Some of you are still treading water in your posts. You should post the ideas you encounter over the course of your research and not simply tell me that you encountered ideas. No post will be necessary for next week, by thye way. Enjoy your break.
So far (now for my debate) I haven’t done anything after checkpoint II. There is a very simple reason for this. The checkpoint was today. Now you may think that I’m doing this right now because it’s still “fresh in my mind”. But as you can all see, I’m just doing this to get it over with before spring break. So before the checkpoint, the biggest thing I did to my debate was basically “start over” my outline. You guy are probably thinking “why the heck would you do that?” so I’m going to tell you. Before, my outline was so unorganized. Somehow, in my outline, I managed to make things like “the Olympics has very little racism but it is still a lot” more important than things like “there is a lot of terrorism going on in international sporting events and we can’t stop it”. So what Mr. Jarrell told me to do and what I did was redo my outline and just put a bunch of “criteria” down and say if the Olympics fulfill or don’t fulfill those criteria. The criteria I used were just basically plans of what the “international Olympic committee” is going to try to solve. Here are the criteria:
1.) To take action in order to strengthen unity
2.) To fight against doping (drug use)
3.) To ensure ethics of sport
4.) To promote a positive legacy from the Olympic Games to the host cities and host countries
5.) And to act against any form of discrimination
...So then i basically said whether these criteria are solved by the Olympics or not. For example, for the 2nd criteria in pro "To fight against drug use, i would say how the Olympics have not succeeded in banning drug use. I would use facts to back that up. Please comment on my format.
OKAY, now I'm really mad. That was the 2nd time the computer logged me out, and my long blog was deleted. Now I'm copying it.
CON REFORM: a) Cost: The government is already in more than $1 trillion debt. They really can’t afford to be paying subsidies, Medicaid, and Medicare. b) It will make small businesses pay more money and they might not be able to afford that. c) Doctors are able to charge more money for medicine and tests that aren’t needed for Medicare (65+ people)
d) Also, "kids" can stay on their parents coverage until they are 26. But some of the "kids" are still in college (or even out of college) and many have low-paying jobs. They aren't able to afford coverage without their parents support.
PLAN TO SOLVE REFORM: a) Higher the age of kids on their parents coverage so that no young person is without coverage. b) Higher the employee amount needed to pay health insurance for employees. This way, small business owners won’t have to worry about paying for insurance when they can’t afford it. If the number is amount is increased, it will only go towards larger businesses who can afford to give insurance. Amount of employees increased to 90-100. c) Reform should regulate the fees that doctors and hospitals give in Medicare.
I know I left out of my plan of how to fix government debt and spending too much on health insurance, but I can't think of anything that would't involve taxing or having the government KEEP spending. Both of them aren't that great. ANY IDEAS?
COMMENT: To Dhruv, since he's the only one posted.
I read your criteria, and I think that this format is a good idea.
I think, though, that you should clarify what you mean by some of your criteria terms like: "action" and "unity" what kind of action and how/what is unity and how will it happen?
"fight" against drugs. how will they fight against them?
"ensure" and "ethics" How will they ensure that and what does ensure mean (not a direct definition, but more related to topic) and what are the "ethics" of sport and how do they ensure them?
"Promote" and "positive legacy" What do they both mean and how will that happen?
"act against" and "discrimination" What kinds of action will be taken and what kinds of discrimination?
Also, I think you should say why your criteria are important to the Olympic games.
Comments: (My real blog is somehere up there ^^^ Alex:
What I'm getting from what you said in your summary is that we should start trying give people that can't afford Medicare insurance either family insurance, or do something to fix them having to pay, or something like that. I can't really explain it but this is not my debate. So anyway, i think that some of these are good plans but the one where you higher the amount of employees needed for insurance, this would create less employees having insurance and when i picture employees working at a small business, i also picture them having a small income, therefore, wouldn't that really also be bad for them to have to PAY now more for their own insurance?
Mohammad Kazmi We should withdraw forces from Afghanistan
From now and foward i haven't done much work because we just handed our debates in. I have been thinking and thought about obamas plan and how we have a bond with a government and by invading their country we are just ruining it. Alos for my con side im going to say we are helping them get rid of the terrorists because i'm sure they dont want terrorists there. Also Mr.J gave us some advice that i will use like U.S hate the Islamic religion and thats why they have been attcking Islamic counteries. Also for my con I can say we are the anly ones killing them by form of suicide bombing and by hurting there pride and costing them a lot of money. Also I'm getting my thoughts together about inocent people who are forced into terrorism by us the U.S so by us doing this we are making terrorists. For my con I will write that we dont kill inocent people terrorists kll inocent people. The terrorists families are living next to the inocent so if they do get bombed it makes U.S look bad. Again this is all from mr. J.(Good Looking out).
