Thesis Statement: THE BENEFITS OF CREDIT CARDS AND HOW TO CONTROL AND USE IT PROPERLY.

1. There are two kinds of people in the world:

1.1 Those who have thick overflowing wallets.
1.2 Those who don’t have thick overflowing wallets.

2. There are different types of cashless transactions:

2.1 Some use debit cards.
2.2 Malaysia and other countries use reloadable cards.
2.3 Credit cards are the most commonly used cards.

3. Advantages of having credit cards

3.1 It can be used on emergency funds for hospital bills, tuition fees, and other incidentals.
And also for shopping too.
3.2 Cards are accepted almost everywhere.
3.3 Credit cards save you from carrying loads of cash.
3.4 They offer good deals like a free meal from your favorite restaurant, saves time to shop
online by just swiping, AND
3.5 Cards give rewards like cashback on groceries or gas
3.6 It builds your credibility

4. There are different risks that may arise from using credit cards:
4.1 If you don’t pay off your balance in full and on time, the interest can spike.
4.2 Your debt, meanwhile, if you won’t pay on time, can quickly spiral out of control

5. Bloomwood offers various tips to save credit card users from financial ruin:
5.1 Always keep tabs of your spending habits. You might be surprised how a cup
of coffee every morning costs you a lot of money. Now’s the time to cut off
unnecessary spending.
5.2 Don’t buy items on a whim. Do you really need a new bag to go with your
new shoes?
5.3 Always pay in full and on time. It will save you from increasing interest rates.
5.4 Keep within your limit. Never go overboard.
5.5 If you are not strong enough to resist temptation, leave your card behind. Right. Now.
5.6 Once you’ve paid all your debts (congrats!), think twice, thrice, four times if you really
need credit cards.
Task 2

Topic: Philippine Law Would Make 9-Year-Olds Criminally Liable

A juvenile offender, according to the United States Department of Justice, is a person who is found to
have committed a violation to the law before the legal age (in most cases, 18 years of age). The issue on the
criminal liability of juvenile offenders is still up for debate as the ages of juvenile offenders vary from country
to country. According to Jeffrey (2015), countries such as America, India, Australia, United Kingdom, and
Canada have set the minimum age of juvenile offenders from seven to 12. However, other countries such as
China, Japan, Spain, Brazil, and Mexico have set the minimum age of juvenile offenders from 14 to 18 years
old. The current Philippine law states that the minimum age of criminal liability for a child to be exempted
from the law is 15 years of age. Furthermore, the Juvenile Justice and Welfare System are concerned with the
actions and well-being of children at risk as well as the children in conflict with the law. An amendment to the
Juvenile Delinquency Act of 2006 has been filed by Pantaleon Alvarez, Presumptive House Speaker and Davao
del Norte 1st District Representative, and Fredenil Castro, Capiz 2nd District Representative. The proposed
modifications for the bill aim to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility from 15 to nine years old
due to cases of adult criminals who purposely use children below 15 in the commission of crimes—such as
drug trafficking, jueteng bet collectors, pick-pocketing, and snatching—in order to escape from being held
criminally liable. However, lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility does not sustain a just and
progressive society. Ultimately, this paper will discuss different arguments toward the criminal liability and the
age of juvenile offenders.

Decisions of people are heavily influenced by one’s surroundings. According to some evidence in the
field of neuroscience, the decision-making ability of children widely differs from that of adults. Through time,
adults undergo more experiences, challenges, and socialization; thus, they are more capable of making
decisions as their brains are more developed and more critical. On the other hand, there are people who have
not undergone their adolescent years and are still subject to their formative years and socialization, which is
necessary for their development. They are still in formation as their ability to intake information and the way
they react or learn from certain situations are still growing; thus, making children less mature than those who
are past the adolescent stage. Furthermore, children may be able to distinguish right from wrong; however,
because of the ongoing changes in their brain anatomy and brain activity, they become more vulnerable to
riskier and more reckless behavior. Moreover, the brain does not fully develop until the early 20s, particularly
parts that control the behavior of a person such as control of impulses, foresight, and comprehending
consequences.

