# data[].attributes.headline
RESEARCH DATABASES (not limited to these, but find a reliable source)

# data[].attributes.subject
RESEARCH DATABASES (not limited to these, but find a reliable source)

# data[].attributes.body
Opposing Viewpoints in Context

Global Issues in Context

American History

U.S. History in Context

# data[].attributes.body
Group Member Name:
Jack Peterson

1.  Title - "Volkswagen: The scandal explained"

2.  Summary -  In September 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that many VW cars being sold in America had a "defeat device" - or software - in diesel engines that could detect when they were being tested, changing the performance accordingly to improve results. The German car giant has since admitted cheating emissions tests in the US.

3. Implications of Research (Why is it important?) - This is important because it shows the lengths corporations will go to just to save some money. They will risk environmental safety and drop all ethics by cheating the EPA system just to turn more profit. This shows how they are driven solely by profit and are willing to lie and cheat their way to it, no matter the consequence.

4.  Connection to The Grapes of Wrath - This is similar to how the land owners would refuse to farm on certain land because it would result in a surplus of supply. This would cause the demand to decrease and prices to drop as well, but this is at the cost of the starving workers and families who could use that land to produce food for survival. In both examples, the corporation is willing to sacrifice public safety in favor of their profit, dropping any ethics or sense of morality they may have possessed prior.
(INSERT THE LINK)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is Volkswagen accused of?

It's been dubbed the "diesel dupe". In September, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that many VW cars being sold in America had a "defeat device" - or software - in diesel engines that could detect when they were being tested, changing the performance accordingly to improve results. The German car giant has since admitted cheating emissions tests in the US.

VW has had a major push to sell diesel cars in the US, backed by a huge marketing campaign trumpeting its cars' low emissions. The EPA's findings cover 482,000 cars in the US only, including the VW-manufactured Audi A3, and the VW models Jetta, Beetle, Golf and Passat. But VW has admitted that about 11 million cars worldwide, including eight million in Europe, are fitted with the so-called "defeat device".

The company has also been accused by the EPA of modifying software on the 3 litre diesel engines fitted to some Porsche and Audi as well as VW models. VW has denied the claims, which affect at least 10,000 vehicles.

In November, VW said it had found "irregularities" in tests to measure carbon dioxide emissions levels that could affect about 800,000 cars in Europe - including petrol vehicles. However, in December it said that following investigations, it had established that this only affected about 36,000 of the cars it produces each year.

This 'defeat device' sounds like a sophisticated piece of kit.

Full details of how it worked are sketchy, although the EPA has said that the engines had computer software that could sense test scenarios by monitoring speed, engine operation, air pressure and even the position of the steering wheel.

When the cars were operating under controlled laboratory conditions - which typically involve putting them on a stationary test rig - the device appears to have put the vehicle into a sort of safety mode in which the engine ran below normal power and performance. Once on the road, the engines switched out of this test mode.

The result? The engines emitted nitrogen oxide pollutants up to 40 times above what is allowed in the US.

What has been VW's response?

"We've totally screwed up," said VW America boss Michael Horn, while the group's chief executive at the time, Martin Winterkorn, said his company had "broken the trust of our customers and the public". Mr Winterkorn resigned as a direct result of the scandal and was replaced by Matthias Mueller, the former boss of Porsche.

"My most urgent task is to win back trust for the Volkswagen Group - by leaving no stone unturned," Mr Mueller said on taking up his new post.

VW has also launched an internal inquiry.

With VW recalling millions of cars worldwide from early next year, it has set aside €6.7bn (£4.8bn) to cover costs. That resulted in the company posting its first quarterly loss for 15 years of €2.5bn in late October.

But that's unlikely to be the end of the financial impact. The EPA has the power to fine a company up to $37,500 for each vehicle that breaches standards - a maximum fine of about $18bn.

The costs of possible legal action by car owners and shareholders "cannot be estimated at the current time", VW added.

How widespread are VW's problems?

What started in the US has spread to a growing number of countries. The UK, Italy, France, South Korea, Canada and, of course, Germany, have opened investigations. Throughout the world, politicians, regulators and environmental groups are questioning the legitimacy of VW's emissions testing.

VW will recall 8.5 million cars in Europe, including 2.4 million in Germany and 1.2 million in the UK, and 500,000 in the US as a result of the emissions scandal.

