Tuesday, November 11, 2008

slate article

1. The links in this article help support the author's point by clarifying certain aspects and reasons for the arguement. For example, when the author points out that alleged plagiarist said something there is a link to the interview. I found this useful for a more complete understanding of the arguement. I found it effective when there was something that needed to be clarified like a conversation, but it was not as effective when the link was pretty much a definition. I think that I would definitely use links in my online arguement. It would be useful to be able to have link to some sites with statistics and arguements by experts to earn credibility.
2. I think that the way he organizes his arguement by stating a form of plagiarism then portraying the text in which the form was abused. I thought this was very effective because it is straight forward as to what is wrong. He used evidence from MLA texts and such to format this arguement. Not only did he use evidence but he used backing.

Alan Dershowitz essay

It is kind of funny because, while reading the essay, I realized that I agreed with everything that Mr. Dershowitz said. I said last week and I still believe that freedom of speech should not be taken away. It is not only a right guaranteed to us by the constitution but it has also become part of our society and government. Mr. Dershowitz said in his essay that he believes that there should be no censorship but speech should be subject to criticism. I completely agree with this just as I did last week. If something someone says deserves censorship then society will make distaste for the saying.

#5 on 173

The picture claims that the new GE train is the cleanest train that they have built. The reason for this is the fact that it is running by birds and wild and they are unarmed and happy. The qualifier is that the ad says "cleanest ever made" not the cleanest. The warrant for this is that the wildlife would not be around harmful things, therefore the train is clean. There is not much evidence to back this in the picture except for the common knowledge that animals do not stay by pollution.

Monday, November 10, 2008

#4 on 172

In my arguement essay on patriotism, I found that I did not really make a specific claim. Also, my warrant was kind of weak. I did have good reasons and backing, though. To fix these problems, I would make a specific statement of what patriotism is at the beginning and use the reasons to support it and to make a strong warrant.

Sunday, November 2, 2008

pictures for powerpoint







This displays the economic theory as to why unemployment would increase with the increase of minimum wage. It also demonstrates the equilibrium, which is where the graphs intersect.






This pie chart illustrates the fact that only a small amount of those earning minimum wage are single parents or single-earners for their family. This makes the sob story that minimum wage earners are supporting families seem a lot less relevant.






This is a humorous but good example of what happens in many small businesses when the minimum wage is hiked up again and again.

more sources

Rocheteau, Guilaume, and Murat Tasci.. "The Minimum Wage and the Labor Market." Economic Commentary (May 2007): 1-4. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Helmke Library, Fort Wayne, IN. 2 Nov. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25784296&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

This article uses economic principals to demonstrate the effects that minimum wage has on the economy and employment in general. It gives chart representations of these different effects. The charts are valuable visual information to support my argument. The authors demonstrate that in a competitive market such as ours, when minimum wage is raised more people are willing to work and less businesses are willing to hire. The authors assert that this leads to greater unemployment because less people can be employed. All of these statements support my stance that the market should be allowed to find equilibrium on a proper minimum wage.

Bartlett, Bruce. "Minimum Wage Is Bad Policy." Human Events 61.6 (14 Feb. 2005): 9-9. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Helmke Library, Fort Wayne, IN. 2 Nov. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=16116038&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

This article addresses the common misconception that raising minimum wage will make the lower class better off. He uses statistics to help him convey that most minimum wage earners are young and unskilled and 90% earn more after a year. He also shows that two thirds of minimum wage workers are employed by businesses with less than 500 workers. Since these businesses are so fragile if wage was increased they would suffer most. Small businesses create 75% of new jobs annually so a minimum wage increase would also be detrimental to job growth. This article also includes trends of previous hikes in minimum wage. It shows that unemployment decreases each time. These facts are concurrent with my views and help to support my argument with some substance.

Henderson, David R. "Minimum Wage + $1 = More Poverty." Fortune 138.7 (12 Oct. 1998): 66-66. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Helmke Library, Fort Wayne, IN. 2 Nov. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=1116604&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

This article is from 1998 but it is still credible because it discusses trends of unemploymentcaused by minimum wage increases. I learned new information from this article such as the fact that for every 20% increase in minimum wage unemployment rises by two to four percent. Also, this article discusses how census data shows that each time a state raises its minimum wage, within a year the amount of families in poverty rises by 4.5%. This author argues the debate should not be against raising minimum wage but abolishing it instead.

freedom of speech

I agree with both of the essays on free speech. In fact the government agrees with them because freedom of speech and expression is protected under the first amendment. Freedom to say what you really think is a great part of what this country was founded on; everybody has a right to be heard and say what is on their mind. “Hate speech” is just an extreme form of this. I believe that as long as what you are doing, saying, or portraying does not affect someone else’s right to do the very same thing then there should be no problem. If one is offended by a speech or a poster or a flag then they have the right to say so just as flagrantly as the person who said the first remark. Obviously, there are restrictions as with anything. For instance, primary and secondary schools often limit freedom of speech. Also, the government always holds the right to “use what you say against you” which creates a strong reason not to speak your mind.