The weekly assignment consists of five parts:
1) Read the two assignments. This week's first reading is from Michael Sandel's Justice. It is Chapter 1, and you can find it here. The week's second reading is from Rousseau's The Social Contract. These are excerpts, and you can find them here. If you want to print the readings out, you can after school.
2) Take Cornell Notes on the readings. This is the part we will start in class on Tuesday. I will collect these notes on Friday in class.
3) Find another credible source on the internet that connects to either/both of the readings above or to the class topic from this week ("What makes a society just?"). You can use any of the sites I have listed on the right, or more general news sites like nytimes.com. We will practice this in class on Wednesday.
4) After you read the source that you find, answer the following questions as a blog entry below:
- Write a summary sentence for the text you found.
- How does the text connect to that week’s topic or to the other text you have read?
- What evidence do you have that the text you found is credible?
- Does the author present strong evidence to support his/her argument? Provide an example.
- What would the author of your text say about the class text from that week?
- What would the author of the class text say about your text from that week?
Keep in mind that everyone else will see what you write below, so please keep it professional. This post is due Thursday, 9/13, by 5:00pm.
5) Come to class on Friday ready to discuss the two shared readings and the text you found!
If you need support or have questions, my office hours are Monday and Wednesday from 3:15-4:15 in Room 229.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jdnews.com/articles/purple-106144-medals-disagreements.html
ReplyDeleteThe text I found is about the continuing debate of whether a Purple Heart medal should be awarded to those who emotionally suffer just as much as those who have visible wounds or hurt physically.
This connects to partial parts of the first chapter of Justice by Michael Sandel. Sandel discusses the Purple Heart regulations, writing that the advocates of those veterans who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder insist that those soldiers should receive a Purple Heart like those physically suffered. Both texts suggest that traumatic disorders are more difficult to diagnose, therefore making it a non legitimate reason to receive this badge of honor, as well as decreasing the honorable status of the true meaning of the Purple Heart, and similarly the “rival conceptions of moral character and military valor.” Sandel suggest that those who insist that physical trauma is the only type of injury that should be honored believe that post-traumatic stress disorder is based on the person’s weak character, and unworthy of honor. Those who think otherwise believe they have sacrificed for their country.
This text is credible because it is from a daily news source, ‘JDNews,’ from Jacksonville, North Carolina. The writer, Amanda Wilcox, is identified as a daily news staff, which means she has done her research as a reporter to be able to write about the topic.
The author does present strong evidence. For example, she quotes the Executive Director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), Michael Fitzpatrick to begin a claim of acknowledging those with emotional suffering, “Troops with invisible wounds are heroes. It’s time to honor them.” On the contrary, she quotes members of the Beirut Chapter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH), who beg to differ, “I am completely against it. You would have to have some very strict guidelines for this to work.” As well as, “If they legitimize this and make (PTSD) a Purple Heart rewardable deal, it’s going to get out of hand,” from Purple Heart recipient MOPH Beirut Chapter senior vice commander, Grant Beck, and more. She also refers to the Department of Defense with hyperlinks.
The author of my text would say this issue would always be a debatable concern for those who emotionally suffer through war. Even though advisory groups have come together to discuss the question of whether or not honor should be awarded to those who emotionally suffer, the conclusion remains a no. It remains that only those who physically suffer receive the honor badge for their “great sacrifice” to their country. The author of my text would be surprised to see that the theme of who deserves the honor badge has a greater meaning to it about honor and virtue.
Sandel would be able to observe some actual evidence to both sides of the issue, and see what some advocates and representatives have to say about the issue. He would say that the article is missing some insight on the deeper meaning about what it would mean to receive an honorary title and how the government is not giving, some would say, the recognition that some veterans deserve.
-Ashley Prenza
The source I found online was an article written in the New York Times about the killing of Trayvon Martin. In this article, I learned that George Zimmerman, Trayvon’s killer, claimed to have been attacked by Trayvon and had no choice but to kill him in order to defend himself. This article (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-prompts-a-review-of-ideals.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all) was published in the prestigious New York Times, both online and in the newspaper. The New York Times is a widely popular newspaper throughout New York that offers credible, biased and unbiased articles on a vast amount of topics, ranging from U.S. and worldwide dilemmas to entertainment reviews. This article offers photographs and videos from reliable sources, such as the widely known press companies Associated Press and Getty Images, in the margins that correspond to events in the article in order to serve as proof that this isn’t just made up. The author of this article also uses statements from witnesses of the incident, such as Trayvon’s girlfriend and residents of the neighborhood, background information on the people involved in the incident, as well as background information on their families, and descriptions of the phone calls made to 911 at the time of the incident. This article reminded me of the “Runaway Trolley” section of chapter one in the book Justice, by Michael J. Sandel. This section discusses the right thing to do when none of your options seem to have positive outcomes. In the case of the runaway trolley, each of the solutions to the problem involved people dying, so readers are forced to think about moral principles. One of the moral principles stated in Justice that applies to both the runaway trolley and the Trayvon Martin case is that we should try to save as many lives as we can. Because of the many robberies occurring in Zimmerman’s neighborhood, it was no surprise that he thought Trayvon was suspicious as he walked by the houses on a rainy day with a hoodie covering his identity. To Zimmerman, stopping this young man from committing another crime in the neighborhood seemed like he right thing to do. His intention was to protect the lives of as many people in his neighborhood as possible. However, there is another moral principle stated in Justice that applies to this case when Zimmerman shot Trayvon. As stated in page 23 of Justice, when “confronted with a situation in which saving a number of lives depends on killing an innocent person, we face a moral quandary.” This makes me wonder if Zimmerman did the right thing. Although he didn’t know that Trayvon was innocent, it was still his job to protect the neighborhood and as an adult with a license to own a gun, it is also his right to defend himself with this weapon. But are all the people in this neighborhood so important that Trayvon, an innocent person, deserved to be killed? Is Trayvon’s life not as important the lives of the others? Zimmerman must not have thought of this if he resulted to murder instead of following the directions of a 911 operator to stand back and not follow Trayvon. The author of this article would agree with Micheal J. Sandel on the topic of the complexity of justice. He would agree on the difficulty of choosing a solution to the runaway trolley problem when none of them stand out as the most right thing to do. On the other hand, Sandel would most likely say that justice has not been served in the case of Trayvon Martin. He would argue that the police department has not maximized welfare in order to seek happiness for the greatest number of people because instead, people, as Sandel states in his article, “surged through the streets; and formed a flood of grief and outrage” because “a young man shot dead, and a month later, still no arrest.” Sandel would say that because no arrest had been made even after a month since the killing, justice had not been served.