No wonder the carmaker's shares have fallen by about a third since the scandal broke.

Will more heads roll?

It's still unclear who knew what and when, although VW must have had a chain of management command that approved fitting cheating devices to its engines, so further departures are likely.

Christian Klingler, a management board member and head of sales and marketing is leaving the company, although VW said this was part of long-term planned structural changes and was not related to recent events.

In 2014, in the US, regulators raised concerns about VW emissions levels, but these were dismissed by the company as "technical issues" and "unexpected" real-world conditions. If executives and managers wilfully misled officials (or their own VW superiors) it's difficult to see them surviving.

Are other carmakers implicated?

That's for the various regulatory and government inquiries to determine. California's Air Resources Board is now looking into other manufacturers' testing results. Ford, BMW and Renault-Nissan have said they did not use "defeat devices", while other firms have either not commented or simply stated that they comply with the law.

The UK trade body for the car industry, the SMMT, said: "The EU operates a fundamentally different system to the US - with all European tests performed in strict conditions as required by EU law and witnessed by a government-appointed independent approval agency."

But it added: "The industry acknowledges that the current test method is outdated and is seeking agreement from the European Commission for a new emissions test that embraces new testing technologies and is more representative of on-road conditions."

That sounds like EU testing rules need tightening, too.

Environmental campaigners have long argued that emissions rules are being flouted. "Diesel cars in Europe operate with worse technology on average than the US," said Jos Dings, from the pressure group Transport & Environment. "Our latest report demonstrated that almost 90% of diesel vehicles didn't meet emission limits when they drive on the road. We are talking millions of vehicles."

Car analysts at the financial research firm Bernstein agree that European standards are not as strict as those in the US. However, the analysts said in a report that there was, therefore, "less need to cheat". So, if other European carmakers' results are suspect, Bernstein says the "consequences are likely to be a change in the test cycle rather than legal action and fines".

It's all another blow for the diesel market.

Certainly is. Over the past decade and more, carmakers have poured a fortune into the production of diesel vehicles - with the support of many governments - believing that they are better for the environment. Latest scientific evidence suggests that's not the case, and there are even moves to limit diesel cars in some cities.

Diesel sales were already slowing, so the VW scandal came at a bad time. "The revelations are likely to lead to a sharp fall in demand for diesel engine cars," said Richard Gane, automotive expert at consultants Vendigital.

"In the US, the diesel car market currently represents around 1% of all new car sales and this is unlikely to increase in the short to medium term.

"However, in Europe the impact could be much more significant, leading to a large tranche of the market switching to petrol engine cars virtually overnight."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's been dubbed the "diesel dupe". In September, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that many VW cars being sold in America had a "defeat device" - or software - in diesel engines that could detect when they were being tested, changing the performance accordingly to improve results.

# data[].attributes.body
Group Member Name: Jenny

1.  Title: Machines, not Americans, could replace immigrant workers.

2.  Summary: The RAISE Act, passed by President Trump to open more jobs for Americans, unables immigrant workers to work. The baby boomers are retiring and Americans are not willing to work on agriculture, America depends on foreign workers. However, since they are unable to work, machines are taking over farming. Even though the pay is higher than minimum wage, they are lacking people to work for five years in a row and lost $13 million in unharvested crops.

3. Implications of Research (Why is it important?)

It is clear that the industry, or machines, are taking over agriculture, because of lack of farmers to work on the farm. Also, foreign workers are not getting jobs because of new act passed by President Trump, which is forcing agriculture to use machinery to do the job.

4.  Connection to The Grapes of Wrath

The foreign workers are not having equal opportunities even though America needs more workers. To make up for that loss, America is replacing farmers with machines, just like tractors replaced workers.
However, the reason they are replacing is not because they have too many workers or because they want to make more money like in The Grapes of Wrath.

(INSERT THE LINK)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jim Bogart sees a growing trend in his patch of America: Farmers are turning more and more to machines because they can't find enough workers to harvest fruits and vegetables.

It's an issue costing California farmers millions of dollars and, they argue, it will eventuallymean higher food prices at supermarkets.

"With the shortage of workers, we have to develop other means to help us grow, harvest and process our crops -- robotics, mechanization, automation," says Bogart, who is president of the Grower-Shipper Association of Central California.

The farmers in Bogart's area aren't alone. Farmers across the state are investing more in robots and other automated technologies as they struggle to fill job openings, according to a Federal Reserve survey published in July.