Dhruv I think you have good criteria and that point that terrorists can't be stopped is good but just because a bunch of people are together doesn't mean they will attack and also I think there is no abbsoulte racism.The Olymics are fair and just because everyone is judged on their performance.
So far, I have done 13 bibliography cards, 40 note cards, and 2 outlines. I will say my main arguments right now and what I will work on over break.
Pro: The deficit is heigh and the budget is unbalanced. I have to go into the details of why this is bad, but my plan is lowering spending and raising taxes. There are a lot of ways to attack this argument, I know, so I have to find something simpler than that. I know, for example that no President wants to be the one to raise taxees because people wouldn't like that President. That's why this plan is impractical. Although t is workable, I still need to find something simpler. Also, before even working on my outlines, I need to just research my topic because I don't think I know enough about it.
Con: My argument is that balancing the budget is unneccessary but I need to find more quotes from people and evaluate the evidence I already have. I am in pretty much the same situation as the pro, I need to research my topic more.
I know I need to work on my debate quite a bit over the break so I'll be sure to do that.
We are not suicide bombing we are jsut bombing. Also, I like what you added on the Islamic countries. It really does seem like we hate Islamic countries, but I think you should research more about that. Finally, what is Obama's plan. Is he against invading the country? it sounds like that was what you were going for, but I'm not completely sure. That's about it.
Jordana Rosenberg International Sporting Events Such as the Olympics Do More Harm than Good Week of March 29st - April 2nd
Over the past week I didn't find any new sources or information but I drastically lengthened my outlines and added 24 note cards. (I already wrote about what I learned.) I don't really have criteria and I already told you my basic outline, I mainly talk about all of the Olympics problems in Pro and how to fix them in con.
If any one has any article suggestions or ideas you have regarding my topic please don't hesitate to let me know.
Dhruv -
I think your criteria is very good and not confusing. I liked the way you choose to go with the project (criteria) even though I don't discuss this at all. IT WILL BE AN INTERESTING DEBATE!!!
Jaxx Ottinger,Whitey J/Bossman We should withdraw our forces from Afghanistan
Some new things that I looked up for my debate was how much it costed to send a lot of troops to Afghanistan. And this is one reason why John McCain and George Bush don't like Obamas plan. It cost 460 billion of dollars to 1 trillion of dollars depending on how much troops go. They argued that was way to much to send troops to Afghanistan. They also didn't like his plan because he said it would fail but is going to do it anyway. He also let the Afghanenes know when they were attacking which will afect them because Afghanistan will be ready when United States attacks.
My soureces from this checkpoint came from politifact and new york times. I have 10 all together. The sources do have something to do with my topic. Like they explain how Obams plan is bad and how we have to withdraw because their are too many civilians dying which leads to terrorist attacks.
Mr.J pointed out something that will help me with my debate. He said that when the person that dies in the battle, if they are a cilvilian their parent and family members are propbaly going to get really mad and maybe try a terroris attack so we have to withdraw because if civilians die their famly members will plan a terrorit attack. So I am trying to find some informaton on that.
Dhruve: You pretty much said that racism isn't important in sports. Just because it is not the most important it is still important. You can still mention it in your debate. The five reasons you gave for the olympics, you didn't even explain if they were bad or good. COME ON YOUR SLACIN PATEL. I EXPECTED BETTER FROM YOU.
"Remove the troops from Afghanistan" Morgan Falasca
I don't have many points to give you for this post, but I have come across another great point that I'd like to share. The point is that we are not really in a war at all with Afghanistan. A war means attacks on enemy country. We are not at war with Afghanistan then. We are at war the with Al Qaedas and Pakistan Talibans. Afghanistan is our allie and they are helping us attack, capture and kill the Al Qaedas and Talibans. Another great point was that, America is helping Afghanistan rebuild their country, therefore we ARE allies with the Afghan country and its Afghan people within... not the Al Qaedas and Talibans. When Mr. Jarrell brought up the topic in class, so I did some research about us killing innocent civilans was not being killed on purpose. It was not our fault, if an Al Qaeda has family and we find the Al Qaeda, they bring their family into it, and then innocent civilans are killed. It has to happen, so what? I am trying to find some good sources on this, so I will keep working on it.
To Jaxx/Mo: Mo- Like Mr. Jarrell said, that is a great point to share because maybe we don't want to withdraw so much because, even though we can't find most of them, we keep finding and killing those who are Al Qaedas or Talibans.
Jaxx- We are allies with the Afghanistan government, how are they going to be ready if we attack them... why would we attack them? I don't believe we would do that, even if Bush and McCain don't like the plan.
Dhruv K. Patel
ReplyDeleteOlympics Debate
So far (now for my debate) I haven’t done anything after checkpoint II. There is a very simple reason for this. The checkpoint was today. Now you may think that I’m doing this right now because it’s still “fresh in my mind”. But as you can all see, I’m just doing this to get it over with before spring break.
