Cause and Effect :: essays research papers

Cause and Effect of Price Wars   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When large sums of money are at stake, many companies bend and flex to their limits to guarantee defeat over the competition. Sometimes they take a loss in one area for a gain in another area. There is a cause for every action the company makes, and in return for their action there is an effect. Although the effect can sometimes be pre-determined, no one is really sure what the outcome is going to be until the time comes. There are millions of cars on the road today and they all require tires. When an owner replaces the tires on his or her vehicle, they can decide what make and model will be on the car. But when a buyer purchases a new car, they do not have the option of which tires they would like.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  There is severe competition in today’s tire market between Goodyear, Firestone, and Michelin. They all want their tire to appear on new cars. The tires that come on the car are usually determined by who has the lowest price for the best tires. But companies can bid too low in the heat of a price war. Since the company needs to make a profit on their product, the production cost is lowered, in tern the quality of the product could be lowered.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  A perfect example of this happened in 1997 between Goodyear and Firestone. They both wanted their tires to appear on the Ford Explorer. This brought a debate to the table. Who could make the better offer to Ford? Well, Firestone did. Goodyear could not match the price Firestone had offered, and at the same time meet their own quality standards. This caused Firestone to take that share of the market, and the effect of the low bid was to soon be realized.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Since Ford had accepted the low bid, Firestone did not have as much money to produce each tire. The lower price directly related to the lower quality of the tire. Also there was less budget for proper testing. Since, Firestone was quick to get their product mounted on the Explorer and on the market, the lower budgeted tire underwent poor, unrealistic testing. Investigators said that Ford never really tested these tires in real world conditions. They ran them at 90 miles per hour for 200 miles at and average temperature of 90 degrees, which is not exactly considered every day driving. Cause and Effect :: essays research papers Cause and Effect of Price Wars   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When large sums of money are at stake, many companies bend and flex to their limits to guarantee defeat over the competition. Sometimes they take a loss in one area for a gain in another area. There is a cause for every action the company makes, and in return for their action there is an effect. Although the effect can sometimes be pre-determined, no one is really sure what the outcome is going to be until the time comes. There are millions of cars on the road today and they all require tires. When an owner replaces the tires on his or her vehicle, they can decide what make and model will be on the car. But when a buyer purchases a new car, they do not have the option of which tires they would like.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  There is severe competition in today’s tire market between Goodyear, Firestone, and Michelin. They all want their tire to appear on new cars. The tires that come on the car are usually determined by who has the lowest price for the best tires. But companies can bid too low in the heat of a price war. Since the company needs to make a profit on their product, the production cost is lowered, in tern the quality of the product could be lowered.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  A perfect example of this happened in 1997 between Goodyear and Firestone. They both wanted their tires to appear on the Ford Explorer. This brought a debate to the table. Who could make the better offer to Ford? Well, Firestone did. Goodyear could not match the price Firestone had offered, and at the same time meet their own quality standards. This caused Firestone to take that share of the market, and the effect of the low bid was to soon be realized.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Since Ford had accepted the low bid, Firestone did not have as much money to produce each tire. The lower price directly related to the lower quality of the tire. Also there was less budget for proper testing. Since, Firestone was quick to get their product mounted on the Explorer and on the market, the lower budgeted tire underwent poor, unrealistic testing. Investigators said that Ford never really tested these tires in real world conditions. They ran them at 90 miles per hour for 200 miles at and average temperature of 90 degrees, which is not exactly considered every day driving.