Related: Trump immigration plan to cost 4.6 million jobs, Ivy League study finds

That reality in California may be a wrinkle in an immigration plan backed by President Trump. The thinking behind the policy is that it would provide more job opportunities and better wages for Americans by reducing legal immigration to the U.S. by 50% over the next decade.

The bill, known as the RAISE Act, seeks to create a skills-based immigration system that would particularly cut back on low-skilled, foreign-born workers.

"This is a major promise to the American people to push for merit-based immigration reform that protects U.S. workers," White House adviser Stephen Miller said August 2nd.

But one prominent U.S. official says that cutting immigration won't lead to more jobs. Instead, robots are more likely to swoop in.

Related: Trump immigration policy poses risk to job market

"If the labor is not available, this is not going to lead to more employment of people in the U.S.It's going to lead to more use of technology and machinery," San Francisco Federal Reserve President John Williams told CNNMoney Tuesday. "We are definitely hearing a lot of these stories."

Worker shortages have been a long-term problem at farms across America.

Bogart, the farming association leader, estimates farmers in his region are missing 15% to 20% of the workers they need.

The pay isn't bad: California farm hands earn $12 to $14 an hour, according to the Economic Policy Institute. That's above California's minimum wage of $10 an hour.

Related: How America's immigrant workforce is changing

"American workers have been unable or unwilling to fill these positions," says Bogart.

Farmers' increasing investment in automation poses a challenge to Trump's immigration plan to carve out more jobs for Americans. It also runs parallel to the trend in American manufacturing: Trump wants companies to produce more in the United States and less in Mexico or China.

But trade experts say Trump's pressure on them will lead to more automation in the U.S., not more jobs.

Trump's immigration plan doesn't get rave reviews from academia, either.

The University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School concluded in an analysis that the proposed policy would cost 4.6 million U.S. jobs by the year 2040. White House officials say the Wharton study has a methodology flaw.

Related: Low-skilled immigration is petering out

There were 27 million foreign-born workers in the U.S. last year. As Baby Boomers retire, economists say America grows increasingly reliant on foreigners to keep the economy growing.

"If we were to cut back dramatically on immigration, that would pose a risk to long-term economic growth," says Luke Tilley, chief economist at Wilmington Trust.

As for farmers, the unpicked fruits and veggies mean one thing: lost profits.

Farmers in central coastal California lost $13 million last year in unharvested crops because of labor shortages, according to the Grower-Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. It's the fifth straight year farmers couldn't find enough workers.

Unpicked crops will also mean higher prices for Americans at the supermarket.

"If there's less product or harvest, the price for consumers will probably go up," says Bogart.

CNNMoney (New York) First published August 18, 2017: 6:06 AM ET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Machines, not Americans, could replace immigrant workers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's an issue costing California farmers millions of dollars and, they argue, it will eventuallymean higher food prices at supermarkets. "With the shortage of workers, we have to develop other means to help us grow, harvest and process our crops -- robotics, mechanization, automation," says Bogart, who is president of the Grower-Shipper Association of Central California.

# data[].attributes.body
The human greed that Steinbeck establishes is to accentuate his own criticism towards those in power. By showing people the greed of others, he attempted to open the general public's eyes to how the "Others" have to live, along with the stark contrast between those with, only being content with more and those without, who are fighting and are content with just survival.

# data[].attributes.body
Steinbeck creates a sense of US vs THEM to show the separation of those that have land and those that don't. It also accentuates the strength of hunger vs the strength of greed. Lastly, he does it to show they way the two people look at the land, US looks at it in hunger what THEM sees it as just a number on the bottom line.

# data[].attributes.body
Group Member Name:  Patrick Cheon

1.  Texas blocks local fracking bans

2.  Summary
Fracking is a relatively new method in extracting oil from the ground. Much of the fracking in the U.S. occurs in Texas.
Citizens of Denton, Texas voted to keep fracking sites away from their homes and school. There are many complaints with noise, bright lights, and the toxic fumes that result from the process. However, Texas Governor Greg Abbot signed a bill which completely disregarded local petitions.

