P1. S1. After listening and reading the sources about the invention of money, I realized that not everyone views money the same way we do. S2. Even though I already knew that people all over the world view wealth and currency differently, but I didn’t think that it was as extreme citizens of Yap view currency. S3. I think that it was crazy that they used enormous stones that weighed hundreds of pounds as currency. S4. If that was the case, then everyone would know how money you had and if someone really had the energy to rob you, they would.
P2. Reading about the people of Yap reminded me of some of the things I learned in my Anthropology class earlier today. One of the things my professor discussed was how people from other societies, more specifically the western world, viewed each other. In this instance, individuals from “more developed” nations would probably view the people of Yap as being uncivilized just for something as little as their currency. Explorers and missionaries would have probably tried to make them “civilized” which is such crap because just because the people of Yap had a different way of living does not make them any less civilized than
P3. In the present day, the Japanese government planned on spending $116 billion (in Us dollars) to save economy. From what it looks like, the government is putting themselves even more in debt just to make minimum progress. The Japanese Prime Minister is arguing that spending all this money will create a cycle of borrowing and investing, which will increase employment. This ploy reminds of the saying “You have to spend to make money.”, which is true to some extent. But this plan could also backfire nd put them even more in debt.
Works cited
Tabuchi, H. “Japan Approves $116 Billion for Urgent Economic Status” New York Times. Web Jan. 30, 2014
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
feedback please
Gladly, Amanda, since you asked so nicely.
Feedback provided, —DSH
OK, Amanda. You’ve had a taste of massive feedback on your Morph post. Now let’s get to business.
P1. Tiny things first:
—S1. You can’t combine listening and reading the sources because it means reading the sources and listening the sources. What you mean is: After listening TO and reading the sources, or After reading and listening TO the sources.
—S1. Choose between two good options: 1) Not everyone views money the same way. 2) Not everyone views money the way we do.
—S2. You cannot use the combination “Even though . . . but.” One or the other
—S4. That was the case, so it’s illogical to say “If that was the case.”
Now for content:
S1 establishes that not every person shares a concept of money. (You don’t specify whether you mean cultures view money differently, or whether you mean individuals.) S2 repeats S1 completely, then identifies the Yap whose view of money seems extreme. S3 spells out the crazy. S4 identifies a problem with that kind of crazy.
To avoid the repetition of S1 and S2, combining them is easy.
Oops. I accidentally combined the first three sentences.
Adding S4 creates this:
The version above isn’t just shorter, Amanda; it avoids lots of noisy, non-claim language that distracts from your actual declarations. In part, it avoids:
—not everyone views money the same way we do
—people all over the world view wealth and currency differently
—it was as extreme as the Yap view of currency
None of that lost language makes an actual claim because it doesn’t identify the views you’re “talking about.”
P2. The first three sentences should be edited to: My anthropology professor says nations of the “more developed” West view cultures like the Yap as uncivilized, based on details as small as their cumbersome, “primitive” currency.
I very much appreciate your claims about explorers and missionaries, but maybe you can both edit them for brevity and clarity AND make them more specific. “Make them civilized” is very vague. So is “had a different way of living.” My version would be:
P3. Tiny things first:
—Please proofread before submitting for comments, Amanda. You must mean “to save THE economy,” “This ploy reminds ME of the saying.”
—$116 billion IS in US dollars. The dollar sign ($) says so. You need to translate only if the number is first given in another currency. “Japan will spend ¥ 1180 (116 billion US dollars).” or “Japan will spend ¥ 1180 ($116 billion). ”
—Government can be referred to in the singular or plural but not both together. So it’s either: “the government is putting itself” or “the legislators are putting themselves.” In your case, I think it’s: The government is putting the country into even more debt. (not themselves)
—Quotation punctuation is tricky but strict. Yours needs to look like this: . . . money,” which . . . .
Now to content:
Your three paragraphs should combine to make an organic whole, Amanda. I see no connection between P3 and the first 2 except that they were both assigned. What you say about the Japanese situation isn’t untrue, but it doesn’t bear any relation to your observations about Yap and the fei. Imagine you were researching a topic for quotes to support your thesis and the Japan reading had nothing you could use. You’d read more until you found a reading that was useful.
This process can be overwhelming, I know, Amanda. Did you find this useful? I need to know whether to adapt my technique for you. Feedback please.
I asked you on February 06 to respond to the sort of feedback I was providing. I haven’t heard from you yet.
No Grade.
This is an ungraded assignment, but the feedback process was supposed to prepare you for the graded A04: Money Rewrite.