So before the checkpoint, the biggest thing I did to my debate was basically “start over” my outline. You guy are probably thinking “why the heck would you do that?” so I’m going to tell you. Before, my outline was so unorganized. Somehow, in my outline, I managed to make things like “the Olympics has very little racism but it is still a lot” more important than things like “there is a lot of terrorism going on in international sporting events and we can’t stop it”. So what Mr. Jarrell told me to do and what I did was redo my outline and just put a bunch of “criteria” down and say if the Olympics fulfill or don’t fulfill those criteria. The criteria I used were just basically plans of what the “international Olympic committee” is going to try to solve. Here are the criteria:
1.) To take action in order to strengthen unity
2.) To fight against doping (drug use)
3.) To ensure ethics of sport
4.) To promote a positive legacy from the Olympic Games to the host cities and host countries
5.) And to act against any form of discrimination
...So then i basically said whether these criteria are solved by the Olympics or not. For example, for the 2nd criteria in pro "To fight against drug use, i would say how the Olympics have not succeeded in banning drug use. I would use facts to back that up. Please comment on my format.
P.S. I will post my comments later
Alex
ReplyDeleteHealth Care
OKAY, now I'm really mad. That was the 2nd time the computer logged me out, and my long blog was deleted. Now I'm copying it.
CON REFORM:
a) Cost: The government is already in more than $1 trillion debt. They really can’t afford to be paying subsidies, Medicaid, and Medicare.
b) It will make small businesses pay more money and they might not be able to afford that.
c) Doctors are able to charge more money for medicine and tests that aren’t needed for Medicare (65+ people)
d) Also, "kids" can stay on their parents coverage until they are 26. But some of the "kids" are still in college (or even out of college) and many have low-paying jobs. They aren't able to afford coverage without their parents support.
PLAN TO SOLVE REFORM:
a) Higher the age of kids on their parents coverage so that no young person is without coverage.
b) Higher the employee amount needed to pay health insurance for employees. This way, small business owners won’t have to worry about paying for insurance when they can’t afford it. If the number is amount is increased, it will only go towards larger businesses who can afford to give insurance. Amount of employees increased to 90-100.
c) Reform should regulate the fees that doctors and hospitals give in Medicare.
I know I left out of my plan of how to fix government debt and spending too much on health insurance, but I can't think of anything that would't involve taxing or having the government KEEP spending. Both of them aren't that great. ANY IDEAS?
COMMENT:
To Dhruv, since he's the only one posted.
I read your criteria, and I think that this format is a good idea.
I think, though, that you should clarify what you mean by some of your criteria terms like:
"action" and "unity" what kind of action and how/what is unity and how will it happen?
"fight" against drugs. how will they fight against them?
"ensure" and "ethics" How will they ensure that and what does ensure mean (not a direct definition, but more related to topic) and what are the "ethics" of sport and how do they ensure them?
"Promote" and "positive legacy" What do they both mean and how will that happen?
"act against" and "discrimination" What kinds of action will be taken and what kinds of discrimination?
Also, I think you should say why your criteria are important to the Olympic games.
That's all. BYE
Dhruv K. Patel
ReplyDeleteComments: (My real blog is somehere up there ^^^
Alex:
What I'm getting from what you said in your summary is that we should start trying give people that can't afford Medicare insurance either family insurance, or do something to fix them having to pay, or something like that. I can't really explain it but this is not my debate. So anyway, i think that some of these are good plans but the one where you higher the amount of employees needed for insurance, this would create less employees having insurance and when i picture employees working at a small business, i also picture them having a small income, therefore, wouldn't that really also be bad for them to have to PAY now more for their own insurance?
Mohammad Kazmi
ReplyDeleteWe should withdraw forces from Afghanistan
From now and foward i haven't done much work because we just handed our debates in. I have been thinking and thought about obamas plan and how we have a bond with a government and by invading their country we are just ruining it. Alos for my con side im going to say we are helping them get rid of the terrorists because i'm sure they dont want terrorists there. Also Mr.J gave us some advice that i will use like U.S hate the Islamic religion and thats why they have been attcking Islamic counteries. Also for my con I can say we are the anly ones killing them by form of suicide bombing and by hurting there pride and costing them a lot of money. Also I'm getting my thoughts together about inocent people who are forced into terrorism by us the U.S so by us doing this we are making terrorists. For my con I will write that we dont kill inocent people terrorists kll inocent people. The terrorists families are living next to the inocent so if they do get bombed it makes U.S look bad. Again this is all from mr. J.(Good Looking out).