3. Implications of Research (Why is it important?)

It is important because it goes against the very belief in which America was founded. A democracy should be about the people's decision, but instead the authority makes the decision. Even worse, the motivations for keeping the fracking sites is for money. Prime example of how greed and new industry overtakes ethics.
4.  Connection to The Grapes of Wrath
Similarly to the Grapes of Wrath, there is the authority that is pushing people out of the Hoovervilles and the one police officer that stepped over the stolen land. It is the authority that is performing an unethical action that traces back to the development of new industry. The farmer stole the land, because there was no work, due to more efficient machines. The people's complaints are because of the newly developed fracking sites. Both times the weak majority is overpowered.

(INSERT THE LINK)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When the citizens of Denton, Texas voted to keep fracking sites away from their homes and schools, industry cronies exploited our corrupt political system to strip the people of their right to decide what happens in their own backyards.

Today on Follow the Money, we take a look at exactly how it happened:

Note: all sources are linked at the bottom of this page

Residents of Denton, TX voted to ban drilling sites in their backyards

Last November, the people of Denton, Texas voted to ban a natural gas extraction process known as hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," in their city. Despite being outspent 10-1 by the oil and gas industry in the month leading up to the vote, the people of Denton passed the state's first local fracking ban with a citizen-led referendum.

It's not surprising that Denton citizens didn't want any more fracking sites in their city: residents have been complaining about noise, bright lights, and toxic fumes spewing into the air from dozens of drilling sites - some as close as 200 feet from their homes.

That's when Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill to override local fracking bans

After the Denton vote, Governor Greg Abbot signed a bill banning not just Denton, but all Texas towns from making their own decisions about oil and gas drilling. Why would a small government "conservative" use government power to take away local control and overrule the vote of the People?

Just follow the money.

Now, political cronies are calling the shots

House Bill 40, which was overwhelmingly passed by the Texas State Legislature, stripped cities and towns of their right to make decisions about oil and gas drilling in their communities. Instead, H.B. 40 put that power in the oily, oily hands of the Texas Railroad Commission (TRC) - a state agency that's completely owned by the industry it's supposed to regulate.

According to public records, TRC Chairwoman Christi Cradick received $828,828 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry. 8 of 10 of TRC Commissioner Ryan Sitton's top contributors are CEOs or presidents of oil, gas, and well companies. And TRC Commissioner David Porter received his largest campaign contribution from the industry, which outspent his next largest contributor by 300%.

In fact, an investigation by local journalists and watchdogs found that the TRC receives 80% of its money from the industry it's supposed to regulate.

Cronyism and corruption drowned out the will of the People

This story is about more than just fracking or the oil and gas industry - it's a perfect example of what happens when big money combines with big government to strip citizens of their right to govern themselves.

Ironically, Greg Abbott ran his campaign for governor around protecting local communities from government overreach, and championed the idea of local control. One of his campaign videos was actually titled "Greg Abbott Will Return Local Control to Texas schools."

Apparently, the $9 million Greg Abbott received from the oil and gas industry throughout his career gave him cause to reconsider his position on the "local control" issue. And let's not forget the Texas State Legislature: its members received more than $5 million in contributions from the oil and gas industry in the last election cycle alone.

It's a bad situation when city leaders' hands are tied. There seems to be an attitude that big state government knows better than the citizens of a city. I just think - conservative or liberal - that is something you don't do in Texas.- Denton Councilman Kevin Roden

This level of corruption is outrageous - Help us spread the word

We're already building a movement to pass Anti-Corruption Acts at the local, state, and federal level to make this kind of behavior illegal (the way it should be). However, we can't do that unless we educate millions of Americans on our nation's corruption problem - and the plan to fix it. Please, help us spread the word:

1. Share this page using the fancy buttons below

2. Subscribe to our YouTube channel

3. Use the big, yellow "Spread the Word" button to join our email list. We'll send you more content just like this, and you can unsubscribe at any time if we start to annoy you.

Sources / Further Reading

1. Video: Denton residents next door to fracking sites

2. Video: Even more Denton residents next door to fracking sites

3. Dallas Morning News: Industry spending big to keep fracking ban out of Denton

4. Fox 4 KDFW: Initial story on Denton's passage of fracking ban

5. Yahoo Finance: Texas overturns local fracking bans

6. News 8 WFAA: Investigative report of oil & gas financing of Texas Railroad Commission

7. Fox 26 KIRV: Did Greg Abbott flip flop on local control?

8. Natl. Institute on Money in State Politics: Career campaign finance data for Greg Abbott

9. Austin American-Statesman: Oil & gas financing of Texas State Legislature

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A town in Texas almost banned fracking. Then big money stepped in.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When the citizens of Denton, Texas voted to keep fracking sites away from their homes and schools, industry cronies exploited our corrupt political system to strip the people of their right to decide what happens in their own backyards.

