Lesson 7 Opposing Viewpoints

My subject of debate is Automated cars and whether they are beneficial to society are harmful. The two sources that I used to learn about Self-driving cars are Ryan Derousseau's "Why Self-driving cars could help auto stocks do a U-turn" published on Fortune Magazine, and "The Perils of Self-Driving cars" by the Globe & Mail.

 A quick run down on the first source is that instead of people buying new cars, they will rent them instead. Self driving cars will prevent a stock crash in a recession and as well all know, the car industry is a huge market and a large section of the economy. Derousseau points out that renting automated cars will help the common man with no cars and this is where the success of uber and lyft come from. However this could all be a ploy to get people to invest in self driving cars, since this is a business magazine.

The second source is a canadian news source and it doesn't bash self driving cars but instead is realistic about them. The report says that some people are too stupid to use the new technology. Self driving cars are in the works but no where near to being done. And that people need to educate themselves on the safety features they provide. For example, he pretty much says that people will rather speed and get somewhere a little bit quicker than allow the car use its navigation to be safe.

In the end I picked the benefits of self driving cars. They will help the economy by allowing people to be more mobile,  and the technology will be a drastic improvement . While I do agree that people will mostly likely not use the autopilot for selfish reasons, I believe others will be efficient and use it to multitask.

Sweatshop Analysis

When the term sweat shops pops in my mind I instantly get really queasy. It is crazy to think that most of our goods come from places where something close to slavery can occur. These people work long hours, and bad conditions for little pay. Back in the late 19th century people in america fought for an improvement in their work lives. Some lives were lost and legislation had to be passed. In places such as China those people are being suppressed. However, like mentioned in the article these conditions are not just in china but they're happening in our own country. They're making counterfeit goods and  selling cheaper than the original and making profit. It is sad to say but if these workers did not make these cheap goods then they could be in much worse conditions. Some of them may be out of the job and force to look else where which could go either or. But some of them could be slaves and sold to sex slavery. However buying counterfeit goods should be avoided at all cost and be more globally acknowledged. 

1st Presidential Debate of 2016

         This debate was very hard to decide a winner. It seemed to ramble on and on. I feel like Hilary Clinton won. Clinton used ethos when she said that she was on the senate. She mention casually that she was on the senate, this subtle nudge was something that allows the audience feel like she is comfortable in making policies.She also brings down Donald Trump by saying that he inherit his money from his dad and he used these funds to create his empire. Unlike Trump she briefly talked about her plans. His mainly talked about Clinton's emails and all the "bad deals". To her defense, Clinton said that this was his opinion. This is very true. In the history of american politics the two parties have never gotten along with the same policies. For the past 8 years, you hear republicans say "thanks Obama" to the point that it has became a meme. Another reason, Clinton won the debate was the fact that she was held this proper posture the entire time. Through the duration of the debate Trump would constantly interrupt Clinton to the point where even the moderator was feeling frustrated. The moderator tried to pull the reigns by telling Trump that he had 20 seconds to respond and that it was Clinton's turn to speak. So the fact that Trump was slandering Clinton and interrupting her, it made it hard to take him seriously.

   
       The candidates  have ethos already built into their arguments. Trump is a billion dollar business man, and Clinton is a former senate and secretary of state. These give them an edge over the other person. Trump caters more to pathos. The way he speaks and the way his face looks. He is an angry person who does not care what the media thinks. He will exaggerate everything he says to get a reaction from people. For example, he usually says Billions and not millions and he emphasizes it too. Clinton on the other hand uses logos. She believes that aiding the middle class will lead to economic prosperity.


      Clinton said her points enough to where it does not backfire. Trump had good points, but he would make stupid comments and  keep repeating things that made him seem like he did not know what he was talking about. Trump destroyed himself and it made Clinton come out on top.

Exercise 3.6

The list shows top games of 2011 next to a kid who appears brainwashed(This is not the image). These games are pretty violent, just by reading the titles, Bulletstorm, sounds like a shooting game. We are made to believe that the kid is playing one of these games because
1.) They're popular 
2.) 3 of the 5 are single player and 
3.) they're group together in the same picture.
However, he can't be playing any of these because he is playing on a ps3, a different controller on a different system. This detail ruins the credibility of the information.













Image link
http://www.videogamepreordersales.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/kids-playing-video-games.jpg

Failing English

Currently I have a 37.14 in English. I have missed one essay, failed to participate in class, and missed a quiz. Things are not looking up for me. In addition, I am procrastinating the blog post about violence or something. I hope that this is the counted as the first blog post and I get credit :^).