Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

I agree with this. If the prices for college keep raising then nobody can afford to go to college. All the higher paying jobs require more schooling, but if you don't have a good job then you can't pay for college. It's a deadly cycle. I also think the government is always looking for more money and raising interest rates. That fact doesn't bother me as much as the fact that the money is being spent on public art, landscapes, and totally unnecessary costs. I think that if the money was given back to 'tuition-payers' then maybe people wouldn't care so much.

JFK was very popular in the eyes of the people. He also seemed to trying to do great things as President, it's a shame that he died so early in his Presidency.

I think that this is a neat article and a great way to honor JFK. But every president is different. Every term that they serve has different circumstances and situations. There is no way to accurately measure who was the "best" president. This poll is just a matter of opinion or a "popularity contest".

Interesting... I could understand why JFK's the most popular. But for some reason, I had a feeling Reagan would be the topper. Nice article :)

I say go for it, it's about time the minimum gets raised while employees actually work hard

YES! I think raising the minimum wage is a GREAT idea. Once some states do it, more tend to follow. I think raising the minimum wage will really benefit part time workers because many work part-time hours but only make enough to pay bills. This raise may allow many to not live paycheck-to-paycheck.

I think the minimum wage should be raised because the minimum wage we have now doesn't get you as far as it used to and people need more money to meet standards of living.

I think this is a wonderful idea. Raising the minimum wage will allow people that work part-time hours that have bills and needs that need to be met, will have money to support themselves and have a little extra support money instead of them wondering if their next paycheck is gonna cover everything.

I don't know if raising the minimum wage would be to good of an idea. Although yes most high schoolers and some adult would really enjoy it. But because that raises the businesses have to pay more, which means they will raise there prices, and we will be back in this situation of people wanting it raised. And we can't just raise it every year.

Raising the minimum wage to 9 or 10$ would be great if everything stayed the same. But according to our government that's not possible. Prices would go up and places would stop hiring. Even making 10$ an hour most likely still isn't enough for someone to live off of. Either way it's almost impossible for things to change for the better.

I agree that the minimum wage should be higher because it allows us to pay for things by ourselves and a lot of part-time workers are college students and they have a lot of bills that they have to pay for school so I think that would help them out a lot.

I don't think minimum wage should be raised because that would only make the prices of everything go up to. Including the price of living. I think that if people want to make more money they should work hard for it and get a better education.

I don't agree with raising the minimum wage at all. Once minimum wage gets raised nationally, prices will go up and workers will be layed off. The people who would still be at the store would have to have more hours as well since they wouldn't have as many people there often.

I feel that if Obama really had all these emotions and is wanting these "shooting sprees" in America to stop, there needs to be something done about it. I understand that we have the right to bare arms, and not everyone will follow the laws made to make things more safe, but implimenting things in schools like metal detectors, or by having it required that parents kept guns locked up would help more with this situation.

I can't help but say that the debates are where we see the best/worst in a candidate not when were watching the news or reading a paper.

I think that in this case they are just like getting back at each other and being dramatic like that isn't what presidency is about at all, and if they are being childish now who knows what the future holds, nobody wants a childish president.

The debates have effected very little votes this time around, not to mention, the candidates just bicker like nine year old kids. It's a waste of everyone's time, we don't learn any more about their ideas, we just hear them attack each other on how one deleted emails and how the other is sexist and wants to build a wall.

In the debate they were trying to attack each other and their private stuff like the emails Clinton had deleted and Trump saying he hasn't paid taxes and they haven't said anything about their plans to "try" and make America great again.

The debates - at least so far - have only helped Hillary's increase of voters. It appears that more and more people are figuring out that Donald Trump can be compared to that kid in elementary school who always has the same comback of "I know you are but what am I?". Personally, I don't like either of our candidates because I'm against some of both of their views, but I believe the debates are a waste of time. The largest reason people watch - in my opinion - is to see how many times Trump will interrupt Hillary, and how much they bicker.

First he says that he is opposed to sanctuary cities, saying it breeds crime and goes on to say that "we have to well defend, we give tremendous amounts of money to California". But then when asked if that was his "weapon of choice" trump says, " I don't want to defend the state...If they're going to have sanctuary cities, we may have to do that." First he says this and then he says that, what IS his opinion here? Plus when he says that sanctuary cities breeds crime, but the FBI gives proof to show that it doesn't. Why can't he check his facts before he says something?

So Trump wants to pull money from California's school, which is ridiculous it will make the US dumber than it already is, we have lost our rank in education. This war doesn't even make logical sense, taking money will never solve the problem. It will cause more.

I think Trump sounds ignorant when he says that they breed more crime. Every city has crime and theres always going to be people that commit crimes no matter what

I can't believe they say were too young to understand. Just because were in high school we too young. its not right.