ReplyDeleteWithin an article from the United Nation Children’s Fund (UNICEF) organization’s website, the issue of child recruitment by armed forces appeared to me as a topic that has significantly went against the ideas of human rights – a subject that Jean-Jacques Rousseau stresses heavily. As stated in his book, The Social Contract, Rousseau states, “Even if each man could alienate himself, he could not alienate his children: they are born men and free; their liberty belongs to them, and no one but they has the right to dispose of it.” In other words, individuals who have chosen to give or sell themselves away do not have the authority to do the same to other individuals; everyone makes their own decision(s) without the weight of another individual on top of them. If this is true, why then must individuals under the age of eighteen – as young as eight years old – have to fight within armed conflicts through forceful actions by armed groups? Child recruitment is the act of enlisting children into armed forces; anyone who hears such a phrase would know immediately just how inhumane and absurd it is. Sadly, it’s an actual event that has been going on for years, and is still seen today. Because of the fact that for the most part, these children are abducted and placed immediately into armies, it is clear that Rousseau’s statement has been contradicted. The freedom that Rousseau states we are born with along with the liberty that we own is no longer available for many children within countries that have faced several struggles such as Uganda, Rwanda, Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo; their human rights have been violated by a greater power, which in this case, threatens the child’s life both mentally and physically. For both the male and female recruits, their dignity is in a sense taken away from them based on what their controllers make them do. These children did not willingly choose to be taken away from their homes in order to fight battles and risk their lives – that decision had been made by the recruiters themselves. These recruiters serve as the individuals who have alienated themselves and aim to alienate others as well, which is exactly what Rousseau had spoke against. However, the children that had indeed chosen to go down that road did not chose to do so because they had wanted to, but mostly because they felt the need that they had to. The reason for this is because of their desperation to escape difficult circumstances such as poverty, abuse or discrimination that have been occurring within their lives. The fact that these children have to face a lack of freedom before and during their time in the armed forces explains the hardships that Rousseau explains happens within a society. Thankfully, organizations such as the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) have worked towards not only reducing the amount of child recruitment that occurs within conflict-stricken societies, but also towards removing children currently working for armed forces since the mid-1980s through the prestigious organization’s advocacies. By doing so, UNICEF is allowing these children to regain their liberty and their human rights without having a powerful authority over them – a chance to start again. I believe that Rousseau’s statements would definitely go hand in hand with the services that UNICEF provides for individuals in need, such as the guidance that is provided for the child soldiers located in troubled nations. Both the UNICEF organization and Rousseau’s statements about our rights as human beings have a clear connection: both have strong viewpoints on morality, and how our birthrights should be respected and honored.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.unicef.org/protection/57929_58007.html
In the op-ed "Troubled Minds and Purple Hearts" published in the New York Times by Tyler E. Boudreau; former Marine Captain and Iraq war veteran discusses his reasons why the Purple Heart medal shouldn't only be given to the physically wounded soldiers. He shows the point of view of the other side, to show us that the Purple Heart medal is only handed out to those with practically blood all over them. This article connects to this week’s text because in chapter one of Justice, Sandel introduces us to the idea of the Purple Heart medal and he cites the article Boudreau wrote in the New York Times. The text I found is credible because not only was it cited in the text we’re currently reading in class, but it was also published in the New York Times – a source we all trust very well. Also, the author was a marine captain and Iraq war veteran so he is basically a primary source. In my opinion Boudreau, does have strong evidence to support his argument. For example, “So why not recognize the struggles of these many individuals with a medal? Why, for instance, if a veteran has been given a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress and awarded benefits, should he not also be awarded a Purple Heart?” From this week in class, the author of my text would agree with the discussions we had because althouhgh they weren’t centreed around the Purple Heart medal, they were centered around justice vs. injustice which is what happened with the medal and the soldiers with psychological problems. From this week in class, the author of the text we’re reading in class would definitely agree with our discussions because although not in depth, we touched a lot of topics in chapter one; the chapter that we have read so far, and through the discussions, he will see that this class is college ready as well.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Trouble mindes and purple hearts" discuss the right for a soilder to recivie a purple heart(an honor given for wons reciced in battal)for physiological. This has to further do with virtue because is it legal for the government to say what is correct and who should get a purple heart based on the great ness of the solider wounds. Well Sandel will argue that its the jod of the govenment to make laws that will promote good morals. Which will be supported by both Aristotle and Rousoue, that for a socity to be successful the government should make laws to promote virtue. This believe goes against Boudreu idea that government not should decide virtue because they could change it to their benefit, that can be viewed by how who recived a purpule heart changed from soldiers that we wounded to only for those that had physical wounds. That Rousoe would look as government miss using their power becausr not all soldiers that were wounded were seen as equal because of what kind of injury they received at combat. In away governments is not taking in to account psychological wounds which is why there miss using there power because there saying what kind of injury is one worth rewording even thought many kill themselves because of the pist wat stress says Boudreau. Which Sandel will disagree with because if we want a stable socity then some chocies are lefted to the government about virtue.Thus there is not one clear solution but government makes laws to insure sour society is morality sound which are some times not the best.
