“Soon, you're going to have to move out!” cried my neighbor upon seeing the largest tomato plant known to mankind, or at least known in my neighborhood.

    One tiny 9-inch plant, bought for $1.25 in the spring, has already taken over much of my rose bed, covering much of other plants, and is well on its way to the front door.

    Roses require a good deal of care, and if it weren't for the pleasure they give, it wouldn't be worth the work. As it is, I have a garden full of sweet-smelling roses for most of the year. bushes must be pruned(剪枝) in early spring, leaving ugly woody branches until the new growth appears a few weeks later. It was the space available(可用的) in the garden that led me into planting just one little tomato plant. A big mistake.

    Soil conditions made just perfect for roses turn out to be even more perfect for tomatoes. The daily watering coupled with full sun and regular fertilizing(施肥) have turned the little plant into a tall bush. The cage I placed around it as the plant grew has long since disappeared under the thick leaves.

    Now the task I face in harvesting the fruit is twofold; First, I have to find the red ones among the leaves, which means I almost have to stand on my head, and once found I have to reach down and under, pick the tomatoes and withdraw(缩回) my full fist without dropping the prize so dearly won. I found two full-blown white roses completely hidden as I picked tomatoes in June, but they were weak and the leaves already yellow for lack of light.

    Here I am faced with a painful small decision: To tear up a wonderful and productive tomato plant that offers up between ten and twenty ripe sweet tomatoes each day or say goodbye to several expensive and treasured roses. Like Scarlett in Gone With the Wind, I'll think about that tomorrow.

    Have you ever been faced with trying to stay positive when others around you are negative? A negative person can bring you down and throw your positive plans out of the window. Whether you deal with a family member, friend or co-worker who is negative, there are things you can do to remain positive in the face of negativity?

    Whatever you do, don't argue with a negative person. Arguing only adds fuel to the fire. I have noticed when my children are crabby, it is best to avoid trying to convince them to analyze and adjust their attitude. As soon as I take the approach of being in opposition to them, the situation gets worse before it gets better. Sometimes the best thing to do is remain silent and let negativity pass.

    You know how difficult it can be to give love and positive attention to negative people. Unfortunately, that is often exactly what they need. A negative person is usually afraid he is unlovable. How do you show love when someone is negative? You must listen to what he is trying to tell you. Acknowledge the feelings he has by saying something like, “You sound very angry right now.” How might you help a negative person? Offer a hug even if you get rejected. A negative person often has difficulty accepting love from others.

If you have negative people on your life who are affecting your mental and physical health, you need to decide whether or not you want these people in your life. Some people are so negative that you have no other choice but to remove them from your life. However, some people, such as your children, are difficult to remove from your life, in this case, professional counseling(咨询) may be the answer.

    You can't imagine how terrible I felt at that time. A month before my first marathon, one of my ankles was injured and this meant not running for two weeks, leaving me only two weeks to train. Yet, I was determined to go ahead.

    I remember back to my 7th year in school. In my first P.E. class, the teacher required us to run laps and then hit a softball. I didn't do either well. He later informed me that I was "not athletic".

    The idea that I was "not athletic" stuck with me for years. When I started running in my 30s, I realized running was a battle against myself, not about competition or whether or not I was athletic. It was all about the battle against my own body and mind. A test of wills!

    The night before my marathon, I dreamt that I couldn't even find the finish line. I woke up sweating and nervous, but ready to prove something to myself.

    Shortly after crossing the start line, my shoe laces(鞋带) became untied. So I stopped to readjust. Not the start I wanted!

    At mile 3, I passed a sign: "GO FOR IT, RUNNERS!"

    By mile17, I became out of breath and the once injured ankle hurt badly. Despite the pain, I stayed the course walking a bit and then running again.

    By mile 21, I was starving!

    As I approached mile 23, I could see my wife waving a sign. She is my biggest fan. She never minded the alarm clock sounding at 4 a.m. or questioned my expenses on running.

