PIG Final Review Day 2. Education Support of Common Core The Common Core Standards prepare students for a competitive global economy Provide national

PIG Final Review Day 2

EducationSupport of Common Core

• The Common Core Standards prepare students for a competitive global economy

• Provide national continuity in education• Designed to build upon the best standards so

that even states with successful standards will be taking a step forward in education


• The standards are also based on international benchmarks and incorporate the newest educational thinking.

• They build upon successful elements already employed in many of the leading states – Helps those states that are struggling improve

and those that are succeeding to build and grow


• Students will be able to think critically about the world around them, and possess applicable skills, making them well-rounded.


• Content is balanced • The CCS are geared toward college and career

readiness, and competition in the global economy.

EducationOpposition to Common Core

• The Common Core Standards do not guarantee improvements in testing on the global scale

• The Common Core Standards straddle the middle ground of education – either better than some states or worse than others

• The Common Core Standards is a program pushed by the government – Adopt the program or no money


• Not every nation with common core standards do well testing

• States understand more so than the federal government on the population being taught – they should decide

• Adequate testing of the CCS has not been completed – difficult to assess if this will work

• CCS does not take in to account ESL students, students with learning disabilities, or poverty stricken student’s difficulties


Focuses more on the higher-order thinking skill than emphasizing the basics from which this thinking pattern grows. Need to develop basics first.

Push is connected to international competition, not necessarily improving skills

Standardizing education limits possibility

Increased focus on testing

Foreign Policy Support of Waging War Against ISIS

• If unchecked, these terrorists could pose a growing threat beyond that region - including to the United States. - Barack Obama

• ISIS constitutes a new level of horror– If unchallenged, its regimen of beheadings,

burnings and crucifixions will continue and grow


• ISIS is determined to build a caliphate. That affects directly the interests of more moderate Arabic forces that are allies of ours. It even threatens non-Arabic countries way beyond its borders– It has already taken up the forcible expansion into

countries that are ruled by non-Muslims.


• So much US effort has gone into building a new Iraq: to see it dissipated so quickly raises questions about why all that sacrifice was necessary; and not fighting on lets down those who fought before.– The United States military lost over 4000 soldiers

as casualties of the Iraq war, and sent home at least 32,000 more who were physically and mentally damaged.


• The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost at least $1.26 trillion from start to finish (and the overall "war on terror" maybe $8 trillion): so to see the Iraqi "democracy" that was left behind - not to mention its army - disintegrate so rapidly before the ISIS onslaught, is simply too much for many to bear


• We broke it. We own it. We cannot walk away now.

• ISIS is a global force.

Foreign Policy AGAINST Waging War Against ISIS

• We inflate ISIS by attacking it. – ISIS is a regional force. We only make it global by

fighting it. As with Al Qaeda before it, a military response by the United States falls directly into the ISIS play book.


• Going to war with ISIS gives terrorists too much influence over American foreign policy.– ISIS knows that its status is improved in radical

Islamic circles if it is attacked by the United States– We let ISIS's exploitation of social media

determine our foreign policy


• Do not want to endure a series of endless wars– To attack ISIS in the manner proposed by the

President effectively opens up our third Middle Eastern war in less than two decades

– War in Afghanistan is not a success nor was invasion of Iraq


• This is not our fight alone, nor is it our fight to lead.– Ideological war– America must watch, not fight– Not a major threat to the United States

Progressive Taxation

• Progressive tax is a tax where the tax rate increases as your income increases

• Tax payers are divided into categories based on income levels

Pros For Progressive Tax

• A tool for redistributing income from upper class to lower and middle class

• Those who earn more pay more into the federal government

• Helps keep income gap from growing wider between rich and poor


• Morally right that those who can afford to pay more in taxes should do so

• Those who have little income should be helped

• Progressive tax allows government to collect money from those who can afford to pay and use it to fund education, medical services, housing assistance and other welfare programs for those who need


• Collecting more money from higher income earners allows the government to earn more revenue

• Government can provide more services than they could if everyone paid the same

Arguments Against Progressive Tax

• Does not promote equality• Discriminates against the wealthy in the

United States• Inflation may push an individual into a higher

income bracket with no actual income increase

• May discourage business investment if additional profit means higher taxes

Documents

PIG Final Review Day 2. Education Support of Common Core The Common Core Standards prepare students for a competitive global economy Provide national