ReplyDeleteThe source I found online was an article written in The New York Times called “Hurricane Charley: The Economics; With Storm Gone, Floridians Are Hit With Price Gouging” by Joseph B. Treaster. This article is about Florida victims of the storm that are not content with price gouging on resources. This article relates to Sandel’s novel Justice because in the first chapter Sandel explains this same event of Hurricane Charley in Florida and how Floridians are upset by the high amount of money they have to pay for their necessities. These include bags of ice, staying in a hotel room, oil at the gas station, and the damages on their homes such as trees on their rooftops. Sandel clarifies that with pricing above the market price where there is no other retailer available, a society is not just. Treaster agrees because in the article he writes that one Floridian claimed “Of course it angers me. They see an opportunity and, fine, if you want to make a little money.” Clearly, this article is credible because it has a 2004 situation of a society not being just. In order for a society to be just everyone should be treated equally and this article suggests that the affluent shouldn’t be the greedy taking advantage of the poor who in this case have suffered the catastrophe or this natural disaster. Based on the article from The New York Times, Joseph B. Treaster does use strong evidence to support his argument that the middle class individuals suffer more in terms of economic situations than the wealthy. Treaster writes about a salesman for roofing supply that states “I’d rather not have it at that price.” It is evident that if the common person cannot afford their resources two things will happen; either the market is modified with retailers to adjust prices or the products will be replaced by a supplement similar to it. Therefore, Treaster would say that prices should be dropped to help the consumer with daily life as inferred in the class text while Sandel will agree with this relevant source because they share similar ideas except that Sandel’s view is for a state of equilibrium between economic classes. Overall, both Sandel and Treaster can say that since price gouging is still occurring justice has not been made.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/18/us/hurricane-charley-economics-with-storm-gone-floridians-are-hit-with-price.html
-Dianitza Mendez
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe text I found on the web illustrates the idea of "what makes a society just", but the author goes off the tangent when religion seems to appear prominently in the essay. This essay connects to the idea of justification in a society because it states ideas of an organized state, government making laws, and the establishment of an ideal society. Evidence that I labeled as credible in this text is when the author relates modern society to ancient Greek and Roman society. Also, the author states how the government system is questioned, tested and modified, which shows that their opinion is not present in the text. The author's evidence is fairly supportable, especially when he/she states, "The idea of an organized state , complete with governmental bodies to make laws , protect the greater good , and improve the lives of citizens is something that is a bedrock of any just society (Clor , 2005)". Here, the author determines what would be ideal for those who are "blind" by means of society. The author of this text would say that our class text, Justice, by Michael J. Sandel is relevant, because the author establishes the idea of what an ideal society would look like, while Sandel prominently discusses that virtue is fundamental in a society. Sandel also decides that the
ReplyDeletevirtue of citizens is the way of life society should promote. On the other hand, Sandel would say that online article is relevant, but needs to be more credible. Sandel will rule that the text is relevant because it relates ancient philosophy on society and modern philosophy on society. Also, Sandel will agree with the author’s idea of how a governmental state should be- protection, laws, and improvement of citizen’s lives. Also, Sandel would argue that the author’s essay is not credible enough because the author’s position on the issue is visible. Both Sandel and the author of the essay include relevant information, but the author of the essay’s information is less credible. Credibility must be something one is securely aware of, not just because it is on a well-known website. Websites such as Wikipedia.com can be edited and information is at risk of being altered. Finally, the idea of making a society just has many different interpretations. For one it may be having a dictator, for another, it may be having virtue, economic stability and justice.
Link to essay/source: http://www.mightystudents.com/essay/Society.essay.23845#
-Karla Arroyo
1) The article I found is about fake pharmicies that are in short supply so they distribute drugs that are used to treat patients with cancer and other diseases and are sold for more than it's initial amount.2) This article relates to price gouging on drugs which affects the society in a negative way, especially those people who have cancer or other diseases.3) I found this article on the website of USAToday so it's definitely credible. An evidence I've found is the copyright also the sponsored links on the website makes it credible.4) Linda A. Johnson provides evidence in the article because investigations have been made and and 268 prescription drugs that have been in short supply. Also a drug dangerously for high blood pressure normally priced at $25.90 per dose, was being priced to hospitals for $1,200.5) Linda A. Johnson would agree with our class discussion because price gouging does not only hurt those people or companies that are intented to be hurt but it hurts our whole society. We think price gouging is bad, apparently she thinks so too because she wouldn't be fighting against it.6)She would agree with me because it's a problem that we all think shouldn't exist at all.
ReplyDeleteRobert Moris
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/story/2012-06-29/military-purple-heart/55923610/1
ReplyDeleteThis article is a different point of view for the Purple Heart reward. This article has made the decision of the soldiers with mental health injuries can now be awarded.
This article relates to the topic of this week’s conversation because it includes the topic of the Purple Heart. This is the result of the argument that has been occurring for a while. Michael Sandel has started the first chapter by mentioning the Purple Heart argument that has been occurring in the last 3 years. Now with this document it seems to answer what was the decision that the Pentagon officials have argued. Sandel can agree with this decision because he wanted for the other soldiers with mental health issues can be rewarded. Both authors can agree with the decision the Pentagon officials has finally made.
