DUE MONDAY, 10/26: Current Events Assignment
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Ms. Derstine
Oct 22, 2009, 8:24:07 PM10/22/09
to AP GoPo
A true understanding of history is demonstrated by your ability to
connect events across time and to recognize significant themes.
STEP 1. Find a news article in an online database (approved sources
are below). Read the article thoroughly. Post a 2-paragraph
response, using the guidelines below. BE SURE TO POST A LINK TO YOUR
ARTICLE!
In Paragraph 1, summarize the article using the prompts below.
Remember that to truly understand the article, you may need to do some
side research!
• Who is the article about? Who are the major players in this
issue?
• What event/issue is this article about? Explain the facts/
opinions of your article.
• When did the story take place? Does it have anything to do with
past events or issues?
• Where is this event or issue occurring?
• Why is this event happening? Is it interconnected with anything
else that is going on or has gone on in the past? What are the events
that have preceded and influenced this?
• How is this story significant? How does this article fit in
with a study of government?
In Paragraph 2, respond to the article using one or more of the
following prompts:
• What did you find interesting about this article? What did you
learn from the article?
• What are the implications of your article for you? Your
community? The US? The world?
• What questions do you have after reading this article?
• If this is mainly an opinion article, how would you respond to
the author?
• Predict what you think may happen as this article develops.
STEP 2: Post at least one thoughtful response to another classmate's
current events post, or continue a current events discussion.
connect events across time and to recognize significant themes.
STEP 1. Find a news article in an online database (approved sources
are below). Read the article thoroughly. Post a 2-paragraph
response, using the guidelines below. BE SURE TO POST A LINK TO YOUR
ARTICLE!
In Paragraph 1, summarize the article using the prompts below.
Remember that to truly understand the article, you may need to do some
side research!
• Who is the article about? Who are the major players in this
issue?
• What event/issue is this article about? Explain the facts/
opinions of your article.
• When did the story take place? Does it have anything to do with
past events or issues?
• Where is this event or issue occurring?
• Why is this event happening? Is it interconnected with anything
else that is going on or has gone on in the past? What are the events
that have preceded and influenced this?
• How is this story significant? How does this article fit in
with a study of government?
In Paragraph 2, respond to the article using one or more of the
following prompts:
• What did you find interesting about this article? What did you
learn from the article?
• What are the implications of your article for you? Your
community? The US? The world?
• What questions do you have after reading this article?
• If this is mainly an opinion article, how would you respond to
the author?
• Predict what you think may happen as this article develops.
STEP 2: Post at least one thoughtful response to another classmate's
current events post, or continue a current events discussion.
Bryan D.
Oct 22, 2009, 10:04:10 PM10/22/09
to AP GoPo
US jury awards $14m to Drumgold
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/10/22/jury_awards_drumgold_14m_in_compensatory_damages/?page=full
This article is about a man named Shawn Drumgold who was wrongfully
imprisoned for 14 years because he was supposedly the Killer of a 12
year old girl who was sitting on a mail box. Right now the court is
deciding who will actually pay his compensation of 14 million dollars.
The cop that withheld the evidence that could actually have set this
man free and proved him innocent or the courts of boston that actually
put him in the jail. Drumgold was let out and is being currently
debated over the people should actually give him the money because in
his court case in 1989 a police officer had broken his civil rights by
housing feeding and paying one of the key witnesses therefore making
the trial less than fair.. The story initially started in 203 when
Drumgold was let out of prison after serving 14 years for no reason
because he was never really proved guilty. This article is significant
because it ties into our rights that give us the right to a fair trial
that was broken by that one officer that really messed up the case.
What I found interesting about this is that this man was really locked
up for 14 years and their still debating on whether or not he is
getting the right compensation for his time. I would say that
compensation wasn't really that fair because we all know that jail can
really change a mans life things that a person shouldn't really see
even things that shouldn't even be heard by others but that's just
what I think. I believe that the courts should pay him more because he
is mentally and physically scared by jail now for a crime he probably
didn't even commit. For me this article implies that even though the
court systems are supposed to be fair and just they just cant be
because of the fact that so many people are being wrongly convicted by
a framing or more than just a misunderstanding. I believe that this is
more of a factual article because the people really had to do their
research to actually find out what happened in this case. I believe
that as this article goes on the man Drumgold will actually end up
getting less than 14 million dollars because the government will
actually try to tax him really hard because he beat them in their own
game.