Meaning of Life and Personality Essay

What is personality? Personality is defined as a ingrained and relatively enduring patterns of thoughts, feeling and behavior. How can anybody be certain how his or her personality is going to turn out. I think people go through many different types an stages of personality throughout life. I think there no way to judge a personality, and that’s if you go by what researchers go by. Do researchers gather all the people in the world and judge the way they act, think, and go through what they do? I think everybody chooses their own personality, what I mean is there personality goes through what prson want it to be. People change their personality many times, at different times. People change their personality through the environment they go to everyday. There is really is no defintion to me, because personality changes too many times and people change each time to a new social world. A personality is very unique to a person, because it defines a person characterstics toward life. Personality usually has to constitute the meaning of that person and the way he or she lives in the world. Personality has to be with that person at all times, because it will help it will help distinguish you from other people. Personality is a key element for a person to establish his or hers in the social world. One person can not only have on personality because that person thakes on a different personality of the series of things that a person is going about. This all comes to point how does personality develops in a person. Reasechers think personality develops in the enviroment and is through heredity.

Who Decided

Nehal HousnyBasic Composition Kathy WilfordNovember 5, 2012 Who Decides? Medical Technologies (MT) is an essential factor when it comes to science . However, there seems to be a misunderstanding on who should have the power to control its use. The three most common figures that are usually involved in controlling MT’s are the government, doctors, and society. Each representative has its own advantages and disadvantages . In both essays ,†The Made to Order Savior† by Lisa Belkin and â€Å"Who Holds the Clicker† by Lauren Slater , medical technology procedures are executed yet controlled and regulated differently.Every figure has its own guidelines as to how to control this technology and at times there was no control at all . Medical practices are very important and sometimes necessary to save a patients life . With proper funding from the government , doctors should have the authority to control how medical technology is used. In the â€Å"Made to Order Sav ior† by Lisa Belkin , doctors were able to control medical practices used in the patients life. Unfortunately , they received little or no funds from the government.Belkin felt that doctors lacked control because they were being held back from the government . For example, Dr Mark Hughees was one the first doctors who helped Strongin Goldbergs’ and the Nashes’ family find a cure for their children Henry and Molly. His brilliance and ever-lasting experience caused much of his research to be supported by the government , but not for too long. It was only so soon that Congress decided to stop funding Hughess research , which eventually affected the lives of Henry and Molly. Hughes then continued his research through private funds.Belkin states â€Å" at the time he was also a member of a federal advisory committee that developed guidelines for single-cell embryo analysis that was central to PGD. But no sooner had those guidelines been developed than Congress banned all federal financing of embryo research , and Hughes was forced to continue his research with private funds only†(6). This shows that the doctors’ work is not always supported and can be affected by the governments’ decisions. The government is controlling and limiting the doctors’ ability to use medical technology .By stopping financial funds necessary to continue research the chances of finding new cures lessens by a great chance . This can also be considered detrimental to the patients life because it leaves questions unanswered . On the other hand , in â€Å"Who Holds the Clicker† by Lauren Slater , doctors were able to receive adequate funding from the government to expand the use of medical technology . The government here saw the benefits of medical technology to the point were they took control of it. By willingly sponsoring doctors , this technology was soon uses as a management device. e .This potentially put pressure on the doctors beca use there funding was still limited which made no room for mistakes or seconds chances. Slater states †Beyond questions of whether a several mentally ill patient can provide informed consent, there continue to hover fears that DBS could fall into the hands of the state, or the overworked prison system, and be used as a management device†(242). As mentioned in the context of the essay, it is understood that the phrase â€Å"management device† refers to power and the capacity to dominate. Here, the government saw an opportunity to utilize the tools of medical technology to control the population.One example of how the government wanted to use medical technology to gain power is to try and wipe out violence. Slater states â€Å" The potential uses and abuses of neural implants were obvious: You could