester/semester, or another range of time since it can be considered a "health study", and is needed for students to understand ways to live a healthy lifestyle.

I think it's important for the media and the public to respect celebrities' boundaries and only delve into their personal lives to the extent that they're comfortable with. There's a fine line between healthy interest and invasive scrutiny, and it's crucial to err on the side of respect and empathy. After all, just because someone is famous doesn't mean they're not entitled to basic dignity and privacy.

The public should know only what the celebrity wants them to know. If a celebrity wants to tell their fans everything about themself, that's alright because it's what that celebrity chose to do. It's not okay to know more about someone's life than they want though.

It just depends on the situation. Sometimes music is great for getting me in the zone, and other times I just need some peace and quiet to get stuff done. It's all about finding the right balance for me.

Working in silence is the most effective and efficient way to get work done, your mind is set on one objective and that is to complete your work. When listening to music your mind may wonder off to people connected to the song, catchy lyrics, or more songs that sound similar.

While it might seem a bit excessive at times, I guess you could say that professional athletes are paid what the market dictates. Whether or not that's "too much" is really up for debate, I suppose.

This depends on the type of professional sport played. Professional athletes in sports with the mass majority of popularity will receive payments beneficial to most of their lifetime, while smaller professional athletes may still have to work 2-3 extra jobs in order to make a living.