# data[].attributes.body
Group Member Name:
Aaron Solens
1.  Title

Monsanto’s Weed Killer, Dicamba, Divides Farmers

2.  Summary
Farmers have planted a new sort of seed, a GMO version of soybean, but many farmers are alarmed by this. Those alarmed farmers have turned against the company, due to the dicamba (a weed killer) that drifts onto their farms. The new seeds are meant to be resisted to dicamba, and so farmers are able to use dicamba  without fear of killing their crops. However, these seeds are extremely expensive compared to normal seeds, and the dicamba drift is hurting other farms, forcing them to use this new type of seed.

3. Implications of Research (Why is it important?)
This is important because it shows how manipulative the company can be. It can make people use something that will inevitably damage other peoples crops, forcing them to use this new expensive crop.

4.  Connection to The Grapes of Wrath
This connects to The Grapes of Wrath because the machine/industry has all of the power over the people even though the people are the ones doing actual work. Either conform to the new expensive seeds or get no harvest, that should be the motto of the company. And the people's complaints do absolutely nothing, because there are always people waiting in line for their jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
But weeds are becoming more resistant to Roundup, so the industry is developing seeds that are tolerant to more herbicides. Environmentalists and some weed scientists worry that making seeds resistant to more weed killers will increase the use of pesticides.

Monsanto and another company, BASF, have also developed a new, less volatile version of dicamba, which has been around for decades. DowDuPont, which has its own dicamba-resistant seed, is introducing crops resistant to 2,4-D, another old herbicide.

Monsanto formally challenged Arkansas' ban earlier this month, insisting that 99 percent of its customers were satisfied. It plans to double the use of its new dicamba-resistant soybeans seeds to 40 million acres by next year.

"New technologies take some time to learn," said Scott Partridge, Monsanto's vice president for global strategy. "Thus far, what we've seen in the field, the vast majority, more than three-quarters of them, has been due to not following the label."

The company has also claimed that Arkansas' decision was " tainted by the involvement" of two scientists tied to a rival, Bayer. Considering that Bayer is acquiring Monsanto, it was an awkward step. Bayer called the men " pre-eminent weed scientists."

Some foresaw drift problems with dicamba.

For years, Steve Smith, once a member of a dicamba advisory panel set up by Monsanto, urged the company to change course. Mr. Smith, the head of agriculture at Red Gold, a tomato processor based in Indiana, aired his concerns at a congressional hearing in 2010.

"The widespread use of dicamba is incompatible with Midwestern agriculture," he said in his testimony. "Even the best, the most conscientious farmers cannot control where this weed killer will end up."

Monsanto eventually removed him from its advisory panel, citing what it called a "conflict of interest." Mr. Smith had helped start a coalition of farm interests critical of dicamba and 2,4-D.

Mr. Partridge said such internal alarms had not been ignored.

"Those concerns are what led to us developing the low-volatility formulation" of the herbicide, he said.

Dicamba does kill weeds. Brent Schorfheide, a farmer in southern Illinois, said it had been extremely effective on those no longer responsive to Roundup.

"It cleaned everything up," he said. "Without it, our fields would be a disaster."

But some farmers say they face a difficult choice - either buy the new genetically modified seeds or run the risk that their soybeans would be damaged more by a neighbor's spraying of weed killers than by the weeds themselves.

"If you don't buy Xtend, you're going to be hurt," said Michael Kemp, a Missouri farmer, referring to the brand name of Monsanto's seeds.

The leaves on his soybeans puckered and curled after they were exposed to dicamba, a problem known as cupping. The cost will not be clear until after harvest.

"You're going to have to buy their product because their chemical is drifting around," he said, adding that growing crops that are not modified is becoming impossible. "The people who are growing non-G.M.O., which I did for a while, they're just left out in left field, I guess."

A pivotal debate centers on how damage is caused.

Monsanto cites particles that drift in the wind when the product is sprayed improperly or when unapproved versions of dicamba are used. That can be addressed through training and enforcement.

But another problem is as much to blame, many farmers and weed scientists say, one that raises questions about the entire product program.

