Serene state of mind

　　

1. Reportedly, after subscription fee of Public broadcasting was verified as legitimate at court, application for contract increased and income of Public broadcasting organization increased.
There is another argument source that whether it's appropriate to charge subscription fees to one-segment broadcasting viewers even if they don't have TV set at home.
But before that, a question to bring up: In the first place, is one-segment receiver necessary?
I thought first of all when I saw news about argument about subscription fees to one-segment broadcasting,
Simply because my old conventional cell-phone was equipped with one-segment receiver which I've never used.
As for this, the answer is simple; iPhone doesn't receive one-segment broadcasting, neither do some smartphones with Android.
Then, just select those mobile terminals if one-segment broadcasting is unnecessary, and it should be OK.
Not only one-segment broadcasting receivers, there are too many preset unnecessary apps and functions in smartphones and mobile terminal units.
-On the second thought, it's easier to delete unnecessary apps than searching and installing apps we want.

2. Reportedly, university entrance ratio is related with whether they can go to coaching school for entrance exam, which is one of the backgrounds of the relationship between university entrance ratio and economic polarization.
Of course, will and practice to study depend on each student.
Sometimes, attitude of parents and teachers can affect -for example, how they are supportive.
There can be unfortunate case that children in poor and unsettled family cannot concentrate on studying.
There are children who pass entrance exam without coaching school or corresponding course.
But if children cannot go to college -or sometimes high school -without extra money for coaching school or correspondence course or tutors,
　Does it mean that too far more than school-taught is on the test at entrance exam?
　　Is school education too far from entrance exam?
　　　-It can be a childish question.
As for me... when I was low-teen, Mother told me to go to coaching school.
I rebelled once, but I resigned myself to go to one.
As a result, this choice was right; in my class at school, many classmates mistook school as a place for social interaction, and their behavior in class was terrible.
So I might have fallen behind in my academic performance without coaching school.

3. When I heard the news about victory of the National Sports wrestler with professional name that came from a volcano in his home prefecture,
I recalled of an incident that the Mayor of the National Sports site town suddenly developed cerebral stroke during the speech on the ring, and two female nurses trespassed onto the ring for rescue, and a referee announced that women must step off the ring, which created even international controversy.
As for this, once I thought that they should allow only MEN to watch National Sports if they really want to and have to eliminate women -if they do such a thing, they spoil current popularity of National Sports, though.
One more artless question I had before this incident: If National Sports world is closed to women traditionally as they say, it looks like a contradiction that one of the administrative board members of National Sports association is female.
NOTE: What to question is anachronism of National Sports world, not this administrative board member's capability.
Now I approve with an opinion that the most amicable settlement is to allow ONLY wrestlers and referees to step on the ring.

◇：Ready to place translation if asked