I am proud of Emily for standing up for what she wanted. Not many people would be brave enough to do something like that..

i think that its really brave of emily to stand up for what she wants and thinks that is the best. Not a lot of people would do it. But she is standing up for others and her opinion.

I understand where he is coming from saying high schoolers are too young to understand this. This topic is all about money, where it is coming from, how much money is needed, how much they will get from it. We do not know what goes on behind the scenes of this deals. Maybe instead of saying we are too young he should of said we are uninformed.

I like what Brice said, "we are just uninformed."

I hate to say it but i have this intense urge to slap City Council member Matt Walsh...what because we are young we automatically don't understand? More like we have more on our minds then politics and gaining support by being popular with business owners.

we have the right to say what we need to say. People have the right to say that they should not be in a public place or anywhere.

If we as a society won't allow juveniles, sixteen year olds in particular, to vote or to sign their name to a legal contract and the justification for that restriction is because they aren't "mature enough" or that they "don't/won't understand" the lasting consequences then how can we expect them to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime? If sixteen year olds are old enough and mature enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime then shouldn't they also understand the lasting consequences to the things I mentioned above?

I agree with Jermey, we need to not set a double standard. We need to rehabilitate young offenders, because if you are not a hard criminal before you go to prison for 20 years of one of the most impressionable times of your life, you will come out of it as one. These are kids that probably grew up in broken homes, and this was the only path they were going to take, because it was the only one they saw. So lets rehabilitate, and give them productive lives, not ones that are going to keep the cycle going.

I agree with you for the most part Natalie. Although if it's a really small crime and the juvenile is unarmed, then they should go to juvenile court. But for crimes bigger than that example, they need to be charged as an adult would be charged. There's actually this reality TV show (that I can't remember the name of) where, in each episode, a group of kids who are on the streets and in gangs, etc. are taken into a jail as a form of rehabilitation, and they go through a day of being in jail and they also hear stories from people who are in jail at that time, and they always say that one doesn't want to end up in jail. I think there was one particular episode where a girl went with her mother to watch her mother plan a funeral for her. It's pretty interesting, and it does seem to help a lot.

Jared, I understand what you mean by some kids growing up in broken homes and having bad lives growing up BUT you always have the option to not go down that road. You have the option to try to better yourself and make something of yourself. Although most people don't do that, they don't always pull a gun on a cop. That is a serious offense and I feel like you guys are so focused on the fact that he's our age that you're blinded by what he did. Jeremy, I don't understand what you're saying. I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me so if you could maybe clarify that would be great. Thanks. Kirstina, I do get what you're saying. Most kids need to see what can happen but this kid is plenty old enough to know right from wrong.

I realize that, but the people that are the most likely to pull a gun are the ones that have the most messed up life beforehand in most cases. We should try them as children, and try to rehabilitate them. Before your 18, and move, a large part of what you do, and know is influenced by your parents, and other senor figures in your life, and even friends Until you reach adulthood, its hard to be your own person, especially in the environment that generates this type of person. There is the odd person in there that is just a bad person, and it is all there fault, but we need to try to rehabilitate them as a child, not as an adult.

Jeremy, there's a major difference between crime and legal contracts. They don't have anything to do with each other. Sentencing teens like adults is important because it protects us. It's a safety issue. Plus it tells other kids, "You break the law, you get in huge trouble." And they don't allow people under 18 to sign contracts without parental consent to protect them from making stupid decisions.

Natalie I'm sorry for the confusion. I was replying more to the article then directly to your post. To clarify I disagree with your position about putting juveniles into adult court that commit violent crimes. At least with the current system we have in place. Kirstina I know there is a major difference between committing a violent crime and signing legal contracts/voting. That's my entire point. If a sixteen year old is not mentally mature or responsible enough to understand the long term consequences of voting then they most definitely aren't mature or responsible enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime like shooting at a police officer, an act that take far more mental maturity to fully understand when compared to voting. As long as our society wants to say that sixteen and seventeen year olds aren't mature enough to understand the consequences of something like voting then how can we expect them to understand these violent crimes that they commit. I'm all for placing older teens in adult court when they commit an adult crime but only if they aren't subjected to an unfounded and unreasonable double standard. Either sixteen year olds are on the same maturity level as adults or they aren't.

i think it is totally understandable because it shows that this kid is planning on doing crimes in the future.

i think that they did the right thing by arresting him if you are 16 then you are old enough to realize that shooting a cop isn't a good idea and you will have a punishment for it

Natalie i agree with your point of view on this article. If he is 16 he already knows what he is doing. We are all in high school and know well the consequences if we did that. I also agree with what you said about his background. It seems like this is a record and he already knows the consequences. So in my opinion he should be charged for adult crime.