This source is credible because it not only an article for USA Today but as well the author is well known through other viewed articles like The Washington Post, USA Weekend, and as well Army Times. The author also a use cites from other websites and quotes from variable sources.
The author doesn’t use a lot of evidence to support her support but it seems that the author has one side of the argument which agrees with the decision made.
The author would say that after a long debate it has finally come to a conclusion and now both types of soldiers can be rewarded. It was a great decision made from the Pentagon officials.
The author form the text Sandel would actually agreed with the author from the article. Sandel was trying to make a point of the Purple Heart argument and was making a point toward both sides, but it seems that his main decision was to make equality. Sandel would agree with this because there won’t be any other explanation way he kept talking about this topic. Both authors wanted for the mental health injuries to have the same value as the ones who have been injured physically.
Whether a stock market crash drowns our country now or later, history will undoubtedly repeat itself as it did during the Great Depression of 1929 and the Stock Market Crash of 2008. In A Short History of the Great Depression, Nick Taylor writes an article in the prestigious New York Times where the causes and effects of the Great Depression of 1929 lay parallel to the causes and effects of the Stock Market Crash of 2008. The article contains links that direct you to other sites that are about the Great Depression of 1929 as well as sources. Given that the article is from the New York Times, one of the most renowned newspapers in New York City, the credibility of this article is one to be trusted. For the majority of the people, which were the lower class, their jobs were stripped away from them. This unemployment trend quickly spread worldwide as people who lived day-to-day dependent on their jobs were now succumbed to poverty. Many of the lower class people affected by the crash were not responsible for it, yet they were the ones suffering the most. The majority became homeless; living in Hooverville’s. Taylor even writes, “People foraged in dumps and garbage cans for food.” In order to fix the problem, government began monitoring the economy, destroying all concepts of a Laissez-Faire economy. The government also helped to rebuild jobs for the unemployed. However, the lower class worked half the hours of private employers. This is when someone would ask: Is this just? Are natural rights being violated? Does one truly have freedom? In chapter one of Justice (Bailout Rage), Michael J. Sandel analyzes the true freedom and justice an individual has in times of crisis. Sandel argues that “it didn’t seem fair that Wall Street had enjoyed huge profits during good times and was now asking taxpayers to foot the bill when things had gone bad,”(12) when in 2008, our country was hit with another stock market crash. Unemployment surged throughout the country and once again, the lower class was left scarred. Government intervened into the economy, as in 1929, and many were forced to pay taxes for the welfare of the country. In need of crisis, everyone was asked to pitch in through taxes, but what happens when the money isn’t used with the right intentions? Corruption leaked when citizens found out that their tax money was being used for bonuses given to “skill-full” Wall Street workers whom, many argue, were the cause of the market crash. This is when one wonders if they are being entitled to their natural rights. Citizens paying taxes did not have any control on whether or not they paid their taxes; refusing to pay them was out of the question. Did citizens notice, like Sandel did, that “something was wrong with these pictures,” (13)? Through the ideas of virtue, they were expected to help the economy grow strong once again. However, despite the ideas of virtue, at the end, individuals did not have control over their own money. The justification of paying workers who essentially screwed up an entire nation was not favored. The idea of favoritism engulfed “skilled workers” as they were valued more while others relied on them to restore the economy. To a certain extent, one does have natural rights, but then, to a higher extent they don’t. Just like in 1929, the lower class suffered through hardships while the minority of the upper class didn’t. Both Sandel and Taylor can agree and share the idea that natural rights become invisible during times of crisis, or in this case, a stock market crash. The parallel between the two times in history only serves to show how much freedom and individual really has. Just as Taylor noted that the lower class was left more affected that the minority of the upper class, Sandel states, “At the heart of the bailout rage was a sense of injustice,” (14). The idea of justice is replaced for virtue; in the hopes of bettering the economy. Corruption lays everywhere; it just takes a moment of peril for the majority of people to notice it.
ReplyDelete- Amber Sepulveda
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1) The article “Cantwell, Inslee Ask Bush To Examine Energy Fraud” from the National Journal exploits the issue of price gouging in the following weeks of hurricane Katrina and Rita in 2005. It goes on to talk about how the threat of how oil and gas market manipulation is real and how they now are bold enough to fleece the consumer’s pocketbook without the fear of any type of penalty unless here is a vigilant authority watching their every move.
ReplyDelete2) This article relates to the first topic in the novel Justice, by Michael J. Sandel. In the novel, Sandel goes to discuss the argument of both the people that support and those who go against price gouging, especially after the disaster of hurricane Charley struck. In the article it discusses how bold companies have gotten when it comes to manipulating prices in areas where disaster has struck like after hurricane Katrina and Rita in 2005. Both the article and the novel are similar in the sense that they both speak of price gouging and how it negatively affects the people whose live is already in turmoil.
3) This source is credible not just because it was a suggested site on the blog by Mr. Rochowitz, but because the article is published in a well respected and prestigious news site. The author is a reporter who cites what other experts had to say over the issue, though it doesn’t present both sides equally.
4) The author does use strong evidence to support his argument though not many. One example is when he quoted the writing of Sen. Maria Cantwell and Rep. Jay Inslee. He quoted, “And unless there is a cop on the beat vigilantly policing energy markets, sophisticated companies can fleece consumer pocketbooks without fear of penalty.” The reporter, sounding to be against price gouging uses this quote which makes the companies at look even more guilty of their greed.
5) The author of the article I chose would agree with Sandel in that price gouging is wrong in many ways and that price gouging can be seen through time. For example the California gold rush, people would purposely sell a simple glass of water for absurd prices just because they knew that the people who went to get gold had to buy it to save themselves.