    I was one of the final runners to finish. But I finished! And I got a medal. In fact, I got the same medal as the one that the guy who came in first place had.

    Determined to be myself, move forward, free of shame and worldly labels(世俗标签), I can now call myself a "marathon winner".

    Living in a foreign culture can be exciting, but it can also be confusing(令人迷惑的). A group of Americans who taught English in other countries recently discussed their experiences. They found that miscommunication was always possible, even over something as simple as "yes" and "no".

    On her first day in Micronesia, an island in the Pacific, Lisa thought people weren't paying any attention to her. The day was hot. She went into a store and asked, "Do you have cold drinks？" The woman there didn't say anything. Lisa repeated the question. Still the woman said nothing. She later learned that the woman had answered her: She had raised her eyebrows(眉毛), which in Micronesia means "yes".

    Jan remembered an experience she had in Bulgaria, a country in Europe. She went to a restaurant that was famous for its cabbage. She asked the waiter, "Do you have cabbage today？" He nodded his head. Jan waited, but the cabbage never came. In that country, a nod means "no".

    Tom had a similar problem when he arrived in India. After explaining something in class, he asked his students if they understood. They answered with many different nods and shakes of the head. He thought some people had not understood, so he explained again. When he asked again, they did the same thing. He soon found out that his students did understand. In India, people nod and shake their heads in different ways depending on where they come from. You have to know where a person is from to understand whether they mean "yes" or "no"．

    The new social robots, including Jibo, Cozmo, Kuri and Meccano M.A.X., bear some similarities to assistants like Apple's Siri, but these robots come with something more. They are designed to win us over not with their smarts but with their personality. They are sold as companions that do more than talk to us. Time magazine cheered for the robots that "could fundamentally reshape how we interact with machines." But is reshaping how we interact with machines a good thing, especially for children?

    Some researchers in favor of the robots don't see a problem with this. People have relationships with many kinds of things. Some say robots are just another thing with which we can have relationships. To support their argument, roboticists sometimes point to how children deal with toy dolls. Children animate (赋予…生命) dolls and turn them into imaginary friends. Jibo, in a sense, will be one more imaginary friend, and arguably a more intelligent and fun one.

    Getting attached to dolls and sociable machines is different, though. Today's robots tell children that they have emotions, friendships, even dreams to share. In reality, the whole goal of the robots is emotional trickery. For instance, Cozmo the robot needs to be fed, repaired and played with. Boris Sofman, the chief executive of Anki, the company behind Cozmo, says that the idea is to create "a deeper and deeper emotional connection ... And if you neglect him, you feel the pain of that." What is the point of this, exactly? What does it mean to feel the pain of neglecting something that feels no pain at being neglected, or to feel anger at being neglected by something that doesn't even know it is neglecting you?

    This should not be our only concern. It is troubling that these robots try to understand how children feel. Robots, however, have no emotions to share, and they cannot put themselves in our place. No matter what robotic creatures "say", they don't understand our emotional lives. They present themselves as empathy machines, but they are missing the essential equipment. They have not been born, they don't know pain, or death, or fear. Robot thinking may be thinking, but robot feeling is never feeling, and robot love is never love.

    What is also troubling is that children take robots' behavior to indicate feelings. When the robots interact with them, children take this as evidence that the robots like them, and when robots don't work when needed, children also take it personally. Their relationships with the robots affect their self-esteem (自尊). In one study, an 8-year-old boy concluded that the robot stopped talking to him because the robot liked his brothers better.

    For so long, we dreamed of artificial intelligence offering us not only simple help but conversation and care. Now that our dream is becoming real, it is time to deal with the emotional downside of living with robots that "feel".

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?

In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census's measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic wellbeing, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.

While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.

The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.

In 2005, as the authors observe: real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France's consumption with the U.S.'s overstates the gap in economic welfare.

Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97 % of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy's performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.

Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.