- Bryan Davis
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/10/22/jury_awards_drumgold_14m_in_compensatory_damages/?page=full
This article is about a man named Shawn Drumgold who was wrongfully
imprisoned for 14 years because he was supposedly the Killer of a 12
year old girl who was sitting on a mail box. Right now the court is
deciding who will actually pay his compensation of 14 million dollars.
The cop that withheld the evidence that could actually have set this
man free and proved him innocent or the courts of boston that actually
put him in the jail. Drumgold was let out and is being currently
debated over the people should actually give him the money because in
his court case in 1989 a police officer had broken his civil rights by
housing feeding and paying one of the key witnesses therefore making
the trial less than fair.. The story initially started in 203 when
Drumgold was let out of prison after serving 14 years for no reason
because he was never really proved guilty. This article is significant
because it ties into our rights that give us the right to a fair trial
that was broken by that one officer that really messed up the case.
What I found interesting about this is that this man was really locked
up for 14 years and their still debating on whether or not he is
getting the right compensation for his time. I would say that
compensation wasn't really that fair because we all know that jail can
really change a mans life things that a person shouldn't really see
even things that shouldn't even be heard by others but that's just
what I think. I believe that the courts should pay him more because he
is mentally and physically scared by jail now for a crime he probably
didn't even commit. For me this article implies that even though the
court systems are supposed to be fair and just they just cant be
because of the fact that so many people are being wrongly convicted by
a framing or more than just a misunderstanding. I believe that this is
more of a factual article because the people really had to do their
research to actually find out what happened in this case. I believe
that as this article goes on the man Drumgold will actually end up
getting less than 14 million dollars because the government will
actually try to tax him really hard because he beat them in their own
game.
- Bryan Davis
Quesi James
Oct 26, 2009, 1:42:12 PM10/26/09
to AP GoPo
Quesi James
Current Eventz
Congress Considers Unemployment, Homebuyer Aid
This is about pending and future details that Congress and the House
will cover. This deals with the Health care legislations and the
Democrats of Congress pushing get 60 votes in order for this to pass.
Adding they are also pushing for a extension on unemployment
eligibility. Democrats are also trying to continue the homebuyer aid
that has been so successful. Congress will try to get all 3 passed
hoping it will jump start the economy.
Congress have many good ideas that they are attempting to address
this week all benefiting struggling families and all which they
believe will help the economy. The legislations effects a lot of
Americans on a broad scale the biggest one being the Health Care
legislation which are getting mixed reviews all over the country but
congress and President Obama seems determined that this goes through.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/congress-considers-unemployment-homebuyer-aid/
Current Eventz
Congress Considers Unemployment, Homebuyer Aid
This is about pending and future details that Congress and the House
will cover. This deals with the Health care legislations and the
Democrats of Congress pushing get 60 votes in order for this to pass.
Adding they are also pushing for a extension on unemployment
eligibility. Democrats are also trying to continue the homebuyer aid
that has been so successful. Congress will try to get all 3 passed
hoping it will jump start the economy.
Congress have many good ideas that they are attempting to address
this week all benefiting struggling families and all which they
believe will help the economy. The legislations effects a lot of
Americans on a broad scale the biggest one being the Health Care
legislation which are getting mixed reviews all over the country but
congress and President Obama seems determined that this goes through.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/congress-considers-unemployment-homebuyer-aid/
n.plaetzer
Oct 26, 2009, 5:06:41 PM10/26/09
to AP GoPo
Current events – “The Great Illusion”, New York Times, first published
August 15, 2008, recently focused as a highlight on nytimes.com
Capitalism between globalization and nationalism
Dear Mr. Krugman,
Thank you for your article “The Great Illusion”, in which you speak
about the conflict between nationalism and globalization as one of the
major problems in the energy policy of the 21st century. You give the
examples of the Caucasus war with its impact on oil shipments and the
use of energy supplies by Russia to put pressure on Ukraine. Moreover,
you quote John Maynard Keynes describing the global economy before
World War I as much more internationally orientated. Finally, your
conclusion is that the global economic interdependence is a fragile
system, which could lead to nationalist wars for resources. The trade
with nations that do not share “democratic values” should be somehow
be accompanied by governmental agreements about international trade.