6) Sandel would at the article as another example of price gouging except he would surprised that it has grown bigger to the point where companies would monopolize and manipulate prices. In this example it can be argued that price gouging goes against the people’s well being and can be taken to court.
source used:http://nationaljournal.com/daily/cantwell-inslee-ask-bush-to-examine-energy-fraud-20080422?mrefid=site_search
http://www.clarionledger.com/viewart/20120827/NEWS/120827021/Mississippi-residents-complain-about-price-gouging-ahead-Isaac
ReplyDeleteThe source I found is about Mississippi residents complaining about price gouging in the approach of Hurricane Isaac. This text connects to Michael J. Sandel’s Justice because Sandel mentions how during Hurricane Katrina the prices significantly go higher than what people were used to seeing. In the source that talks about Mississippi, the price increases for any materials needed to protect lives during the storm. In Justice, Sandler writes that a bag of ice increased to ten dollars during the hot month of August when the usual price before the hurricane alert was two dollars.
This text is credible because the editor Brian Eason includes opinions and statements said by the Governor of Mississippi, Phil Bryant and a general attorney Jim Hood. Also it includes ideas of the law and government. The article is based on a natural disaster that led to price gouging in Mississippi and it’s a situation that recently just happened. Furthermore, the article comes from Clarion Ledger which in Jacksonville, Mississippi is a local news provider that keeps the Mississippi community updated on what’s going on in their state. The author, Eason does have strong evidence to support his argument. Brian Eason has conversed with an attorney and had enough information and opinions from both the attorney and the governor of Mississippi to prove his argument that price gouging has to be illegal in the state of Mississippi .The attorney Hood says “If we see instances really on the rise-we’ve already had calls about it-we’ll encourage the governor to invoke it, he said “. The author of the text would say that what Sandel included in Justice is accurate information because as seen in pages 4-6 Sandel’s includes what Jacoby and Sowell think about price gouging. Sowell says “If ice fetches ten dollars a bag when Floridians are facing power outages in the August heat, ice manufacturers will find it worth their while to produce and ship more of it.”During every natural disaster price gouging always happens to happen and businesses take advantage of the weather and the residents. Similarly, Sandel would say that everything that is going on with price gouging is like history repeating itself, where in this case price gouging always comes back to take advantage of the residents. Sandel would also say that Eason was missing a few more sources that explain what the residents feel and other examples of how price gouging was affecting the Mississippi residents.
- Karina Cabrera
The relevant source I found was "Oil Price 'Gouging': A Phantom Menace" an article written by Edmund L. Andrews published in the New York Times on May 20, 2007. This text spoke about politicians in Washington wanting to punish oil companies because of their supposed “price gouging” tactics, but there are uncertainties about whether or not the price increases of gasoline can be characterized as “price gouging”. This text connects to this week’s topic because price gouging is a topic mentioned in Justice by Michael J. Sandal. In Justice Sandal discusses examples of incidents where companies were accused of price gouging such as when Hurricane Charley occurred and a gas station was selling $2 ice bags for $10. As stated in the article people are not able to reduce their demand for gasoline based on prices because it is necessary, which forces customers to purchase this product although prices may be escalating. This connects to Justice where Sandal mentions Crist’s perspective about how by defending price gouging in a free market, it can no longer be considered free. Price gouging forces customers to purchase necessities at elevated prices giving them no choice but to spend more than what would be considered reasonable. This also connects to Justice because there are different perspectives about what should be done to companies who price gouge, in the article a possible solution was expanding renewable and alternative fuels. This article is credible because it is a daily newspaper which has been published since 1851, they will not fail readers because it will be a economic loss for their corporation. It is also credible because it was written by Edmund L. Andrews who is an economic reporter that published a book in the year 2009 titled Busted: Life Inside the Great Mortgage Meltdown. The author of the article presents strong evidence to support the idea that oil price hikes can be considered price gouging,a piece of evidence he used to support this was stating how much exactly prices increased. Andrews stated that gasoline was $3.10 a gallon which was more than a nickel the week before and 15 cents more than a year ago. This idea was also supported by including multiple perspectives he questions whether or not this situation can really be characterized as price gouging by including that gasoline prices may increase because of increase in the price of crude oil. The author of this text may agree with Crist’s ideas of price gouging taking away freedom from customers. He would also agree that by respecting individuals freedom, virtue is being promoted because individuals will be able to obtain the necessary resources needed in order to have their needs met. The author of Justice would also agree that price gouging is negative because he states, “But the outrage at price-gougers is more than mindless anger.” This means that Sandal is against price gouging and would agree that it is an unjust practice towards individuals who are trying to purchase necessities. Both these authors would agree that by eliminating price gouging, it would be a step forward in promoting the virtue of citizens.
ReplyDeleteThe text I found is about international phone companies charging U.S Military troops excessively high amount of money for calls of four minutes or less that they make to their families from German airports pay phones.
ReplyDeleteThis text connects to this week’s topic because is based on price gouging. In the class’ text, chapter one, Michael Sandel uses price gouging as an example of justice (welfare, freedom, virtue) and to determine what makes a society good or bad.
The text I found is credible because it’s posted by the New York Times. The New York Times is a prestigious news organization in the United States. The source is also credible because it cites other sources, websites and it consist of citations. If this source wasn’t credible it will lose the millions of readers it has.
The author of this text, James Dao, presents various different evidence to support his argument. One evidence that he states is when Sergeant Kyle Herman of the Montana National Guard used Leipzig phones when heading to Kuwait. He was charged $83.92 for about a four minutes phone call. Dao, also uses as evidence the case of Specialist Reynald Matias. Reynald Matias was heading to Afghanistan with his Army unit when he made a call at Leipzig Airport and decided to call his wife. For a call, estimated of two minutes or less they charged him $51.