Because genetically modified crops allow dicamba to be sprayed later in the year, after crops emerge from the ground, and in hotter and more humid weather, the chemical is susceptible to what is known as "volatility" - it can turn into a gas and drift onto whatever happens to be nearby.

While Monsanto and BASF modified the new versions of the herbicide they are selling, they have not entirely solved the problem. So much dicamba is being used that even a small percentage of drift can cause widespread damage.

Arkansas and Missouri said they were still investigating complaints. The Missouri Department of Agriculture referred questions on the extent of the crop damage to Kevin Bradley, a weed scientist at the University of Missouri, who said more than three million acres had been affected.

In an email, he said that particles drifting in the wind during spraying "may have been the largest reason, but not by much," adding, "I believe similar or perhaps slightly lower percentages can be attributed to volatility."

In a statement, the E.P.A. said, "This is still an ongoing investigation and we cannot speculate on what the underlying causes of damage may be."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Monsanto's Weed Killer, Dicamba, Divides Farmers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
But weeds are becoming more resistant to Roundup, so the industry is developing seeds that are tolerant to more herbicides. Environmentalists and some weed scientists worry that making seeds resistant to more weed killers will increase the use of pesticides.

# data[].attributes.body
The context in this passage shows how these land owners, who were once squatters and part of the poor population, have forgotten those below them and are purchasing land for their own land. They have these "fallow fields" because they do not want supply to increase, for prices would go down. In reality, people need the food that could be produced from these lands, but these greedy owners decline to allow these people to survive solely for economic gain.

# data[].attributes.body
The passage shows the extent to which the large farm owners in California let greed overtake their moral standing. In order for the owners to maintain their land and wealth, they needed to put down any possibility of a large scale revolt of the poor majority population. They did this by destroying Hoovervilles and creating laws that further restrict the poor and also having

# data[].attributes.body
The industry takes over men, which unables okies to work and make money to support their families. On the other hand, the Californians are gaining more wealth from increased production. Even though Okies struggles to survive through hunger, Californians' greed constantly increases, which make them focus on their own wealth instead of helping poor Okies.

# data[].attributes.body
This quote happens after a poor man plants food in someone's weed filled land. A police man comes and trashes the plants, because if a man plants and feeds off a land, he believes it is his land. And so he may do drastic things just for a tiny plot of land, even "die fighting for the little plot".

# data[].attributes.body
Californians (them) see the land as something that gives them money, while Okies (us) see the land as part of nature that provides them food and help them survive. This juxtaposition emphasizes the different view point of land and different life situation of rich and poor.

# data[].attributes.body
The irony present in this passage is how these landowners, or Californians, view the Okies as peasants, thieves, and people who live a extremely different and wrong life. This irony helps strengthen the author's claim on the somewhat idiotic viewpoint of the rich owners, for they make these Okies live like this and they, like how they view the workers as thieves, where in reality they have stolen the land from the common man. These owners are mocking and poking fun at the workers, but in reality they fear these characteristics make them stronger than themselves in this fight.

# data[].attributes.body
"There's thirty thousan' acres, out west of here. Layin' there. Jesus, what I could do with that, with five acres of that! Why, hell, I'd have ever'thing to eat."

# data[].attributes.body
"And the great owners, who had become throgh their holdings both more and less than men, ran to their destruction, and used every means that in the long run would destroy them. "

# data[].attributes.body
"The tractors which throw men out of work, the belt lines which carry loads, the machines which produce, all were increased; and more and more families scampered on the highways"

# data[].attributes.body
"They farmed on paper; and they forgot the land, the smell, the feel of it, and remembered only that they owned it, remembered only what they gained and lost by it."

# data[].attributes.body
"Get him off quick! He'll think he owns it. He might even die fighting for the little plot among the Jimson weeds.

# data[].attributes.body
"Outlanders, foreigners.

Sure, they talk the same language, but they ain't the same. Look how they live. Think any of us folks'd live like that? Hell, no!"

# data[].attributes.body
1. Research contemporary examples of industry overtaking the average farmer.

# data[].attributes.body
2. Research contemporary examples of industry supplanting morality/ethics.

# data[].attributes.body
Essential Question #1
How and why does Steinbeck create a sense of "US vs THEM" in The Grapes of Wrath?

# data[].attributes.body
Essential Question #2

How and why does Steinbeck establish this sense of HUMAN GREED throughout The Grapes of Wrath?