I believe this kid should get charged as an adult because like they said in the article. He is a threat to society and to himself.

I agree with Natalie, everyone in the right mind should know shooting at someone; especially a police officer is wrong. And know their will be consequences to follow. So yes, juveniles should be charged as an adult depending on the circumstances.

I agree with charging juveniles as adults. People should know the right from wrongs at an early age and receive the consequences though an understanding of what they did wrong.

I agree with Melissa, people should know the difference from right and wrong, they definitely know the incentives for doing wrong as well.

Jeremy, I don't quite understand where you stand on the issue. You said that you realize there's a difference but then you said, and I quote, "Kirstina I know there is a major difference between committing a violent crime and signing legal contracts/voting. That's my entire point. If a sixteen year old is not mentally mature or responsible enough to understand the long term consequences of voting then they most definitely aren't mature or responsible enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime like shooting at a police officer, an act that take far more mental maturity to fully understand when compared to voting." You're contradicting yourself there and in your original comment.

Obviously there is something wrong with society if we have mere teenagers pulling out weapons and assaulting people to the point of felony. I think that the punishment is completely fair for such a sick individual. Criminal behaviors are not taught, but learned so he had to have learned this from someone he knew or a parent with a criminal record. Either way, what he did was wrong and he deserves to be behind bars.

I agree with charging minors as adults because this article is one of many where the felon was a minor. I did research over this in another class and i found many articles where they were charging a minor with adult charges because of how brutal the murders they committed where. Like i argued in my other paper "is your loved one's life any less valuable just because they got murdered by a minor"

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/03/sport/football/dutch-linesman-killed-football/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 Here's another case of teenagers committing violent crimes. They beat this man to death. There were two 15 year-olds and a 16 year-old.

they should charge minors as adults because they will be out in the streets again and doing more crimies. its there own fault that they get charged thats why they should face charges alone.

I think if you do the crime, you pay the time whenever the government wants you to.

i say same charge for everyone no matter what

if you're willing to make the decision to break the law and commit a serious crime with the consequences of an adult then you should definitely suffer the same consequences no matter your age.

if anyone commits a crime they should be charged the same no matter what age

I agree with the idea that no matter your age, if you commit a serious crime, you should suffer the consequences. Say a teenager decides to murder someone... Just because they're a minor, should they be charged with a lesser offense than an adult would have? NO. If you are willing, capable, and have the mental capacity and audacity to commit such crimes, you deserve prison and whatever other punishment you receive.

Great discussion guys! Here is some more food for thought. People who do bad things need punishment, but there is plenty of scientific evidence that teenage brains are in a state of development that doesn't excuse bad acts, but can help explain it. http://goo.gl/MXEAd Ask yourself if you are the "same person" you were when you were 5 years old? I can tell you, you will make decisions differently when you are 25, and probably 65.

This is a good point i have to say. That's why I think we need to do our best to reform kids, not just punish them. Make it clear that their will be consequences, but try them as hardened, adult criminals is not the way to do it.

This is an extremely touchy subject. It's hard to lay out things like this without stepping on toes of other controversial subjects like voting age and military eligability

Honestly, the mandate is lifted (for Iowa at least) so if you do not want to wear a mask, vaccinated or not you shouldn't have to. It is your choice. And you should especially not have to have the vaccine to travel and put something in your body not proven to be safe or cause long-term effects. There are bigger problems to worry about than if Americans will lie and say they're vaccinated to not wear their mask especially if it's not mandated in the area.

I am interested in how the cases will turn out now that more people are not wearing masks. If it gets too bad I'm sure something else will be put into place.

I wonder how the government is going to force non vaccinated people to wear a mask. It is real easy to just say you're vaccinated when you really aren't.

i don't think that people will be honest about their vaccinations only to not wear their mask. not everyone carries their vaccination card with them(although we should, i know i don't)

I think this is going to be interesting to see. So many people were already refusing to wear masks and I think this might just make it worse.

I don't think this was the right move, as America is nowhere close to herd immunity

I have still seen people on social media that have admitted to not wearing masks and not getting vaccinated citing "My body, my choice". This is idiotic and people think that the government is out to get them and control them by wanting them to wear masks and getting the vaccine. There are also people who don't trust the vaccine for no good reason.

I don't think many people are out there being honest. Many are going to think that if it isn't required why would they wear one? It's a lot of trust on something you don't have a definite answer for.

now people might not be required to wear a mask if they are fully vaccinated so fewer people will stop wearing masks. Even people who are not vaccinated are going to use that excuse that "they are vaccinated"

People are going to lie about being vaccinated, just like they lie about having a medical exemption. All we can do is hope that people will be honest.