First of all, the globalization, understood as an increase of
interdependence between all parts of the world, is a great chance for
the spread of liberty and justice in more and more countries: As
Milton Friedman showed in “Capitalism and Freedom”, increasing
economic freedom always leads to more political freedom in the long
run. This theory has been proofed a lot of times in history: After
World War II, the establishment of a free market system in Germany
created a boom (often called the “economic miracle”) which was a
milestone for the development of a free society after the Nazi regime.
The same process could be seen in a lot of East European countries
after the fall of the Berlin wall. Columbia university economist
Jagdish Bhagwati recently showed in his book “In Defense of the
Globalization” that the booming Indian economy helped achieving more
civil liberties – e.g. the beginning questioning of the caste system
as a result of economic advancement of Indian workers from lower
castes, including women. Capitalism provides also a perspective for
oppressed women in Islamic societies.
In your article, you warn against the nationalist use of resources but
offer the same nationalism as a solution: Why should governments
restrict the trade between free individuals in the name of freedom?
This is not only a contradiction in itself but also fatal in its
result. Instead of improving the standing of “democratic values”,
their further spread would be stopped. The goal of exerting pressure
on totalitarian regimes may work so that concessions in bilateral
cases can be achieved – but the price to pay for this, the immediate
stop of social liberalization, is high.
It is very interesting that Keynes sees the economy before WWI as a
good example for the globalization nowadays. Of course, it is right to
blame the “the projects and politics of militarism and imperialism, of
racial and cultural rivalries, of monopolies, restrictions, and
exclusion“ for the disasters of the last century. I also agree with
the theory that WWI was the starting shot of WWII and the Cold war in
its aftermath. But was this possible? Was it only based on a change of
the philosophy in foreign policy? You do not give an answer on this
essential question. 1913, one year before the beginning of WWI,
President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill to found the Federal Reserve
System as the American central bank controlling the value of the
dollar. Later, he said he would be “a most unhappy man”, who had
“unwittingly ruined” the country. In World War I, only 21 percent of
the cost were funded through taxation, the rest through Fed-backed
borrowing and money creation out of thin air – banks, to quote Thomas
Jefferson, are more dangerous than standing armies. Without the use of
the central banks’ money press, none of the big military conflicts of
the 20th century would have been possible.
Therefore, I totally agree with your point of view concerning the
danger of nationalism in general. Nationalism is an enemy of personal
liberty and a philosophy of hate – but trade restrictions are one more
nationalist answer, only coming from the other corner. The correlation
between war and central banking is also a point you totally
underestimate. I hope the American will change their views on the Fed
in the reappraising of the financial crisis and the Iraq war.
August 15, 2008, recently focused as a highlight on nytimes.com
Capitalism between globalization and nationalism
Dear Mr. Krugman,
Thank you for your article “The Great Illusion”, in which you speak
about the conflict between nationalism and globalization as one of the
major problems in the energy policy of the 21st century. You give the
examples of the Caucasus war with its impact on oil shipments and the
use of energy supplies by Russia to put pressure on Ukraine. Moreover,
you quote John Maynard Keynes describing the global economy before
World War I as much more internationally orientated. Finally, your
conclusion is that the global economic interdependence is a fragile
system, which could lead to nationalist wars for resources. The trade
with nations that do not share “democratic values” should be somehow
be accompanied by governmental agreements about international trade.
First of all, the globalization, understood as an increase of
interdependence between all parts of the world, is a great chance for
the spread of liberty and justice in more and more countries: As
Milton Friedman showed in “Capitalism and Freedom”, increasing
economic freedom always leads to more political freedom in the long
run. This theory has been proofed a lot of times in history: After
World War II, the establishment of a free market system in Germany
created a boom (often called the “economic miracle”) which was a
milestone for the development of a free society after the Nazi regime.