control prison populations; you could effectively wipe out violence† (236). They targeted certain races and populations, such as African Americans. Their excuse t o use medical technology was to wipe out violence from the African American race. Once again, this proves that the doctors are the ones who should be in charge of medical practices. With a doctor, there is no exchange of benefits with his or her patients.The doctor does not desire power or management to cure a patient. Instead, a doctor needs experience, passion, and the will to decide when and how to use medical technology. In both Belkin and Slaters’ essays the government is seen as an obstacle to allow the doctors be in control of their own job. Government is looking for ways on how to control the people regardless if it is providing funds or not. Peoples lives should not be based on what the governments’ visions are . The use of medical technology should stand in the hands of the doctors with no pressure included.Neurosurgeon Rees Cosgrove stated â€Å"If we do not do this right and carefully, and , you know properly†¦ I do not think we will have another oppo rtunity†(242). There is a certain amount of pressure on the doctors shoulders’ to perfect these experiments and devices. Because there is no time for trial and error doctors are not able to test the procedure several times before actually executing it . â€Å"There are no animal models of DBS for anxiety or depression, so these forays into the human brains are largely unguided despite all the high tech equipment†(242).Once again, government is limiting the doctors’ options creating less precise results for their research. Spending so much time with anyone creates a certain level of attachment, let alone between a doctor and his or her patient. This attachment or bond can expedite the curing period of a patient. For example, Belkin states â€Å" They [Henry’s parents] took on Dr. Hughes problems as their own, bonding with him deeply , knowing that they needed him to bond if they were to save Henry†(10).Here, it is obvious that Henry’s p arents are proudly desperate to find a cure for their son to the point where they are willing to deal with Henry’s doctors’ personal problems. Concerning over one another’s issues and trying to lift a burden always increases productivity and positivity. Slater also states â€Å" When Mario talks about that time now , tears come to his eyes. â€Å"It was like a miracle,†he says. †I still have some OCD symptoms but way , way less. Dr Greenberg and Ramussen saved my life. †(241) It is clear that as long there is good communication between the patient and the doctor, progress comes easier .Also, when the doctor has full control of the situation in terms of knowing the patients past habits, pain issues, and diagnosis he or she can provide a specific solution. They not only master helping every patients life but also learn to bond with most of them . This makes it more personal which can result in a positive way. Doctors should be able to receive p roper funding since it is for sake of saving lives and advancing cures. As mentioned, doctors are reputable people with knowledge of how medical procedures should be carries .There are regulations that are given to every patient before the procedure. For example, Belkin states â€Å"That was apparently what Hughes’s gut told him , too, and he agreed to try and develop a lab procedure to screen HLA a the single-cell level. His participation came with certain conditions. First , that the mother must be younger than 35, because younger women produce more eggs, increasing the odds of a healthy match. Second, that he would work only with families who carried a specific subset for Type C mutation, known as IVS4,because it is the most common.And, last of all, the child being created must be wanted. †(7). Doctors create these guidelines to create the maximum amount of productive work and results. Once again, proving that they should have the say as to how medical technology is used. Slater’s essay advocates this idea of setting guidelines before experimentation, â€Å" To be eligible for neural implants he [Mario] had to exhaust every available pharmacological option at either optimal or above optimal doses and undergo at least 20 hours of behavior therapy.He had to understand the risks and implications of the procedure and provide his consent. His case was viewed by three review board†(238). It is shown that doctors are trained to take full control of a patients' medical life in order to provide them with necessary aid. Others may see these procedures as detrimental to human health, however no doctor is licensed to harm his own patients. Slater’s essay later states â€Å" Dr Greenberg, his [Mario] psychiatrist said â€Å"we don't want to repeat the mistakes of the past.We want to sure this therapy is not only used indiscriminately , but that it is reserved for the group of people who have failed trials of everything else†(23 8). This shows that doctors have the commitment to cure their patients. Although doctors provide accurate results , other may argue that doctors have too much control over the patients life. In† Who holds the Clicker†, a doctor by the name of Robert Heath studied forms of psychosurgery such as deep brain stimulation , also knows as DBS. The method in which carried this type of surgery is graphic and can be disturbing to the patients’ family members.Slater states â€Å" Heath took patients culled from the back wards of Louisiana’s mental hospitals, slit open their skulls , and dropped electrodes down deep inside them . With the use of a handheld stimulator , Heath discovered that electrodes placed in the hippocampus, the thalamus, or the tegmentum could produce states of rage or fear , while electrodes placed in the brain’s septal area and part of the amygdala could produce feelings of pleasure†(235). Evidently, the language used in this quote is visual and does not sound pleasurable.These procedures are seen as immoral and unethical by many patients and the public. To a certain extent the procedures of some experiments are unconscionable . Nonetheless, this paved a way for new science discoveries and benefited millions. Belkins’ story takes this issue a little lighter than Slaters’. The mothers of Henry and Molly underwent the process of in-vitro fertilization every other month to try and conceive a newborn child. It was necessary to impregnate a child with a matching tissue type. In spite of this hectic procedure , the mothers did not mind it .Even though the process affected their health and reproductivity , they still followed the doctors recommendation . They flew out to different clinics in different states to find a solution. Belkin states â€Å" Lisa spent all 1999 trying to defy the odds. In January she produced 12 eggs, 2 of which were healthy matches;she became pregnant , then miscarried. In June she produced only four eggs , one of which was a match but did not result in a pregnancy. In September she produced eight eggs , six of which had Fanconi anemia ; the single health match was implanted , but again, her pregnancy test was negative†(13).If there is a will there is a way to solve any problem no matter how difficult it is. Lisa , mother of Molly, kept trying and trying until she finally did become pregnant. This shows that trial and error, despite its vulgar imagery , still has the possibility of bringing positive results and changing someones’ life! Also , as much as doctors know the procedure is harmful in some way to the body, they also know there is a way of rejuvenating the patients health. These doctors don't see a possibility of â€Å"no†.So why would anyone not allow doctors to have control of our medical lives? Dr. Wagner states â€Å" I’m here as the patients advocate , meaning Molly and Henry and all the other children in need of t ransplants . It is my obligation to push the envelope because I see how bad the other side can be . I see the results of a sibling transplant;they’re the easiest transplant to do†(7). It is clear that doctors see potential way more than the patients and the families. They should be trusted even if the procedure involves surpassing boundaries and limits .When these limits are exceeded and pushed to its fullest potential results like saving Molly’s life occur . Belkin states â€Å" In the end , Molly’s life was saved. That is the Nashes’ answer to people who question their right to manipulate nature . Their right springs form the difference between 30 percent and 85 percent ;the difference between Molly and Henry. That is also their answer to those who would urge the government to ban all embryo research because it harms unborn children . The research , they say ,saves children like Molly†(17).Not only is it proven that the government is an obs tacle in terms of funding research , but also the doctor here jeopardizes his own job . Ultimately , medical technology is a very brittle topic to discuss in terms of who controls it. Governments’ part to play is to fund the doctors who are guaranteed to establish new science . As far as the essays and my personal opinion goes , doctors are the ones to be given control . They should be able to regulate medical devices . With their recognizable knowledge and perpetual background, it is safe to rely on doctors with your eyes closed.

Malcom X

Malcom X Free Online Research Papers Malcolm X The Civil Rights Era was a time of hardships and oppression for minorities living in the United States. Minorities were treated unfairly and oppressed for the past 200 years which is why many of them wanted a change in the society they lived in. Throughout the course of the Civil Rights Movement many leaders arose to lead their followers to liberation from discrimination and racism. Malcolm X was one of these leaders. He was a phenomenal speaker and very influential leader. However Malcolm believed in achieving liberation, equal rights, and freedom through violent revolution. He advocated and promoted violent protest and hate to rally support from his followers. These radical protests negatively impacted the course of the movement. Examples of these negative influences were shown in Malcolms faith, his view on the J.F.K. assassination, his condescending view of Martin Luther King, his controversial speech The Ballot or the Bullet, his blatant racism against whites, and his opposing views of racial integration. Malcolm Xs violent ideology negatively affected the success that the Civil Rights Movement had for American minorities. Malcolm repeatedly told his followers that violence and harmful crimes would lead them to freedom and liberty from the whites. In his speech The Ballot or the Bullet Malcolm said, The only thing Ive ever said is that in areas where the government has proven itself either unwilling or unable to defend the lives and the property of Negroes, its time for Negroes to defend themselves. Article number two of the Constitutional amendments provides you and me the right to own a rifle or a shotgun. It is constitutionally legal to own a shotgun or a rifle. This doesnt mean youre going to get a rifle and form battalions and go out looking for white folks, although youd be within your rights I mean, youd be justified; but that would be illegal and we dont do anything illegal. If the white man doesnt want the black man buying rifles and shotguns, then let the government do its job. Thats all.