The author of my text will say about the class’ text of this week that price gouging for people who are in need is not a right thing to do, it’s unfair. He will say this because in the text, Dao quotes Sergeant Corder when he was at a interview and said “I want them to stop ripping off soldiers”. These phone companies are taking advantage of our heros. Since Army units have to pass through these airports in order to go to their destination combat zones, they know how emotional these soldiers are and how eager they want to contact their loved ones. This relates to the example Sandel mentioned in the chapter because after hurricane Charley, abundant amount of people are in need of resources and a place to stay and these employers are just exploiting the victims because of their need of resources.
Michael Sandel will say about my text that price gouging is unjust. On page 7, Sandel implies an argument that Crist created. He states, “Greed is a vice, a bad way of being, especially when it makes people oblivious to the suffering of others... In times of trouble, a good society pulls together. Rather than press for a maximum advantage, people look out for one another. A society in which people exploit their neighbors for financial gain in times of crisis is not a good society”. German airports and international phone companies should be aware that the United States is going through a recession which causes the US Military not a high paying job. Also taking advantage of these military troops is not right because they are already sacrificing their lives for us Americans and charging them $51 for a two minute call just seems like these people are cold hearted and they are not helping us throughout this crisis. Concluding that these German phone companies are not a good society.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129711544
ReplyDelete"A History of the Purple Heart" By T.Christian Miller talks about how the solders receive the purple heart medal, because during the world War two, the medal was change as a recognition of combat injuries and death, This Article connects to Justice, because in the text Michael talks about what the medal is for & why they use it, Also he mentions the post traumatic stress disorder, in which he disagree with the pentagon on how people who have this disease do not receive a medal. the source i found is relevant because it has good amount of information, but it does not have a hyperlink & the author connects to the topic. Yes the author shows strong evidence that supports it's argument,One Example would be how the author Describe each date an event happen to the soldiers & why they receive these medals. The author of my text would either agree or disagree with Michael J. Sandel & the author from the class text would agree or disagree as well.
The third source that I chose speaks about the two different sides about the purple heart award. The Purple Heart is an award that was chosen by the Pentagon to give to Soldier who have been physically injured this combat. This includes missing limbs, being shot, and other wounds that had shed blood. This award is not given to soldiers who have had mental problems because of war. The text argues that the decision the Pentagon made, to give the Purple heart to the soldiers who have only been physically hurt by war, is unjust towards those who have been injured in a psychological way. In this report, Tyler E.Boudreau also makes a clear connection with Sandel when he says "to truly believe that post-traumatic stress is, in fact, an injury and not the result of a weak or dysfunctional brain." because in the first chapter of Justice, Sandel mentions something similar. "Those who insist that only bleeding wounds should count believe that post-traumatic stress reflects a weakness of character unworthy of honor." In contrast of that same statement, Sandel also mentions "Those who believe that psychological wounds should qualify argue that veterans suffering long-term trauma and severe depression 'have sacrificed for their country as surely, and as honorably, as those who've lost a limb." (page 11). On the second paragraph on page 12 of Justice, the reader can tell that Sandel would most likely agree with Boudreau's arguement because it seems as if Sandel favors Aristotle's theory of Justice, as oppose to the theories of more modern philosophers. The source that I chose is credible due to the fact that the report is written by a former Marine captain and was published by the New York Times Company in 2009. My author also provided a good example of the "injustice" of the Pentagon's decision when he mentioned in his report that while he was in Camp Lejune, N.C., making calls to marine's families to inform them of a marine's wounds, he was never asked to inform a family member that a marine was suffering from a psychological wound. He then stated "if a combat wound is a combat wound no matter how small, shouldn't those people suffering from the 'invisible wounds' of post-traumatic stress also recieve the Purple Heart?" In conclusion, Boudreau would most certainly be the devil's advocate for anyone who is against giving a Purple Heart to any veteran suffering from any kind of mental injury.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/18/national/18scams.html?pagewanted=all
ReplyDeleteThis article, “With Storm Gone, Floridians Are Hit With Price Gouging”, discusses the price gouging that occurred after Hurricane Charley-a disaster that struck Florida-subsided. The people of Florida were in desperate need of supplies that were scarce. The prices of those scarce supplies were inflated because businesses were trying to make money since everyone knew that the people of Florida would have no choice but to buy the supplies like ice. The book Justice by Michael Sandel highlights these points. Specifically, it puts into question whether price gouging is morally right or wrong. Virtue is one of the things we spoke about in class this week. This article was published by the New York Times which is a well-known news reporting organization in New York. The information published in the New York Times is reliable and credible because the newspaper is a statewide known newspaper, thus, it would lose all of its fame and credibility as a newspaper if it were to publish false information. The New York Times takes pride in its fame and it deserves to be because everything they publish is completely trustworthy and true which is why it is such a widely read and favored newspaper. In this article, Florida’s attorney general, Charlie Crist received 1, 400 complaints and filed lawsuits about price gouging after Hurricane Charley hit Florida. The article states, “In one of the boldest cases, some contractors from Jacksonville offered to clear two trees off the roof of an Orlando woman for $23,000, Mr. McMahon said. The woman declined the offer.” This is just one bit of information that proves that many people were inflating the prices of necessary products. The author of this article would agree with Sandel in saying that price gouging is completely wrong and unjust. Price gouging does not make this society just. Even if it does create a market, it is wrong to price gouge people who just went through a disaster and have basically nothing. Sandel states, “Thinking about justice seems inescapably to engage us in thinking about the best way to live” (10). In fact, the three main ideas of justice are, “…maximizing welfare, respecting freedom, and promoting virtue” (6). Sandel would be on the same page as Joseph B. Treaster, who wrote the article. Treaster highlights all the negatives to price gouging and the point of view of the people of Florida. It is very clear that the people of Florida don’t care about making a market or creating competition by inflating prices, they just want to be able to get back on their feet after disaster struck them. Treaster quotes a very important person who had a big role in the affairs of price gouging after Hurricane Charley who was Charlie Crist. Charlie Crist is also quoted in Justice. In the book, Crist argues that the price gougers are just being greedy and that’s the reason why they inflate the prices and Sandel would agree. There isn’t a law preventing price gouging because America is based on a system called supply and demand but as Sandel points out in chapter 1 of Justice, virtue is a big part of justice since there must be morals in a just society. Price gouging is morally wrong when it comes after a natural disaster and that is a problem. It is economy versus morals which are two things America highly values. Sandel and Treaster-and Crist-all understand this but they can both agree that the price gouging that occurred after Hurricane Charley hit Florida was not just.
1. In this CBS article eight governors want the president and congressional leaders to make an investigation of price gouging after hurricane Katrina. Then President Bush asked his Attorney General to handle all price gouging situations and the Senate passed legislation that made the Federal Trade Commission check out the accusations.
ReplyDelete2. This text relates to this week’s topic when we talked about price gouging during class based on Justice example of gouging. In a lot of ways both are similar since they talk about how hurricanes are an example of price gouging and how they take advantage of the need of the people to make a profit. Also in both text there is a person who wants to do something for the people getting abused because of merchants who don’t have any virtue for people in need in a time of a disaster.
3. The reason my text is credible is because it comes from a source that doesn’t just let anyone post what they want. Also there isn’t a bias. The author is writing about governors wanting to stop price gouging but not him himself. Also the source is from CBS news and is well known for its reputation of delivering honest reports.
4. Since the author himself didn’t provide an opinion I will talk in perspective of the governors. In order for the governors to get the president’s approval, in the letter they sent they establish a case study by economist Don Nichols who states that the price gouging started not only during hurricane Katrina but after as well. They said because hurricane Rita also was striating to target the are oil companies started raising their oil prices since they would be unable to produce more due to the hurricane. So the governors used this as way to get attention and force for investigation of price gouging.
5. I think if the governors from my piece were to sit and talk with Sandel about his idea of price gouging they will be in equal terms to stop it. Since Sandel wrote about how in Florida merchant were price gouging products during a hurricane the governors would most likely support his idea that price gouging shouldn’t be practiced and get his perspective on the manner and included it in the letter they wrote to the president as a way to further support their argument.
6. I think if Sandel right now will sit with the governors and talk about price gouging he would mention the immorality of it. Since Sandel is a strong believer in the virtues of a just society he would disapprove the ideas of oil companies using consumers as way to pay their damage expenses because of a hurricane that is totally natural and can’t do anything to stop it. Sandel and the governors would come up with a plan to stop price gouging to prevent it from ruining the virtue of a society and keeping it just.
Link of Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500487_162-870784.html
Dubiel Tavarez 9/13/12
ReplyDeleteCivics Mr.Rochowicz
In this Assessment I us the “Timeline of events in Trayvon Martin case” By the CNN Wire Staff Do to the lesson why do laws exist in this Case when in this story when 28 year old George Zimmerman's was charged for 2-degree murder on February 26 for shooting 17 year old in this time line it show what neighbor said about what happen that day mostly the neighbor was talking about how they called 911 and others were scared when later George Zimmerman didn’t get arrested till after days later and the case is still on and no one has been arrested . this Court Case timeline is Relevant because it’s close to topic of why do law exist like in class when the thief steals the water and nothing happen, this man kill a 17 year old and still not behind bar rooting his life in jail even if he was charge with 2-degree murder it been a year and 7 months. This court case credible because this timeline is from CNN, there’s comments from people during the event during the shooting and the court case and has Hyperlinks to other times during the shooting the months that everything in court happen, video of events that has been on the news and other comments from readers and show the name of the author of the second hyper link , This is why this Timeline of events in Trayvon Martin case is both Relevant and Credible
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/12/justice/florida-zimmerman-timeline/index.html?iid=article_sidebar
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/18/justice/florida-teen-shooting-details/index.html
The source I found was about morality of the bankers through out the era of thatcher/Reagan. This text is credible because it’s writing by a noble prize winning economist. Another reason is because it is from Mother Jones; a news organization that specializes in investigative, political, and social justice reporting. It also has its own national magazine and website. This piece relates to Justice because it has to do with the concept of morality in the economy with both writers express. Michael J. Sandel expresses some of his thoughts on this when he talks about price gouging, free/ pro market, and virtues. The author of this piece Joseph E. Stiglitz shows how the era of thatcher/Reagan the economy seemed to lack morality. The economy was based on incentive pay, which Sandel says is one the standard cases for a free market economy. Except in the finance sector they were actually getting high pay even if there performance was high or low. It also stated how the Bankers also exploited the middle and lower class because they saw that there was a lot of money that could be made through the
ReplyDeleteSandel would say the text that under a free market economy this is what occurs. Resulting in the economy not being truly “free”. The banker knew that the public needed them for loans so they were able to exploit them. He would also agree the morality of the government changes because of economic situations. The case of the “near death” of the economy did the opposite of the Hurricane charley but they both demonstrate a change. Stiglitz would say that Sandel bring up great points in Justice. He point price gouging is another place where the morality of the economy could be questioned. In both writers seem to go against pro market. In the Stiglitz piece it even show how one aspect of free market lead to corruption of the economy.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/01/joseph-stiglitz-wall-street-morals
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWrite a summary sentence for the text you found.
ReplyDeleteI found an article from USA Today, revolving around the Purple Heart issue and soldiers with Post Traumatic Stress Disorders, by Patricia Kime from Army Times.
How does the text connect to that week’s topic or to the other text you have read?
Both Patricia Kime and Tyler Boudreau discuss the pentagon’s decision of not rewarding soldiers with Post Traumatic Stress Disorders, or PTSD, with the Purple Heart medal. The medal is a honor to those that have been injured in war, sacrificed their lives and have made it back alive. Both Kime and Boudreau recognize how both Purple Heart awarded soldiers and soldiers with PTSD should receive the honor, Boudreau expresses how when he was in the army his commander stated “ a combat wound is a combat wound, no matter how small.” so the question for everyone, why not consider PTSD as a combat wound? Kime stated “combat-related PTSD could be the result of an undetected physical injury such as microscopic brain changes resulting from exposure to a blast wave” which also corresponds with Boudreau’s statistic of “most common Purple Heart awarded was the perforated ear drum….. By the concussion of a nearby explosion.” Kime and Boudreau both report on a issue of recognizing honor of wounded soldiers.
What evidence do you have that the text you found is credible?
I believe the text is credible because it comes from a highly recognized news reporting website, that has been around since the 1980s, giving respectable and dependable reporting to not tarnish their business and ruin their reputation of reporting news.
Does the author present strong evidence to support his/her argument? Provide an example.
Patricia Kime presents strong evidence toward the Purple Heart controversy, quoting the report of the pentagon from 2009 stating that the Purple Heart medal would not be awarded to soldiers with PTSD and also quoting the executive director of the department of defense Michael Fitzpatrick, who said “ Troops with invisible wounds are heroes. It's time to honor them”
What would the author of your text say about the class text from that week?
Patricia Kime would agree with the facts given by Tyler Boudreau, and further discuss his opinion on the topic, going in to what he believe should be done, making another medal for those with PTSD, the Black Heart medal. The Black Heart medal would represent the idea of PTSD, of the meaning the Boudreau placed for it “the hearts of these soldiers are black, with the terrible things they saw and did on the battlefield.”
What would the author of the class text say about your text from that week?
Michael Sandel would also agree with Patricia Kimes report, unlike Boudreau’s report, Kime’s doesn’t have an opinion, but Sandel’s slight favoring of Boudreau’s report to counter argue the pentagon’s gives away his position. Sandel also writes “veterans suffering long-term trauma and severe depression have sacrificed both for their country as surely and as honorably as those who’ve lost a limb.”
The article I read was "Obama Wins Election ; McCain Loses as Bush Legacy is Rejected". This text implies the story that president about faced during the election presidency. And the challenge he had battling McCain even thought he had won some states already. Also something very important in the text says that his grandmother passed away the one that raised him and couldn't see the day he became president. This text connects to the topic of the week because we talking about idea of american exceptionalism is that there are certain ideals or value that make America "different" or "special". My text connects to the topic because one idea is constitutionalism that because we have elected a president that we want and with our right to vote we had the power to pick our governor. It so connects to freedom of speech because people have the right to say what they want. The text i choose is credible because its from New York Times and its a source that says everything how it is and has alot of years around. And also its talking about the president that is some one important. This source provides alot of evidence and show with detail something of the things that happened when the president was elected. The author of my text would contribute to the class discuss with joy because he would know what Americans ideals and want know many thing that could help see the class discussion in a different way.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/us/politics/05campaign.html?pagewanted=all
The article I found is credible because it was published by news-press.com. A prestigious newspaper and online site that offers unbiased news articles. The writer Cristela Guuerra is a Staff reporter at the news paper. The text that I found is about how a World War 2 vet got wounded but because of lack of proof and records, he hasn't received a purple heart.This connects to the article we read Troubled Minds and Purple Hearts.They are both talking about the criteria needed to receive a purple heart. The text we read in class says that people with war wounds and also with Post Traumatic Stress.
ReplyDeleteThe article I read talks about how many veterans sometimes hurt themselves or fake injuries and are able to get purple hearts without strong proof or documentation If soldiers are injured and the injuries are not documented,its difficult for the military to know whether it is real or not, At war you cannot carry journals or record anything so how would people know if you really got hurt unless some sort of medic or tracker is around you at the time of impact. The article stated that it was very hard at the time to determine if an injury was real and if a veteran was eligible for a purple heart. "Reporting requirements for deck logs, war diaries, and action reports changed several times between 1942 and 1943, making it all the more difficult to determine who was wounded in battle. The Navy Awards Board may not award a Purple Heart without such records and the soldier in the article is not only trying to get his purple heart, but advocating for other soldiers to speak up about deserved medals" He believes he has many reasons why he deserves a purple heart. He suffers from dizzy spells, hearing troubles, acoustic trauma and occasional vertigo. These were all caused by his time at sea. He also has physical damage because the nerve endings in his toes are shot. This was caused as the ship rocked back and forth , the projectiles rolled back and forth and hit the sailors toes crushing the nerves little by little.
The military states that The Purple Heart is given to individuals killed or wounded in combat at the hands of the enemy and because it was the captain's fault he can't receive a medal. Also a letter from Rep. Bill Johnson, chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, says no record verifying Beeman’s injury could be found. The author of the document we read in class would support the vets fight to get his purple heart. Just because he wasn't wounded by an enemy he was still wounded mentally. He would say that the fact that there is no record of injury is due to the soldiers not being able to keep records of their day to day actions.Some would argue that is the reponsobility of the soilder to make his statment to the military but it is hard to tell people about your disorder when your whole life has now changed and your no longer able to rekindle the thoughts of war without having an episode.