The same process could be seen in a lot of East European countries
after the fall of the Berlin wall. Columbia university economist
Jagdish Bhagwati recently showed in his book “In Defense of the
Globalization” that the booming Indian economy helped achieving more
civil liberties – e.g. the beginning questioning of the caste system
as a result of economic advancement of Indian workers from lower
castes, including women. Capitalism provides also a perspective for
oppressed women in Islamic societies.
In your article, you warn against the nationalist use of resources but
offer the same nationalism as a solution: Why should governments
restrict the trade between free individuals in the name of freedom?
This is not only a contradiction in itself but also fatal in its
result. Instead of improving the standing of “democratic values”,
their further spread would be stopped. The goal of exerting pressure
on totalitarian regimes may work so that concessions in bilateral
cases can be achieved – but the price to pay for this, the immediate
stop of social liberalization, is high.
It is very interesting that Keynes sees the economy before WWI as a
good example for the globalization nowadays. Of course, it is right to
blame the “the projects and politics of militarism and imperialism, of
racial and cultural rivalries, of monopolies, restrictions, and
exclusion“ for the disasters of the last century. I also agree with
the theory that WWI was the starting shot of WWII and the Cold war in
its aftermath. But was this possible? Was it only based on a change of
the philosophy in foreign policy? You do not give an answer on this
essential question. 1913, one year before the beginning of WWI,
President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill to found the Federal Reserve
System as the American central bank controlling the value of the
dollar. Later, he said he would be “a most unhappy man”, who had
“unwittingly ruined” the country. In World War I, only 21 percent of
the cost were funded through taxation, the rest through Fed-backed
borrowing and money creation out of thin air – banks, to quote Thomas
Jefferson, are more dangerous than standing armies. Without the use of
the central banks’ money press, none of the big military conflicts of
the 20th century would have been possible.
Therefore, I totally agree with your point of view concerning the
danger of nationalism in general. Nationalism is an enemy of personal
liberty and a philosophy of hate – but trade restrictions are one more
nationalist answer, only coming from the other corner. The correlation
between war and central banking is also a point you totally
underestimate. I hope the American will change their views on the Fed
in the reappraising of the financial crisis and the Iraq war.
n.plaetzer
Oct 26, 2009, 5:07:41 PM10/26/09
to AP GoPo
Here is the link to my article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/15/opinion/15krugman.html
Jessica Booker
Oct 26, 2009, 8:11:43 PM10/26/09
to AP GoPo
Jessica Booker
October 2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33470166/ns/business-small_business/
This article is about Obama addressing the fact that he believes
bigger banks should lend more money to small business because of how
tax-payers recently “bailed” them out. Obama believes they should
return the favor in high hopes that this will give the recession a
speeder finish. Small business owners are still unable to receive
credit even with the Obama administration working hard to pass new
laws and such to make their financial burden just a little bit
easier. "These are the very taxpayers who stood by America's banks in
a crisis, and now it's time for our banks to stand by creditworthy
small businesses and make the loans they need to open their doors,
grow their operations and create new jobs"(msnbc.com). President Obama
shakes his head at the fact that he tried to propose something called
Consumer Financial Protection Agency which (I think) would give
smaller banks more authority of how they run stuff so that they are
able to get back on track but to do this bigger banks must be of some
kind of assistance. Instead they worked through congress to try and
weaken it, when in fact those who are suffering helped them back on
top.
I found this article rather interesting because it really shows how
big banks regulate and get things done, which is not in a good way. It
opened my eyes to how the world is run on money and everyone wants it,
the bigger banks only got bailed out because of the tax-payers and
when tax-payers need help no one wants to be there for “us”. I always
read news articles or heard it on the news about how banks and fiance
industries step all over tax-payers but I thought it was exaggerated
apparently not though. I am very curious to see how this problem gets
fixed and if Obama will convince them to change and help out.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages