Case
Study – Flood of Thailand 2011
<Selfish government made a
bad decision. I think people should be equal
Rich=Poor>
|
|||
Values
|
Economic
|
Education
|
Recreation
|
Positive Short-Term Consequences
|
Positive
to the rich people.
|
No,
|
No (except
computer addicted people)
|
Negative Short-Term Consequences
|
Negative
to the poor people because the government decided to protect Bangkok (Rich
people).
|
All
schools were closed for a while because it was very dangerous out there.
Students were not able to get a proper education.
|
Most of
the people stayed home and waited for the flood to finish. So there was no
chance for them to go out and play.
|
Positive Long-Term Consequences
|
No
Positive effect at all.
|
No
|
No
|
Negative Long-Term Consequences
|
Thailand
is a country of rice. Poor people make most of their money by farming, But
they lost their job because of the flood. So huge negative effect.
|
Same
|
Most of
the people stayed home and waited for the flood to finish. So there was no
chance for them to go out and play.
|
Good thinking and filling in the boxes, but you need to be more specific. For example, bad for rich people, how so??
답글삭제Plus your environmental decision needs to be in question form. For example, "SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT BE EQUAL AND NOT BLOCK THE CITY?"
90%