Dhruv I think you have good criteria and that point that terrorists can't be stopped is good but just because a bunch of people are together doesn't mean they will attack and also I think there is no abbsoulte racism.The Olymics are fair and just because everyone is judged on their performance.
Neil
ReplyDeleteBalance the Budget
So far, I have done 13 bibliography cards, 40 note cards, and 2 outlines. I will say my main arguments right now and what I will work on over break.
Pro: The deficit is heigh and the budget is unbalanced. I have to go into the details of why this is bad, but my plan is lowering spending and raising taxes. There are a lot of ways to attack this argument, I know, so I have to find something simpler than that. I know, for example that no President wants to be the one to raise taxees because people wouldn't like that President. That's why this plan is impractical. Although t is workable, I still need to find something simpler. Also, before even working on my outlines, I need to just research my topic because I don't think I know enough about it.
Con: My argument is that balancing the budget is unneccessary but I need to find more quotes from people and evaluate the evidence I already have. I am in pretty much the same situation as the pro, I need to research my topic more.
I know I need to work on my debate quite a bit over the break so I'll be sure to do that.
Neil
ReplyDeleteCriticism for Mo,
We are not suicide bombing we are jsut bombing. Also, I like what you added on the Islamic countries. It really does seem like we hate Islamic countries, but I think you should research more about that. Finally, what is Obama's plan. Is he against invading the country? it sounds like that was what you were going for, but I'm not completely sure. That's about it.
P.S.Have a nice spring break everyone!
Jordana Rosenberg
ReplyDeleteInternational Sporting Events Such
as the Olympics Do More Harm than Good
Week of March 29st - April 2nd
Over the past week I didn't find any new sources or information but I drastically lengthened my outlines and added 24 note cards. (I already wrote about what I learned.) I don't really have criteria and I already told you my basic outline, I mainly talk about all of the Olympics problems in Pro and how to fix them in con.
If any one has any article suggestions or ideas you have regarding my topic please don't hesitate to let me know.
Dhruv -
I think your criteria is very good and not confusing. I liked the way you choose to go with the project (criteria) even though I don't discuss this at all. IT WILL BE AN INTERESTING DEBATE!!!
Have a Good Break!
Jaxx Ottinger,Whitey J/Bossman
ReplyDeleteWe should withdraw our forces from Afghanistan
Some new things that I looked up for my debate was how much it costed to send a lot of troops to Afghanistan. And this is one reason why John McCain and George Bush don't like Obamas plan. It cost 460 billion of dollars to 1 trillion of dollars depending on how much troops go. They argued that was way to much to send troops to Afghanistan. They also didn't like his plan because he said it would fail but is going to do it anyway. He also let the Afghanenes know when they were attacking which will afect them because Afghanistan will be ready when United States attacks.
My soureces from this checkpoint came from politifact and new york times. I have 10 all together. The sources do have something to do with my topic. Like they explain how Obams plan is bad and how we have to withdraw because their are too many civilians dying which leads to terrorist attacks.
Mr.J pointed out something that will help me with my debate. He said that when the person that dies in the battle, if they are a cilvilian their parent and family members are propbaly going to get really mad and maybe try a terroris attack so we have to withdraw because if civilians die their famly members will plan a terrorit attack. So I am trying to find some informaton on that.
Dhruve: You pretty much said that racism isn't important in sports. Just because it is not the most important it is still important. You can still mention it in your debate. The five reasons you gave for the olympics, you didn't even explain if they were bad or good. COME ON YOUR SLACIN PATEL. I EXPECTED BETTER FROM YOU.
WHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA
"Remove the troops from Afghanistan"
ReplyDeleteMorgan Falasca
I don't have many points to give you for this post, but I have come across another great point that I'd like to share. The point is that we are not really in a war at all with Afghanistan. A war means attacks on enemy country. We are not at war with Afghanistan then. We are at war the with Al Qaedas and Pakistan Talibans. Afghanistan is our allie and they are helping us attack, capture and kill the Al Qaedas and Talibans. Another great point was that, America is helping Afghanistan rebuild their country, therefore we ARE allies with the Afghan country and its Afghan people within... not the Al Qaedas and Talibans.
When Mr. Jarrell brought up the topic in class, so I did some research about us killing innocent civilans was not being killed on purpose. It was not our fault, if an Al Qaeda has family and we find the Al Qaeda, they bring their family into it, and then innocent civilans are killed. It has to happen, so what? I am trying to find some good sources on this, so I will keep working on it.
To Jaxx/Mo:
Mo- Like Mr. Jarrell said, that is a great point to share because maybe we don't want to withdraw so much because, even though we can't find most of them, we keep finding and killing those who are Al Qaedas or Talibans.
Jaxx- We are allies with the Afghanistan government, how are they going to be ready if we attack them... why would we attack them? I don't believe we would do that, even if Bush and McCain don't like the plan.