In retrospect, crimes around the world seem to have sprung out from various reasons, so much so that
for juvenile crimes, the reasons may also differ–some are caused by personal tendencies, while others are due
to their social environment. Whereas, children are more subject to vulnerability and may commit criminal
offenses because of their familial, personal, and social circumstances. Thus, the individualism resembled by
the youth makes it biased to generalize the punishment of their actions because the gravity of the offenses
varies. Children, most especially, should be living their lives exercising their rights to freedom, education, and
happiness–under the loving care of their parents. However, children around the world who are arrested for
alleged wrongdoings are not given the protection they rightfully deserve from what has been stipulated on the
Convention on the Rights of the Child. Moreover, children, sometimes even those below the age of 12, who
are accused of committing a crime, are sometimes treated the way adult criminals are treated–which hampers
them from exercising any of their rights. So much so that, in a country like the Philippines, where the justice
system is flawed and where corruption is prevailed, it would be truly unfair to the child by detaining him or her
in an environment where there is no system at all. This is detrimental the child’s development, especially
those who are still in their formative years, because children are heavily influenced by their surroundings.
Therefore, changes in the filed bill must be research-based and thoroughly studied as opposed to being
heavily presumptive of children (especially below the age of nine). An alternative amendment to the bill could
be suggested, wherein children below the age of 12 should be exempted from their criminal liability. For these
children, a more systematic process should be done wherein the degree of their crime should be assessed
thoroughly first before taking the next step. If the degree of the crime is minor crime, the action taken by
court should be that children below the age of 12 should be exempted from their criminal liability, however,
they should be under strict and close watch by their parents; this is in order to give leeway to the child in
realizing his or her mistakes and learning from them. If the count of these minor offenses increases to three,
they shall be stripped away from the care of their parents and taken into custody by the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD). However, if they have committed a major crime on their first count, they
should be taken to the DSWD as well. Meanwhile, children from the age of 13 to 17, since the Philippine legal
age is 18, shall automatically be taken to the custody of the DSWD. The role of the DSWD in this process would
be to create programs and seminars which shape the moralities and development of the child.

The congressmen who filed the amendment argued that the current law pampers youth offenders
who commit crimes knowing that these juvenile offenders can get away with it. Minors who engage in crimes
should be held responsible; however, the gravity of the offense should be taken into consideration in deciding
the punishment. Moreover, it is unjust to detain and prosecute youth offenders, regardless of the crime,
without giving them due process; in this case, considering the rights of a child and hampering his or her moral
and intellectual development. Authorities must not generalize the consequences for all juvenile offenders but
rather find the root cause of the crime and fix the real problem.

The government plays a responsibility in solving the real problem of adults using children in the
commission of crimes. The proposed bill on the amendment of the Juvenile law is a short-term remedy that
simply leads to a long-term problem because locking children in jail does not allow room for change. The bill
should be more progressive to help children transform their lives instead of being punished. The current law
states that rehabilitation services are provided under the supervision of trained staff where guests are cared
for under a structured therapeutic environment. However, rehabilitation centers are not funded and managed
to its full capability. The government should ensure rehabilitation centers are efficient in helping children at
risk and in conflict with the law.

In a world where crimes are committed daily, children are detained and arrested for their
wrongdoings, and where there are errors in the justice system, the rights of children should be reviewed.
Furthermore, in a country like the Philippines where poverty is so rampant and remains unsolved, there is a
higher chance of juvenile delinquency and there is a multitude of reasons as to why the crime was committed.
Therefore, the minimum age criminal liability in the Philippines should be lowered to 12 years old because of
the vulnerability and incapability in decision-making. Children below 12 are still psychosocially immature, thus
they are vulnerable to peer pressure because they seek for a sense of belongingness. Moreover, greater
efforts to enforce laws that prosecute adults who constrain children to be involved in criminal behavior must
be done. It is the policy of the State to ensure that children shall be taught to accept responsibility for their
words and deeds. It is the government’s role to protect and rehabilitate juvenile offenders through restorative
measures.
Thesis Statement: Lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility does not sustain a just and
progressive society.

1. The ages of juvenile offenders vary from country to country:

 1.1. America, India, Australia, United Kingdom, and Canada have set the minimum age of juvenile
offenders from seven to 12.
1.2. Other countries such as China, Japan, Spain, Brazil, and Mexico have set the minimum age of
juvenile offenders from 14 to 18 years old.
1.3. Philippine law states that the minimum age of criminal liability for a child to be exempted
from the law is 15 years of age.
2. Crimes that adult criminals who purposely use children below 15:
2.1. drug trafficking
2.2. jueteng bet collectors
2.3. pick-pocketing
2.4. snatching
3. The decision-making ability widely differs from children and adults:
3.1. Adults undergo more experiences, challenges, and socialization; thus, they are more capable
of making decisions
3.2. Children are still subject to their formative years and socialization, which is necessary for their
development. They are still in formation as their ability to intake information and the way they
react or learn from certain situations are still growing
4. A more systematic process for children who committed crime should be done wherein a degree of
their crime should be assessed thoroughly first before taking the next step.
4.1. If the degree of the crime is minor crime, the action taken by court should be that children
below the age of 12 should be exempted from their criminal liability
4.2. However, if they have committed a major crime on their first count, they should be taken to
the DSWD