(X) Although Malcolm brings up the constitution, his statements are still morally wrong. He is telling hi s followers to go out and purchase guns. By telling them to arm themselves, he is promoting violent means to achieve liberation from racism and segregation. Harming or injuring any person in order to prove a point would certainly not motivate the government or any other person to make a change in their society. Instead it would cause greater chaos and promote even more problems. In The Ballot or the Bullet Malcolm told his listeners, Any time you demonstrate against segregation and a man has the audacity to put a police dog on you, kill that dog, kill him, Im telling you, kill that dog. I say it, if they put me in jail tomorrow, kill that dog. Then youll put a stop to it. Now, if these white people in here dont want to see that kind of action, get down and tell the mayor to tell the police department to pull the dogs in. Thats all you have to do. If you dont do it, someone else will.(X) This is one of the ways in which Malcolm promoted violence amongst his followers. He told them to go out and violently demonstrate against racism and discrimination. He told them they have the right to kill anything that got in their way. This proves his extremist attitude toward ending the suffering and mistreatment of minorities. This type of violent attitude would only impede the progress that the Civil Rights Movement was making. Aggressive behavior would not help African Americans achieve desegregation and win freedom from oppression; instead it creates a hostile and dangerous environment for all of America. Malcolm made several statements during speeches and interviews that significantly harmed the view of African American activists by other Americans. In an interview Malcolm said, the Negro has already given up on non-violence. This new-thinking Negro is beginning to realize that when he demonstrates for what the government says are his rights then the law should be on his side. Anyone standing in front of him reclaiming his rights is breaking the law. Now, youre not going to have a law-breaking element inflicting violence upon Negroes who are trying to implement the law, so that when they begin to see this, like this, they are going to strike back. In 1964 youll find Negroes will strike back, there never will be non-violence anymore that has run out.(Gallen 125) This is what Malcolm wanted. He wanted a violent revolution to occur because he thought it was the only way for black to get the rights they deserved. Malcolm wanted to stir up the blacks so they would revolt violently against the whites. Malcolm made several statements that harmed his stance in the movement. Malcolm Xs rising star in the Nation of Islam came tumbling down in 1963. At a rally on December 1 he referred to President John F. Kennedys assassination as a case of the chickens coming home to roost, meaning that the same hatred that whites had directed at blacks had felled the president.(Gallen 61) Malcolm began to become more radical and extreme in his acts. In this statement he mocks the assassination of one of our presidents because he is so fed up with the discrimination of his people. Malcolm humiliated the black community with these words and created a bad stigma for activists like himself and Martin Luther King. Malcolm criticized and blamed the government for the racial problems within their society and he vehemently disavowed his allegiance to America. Malcolm once said, Im not anti-Democrat, Im not anti-Republican, Im not anti-anything. Im just questioning their sincerity and some of the strategy that theyve been using on our people by promising them promises that they dont intend to keep.(X) Malcolm demonstrates how he was an extremist fighting against the government. Malcolm constantly reprehended Americas government for not helping solve the problem of black discrimination. His comments were taken as a threat by the government and gave them reason not to make changes for the good of African Americans. In his The Ballot or the Bullet speech he said, No, Im not an American. Im one of the 22 million black people who are the victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million black people who are the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So, Im not standing here speaking to you as an American, or a patriot, or a flag-saluter, or a flag-waver no, not I. Im speaking as a victim of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I dont see any American dream; I see an American nightmare(X) Malcolm blamed America for the discrimination of his people. He revoked himself as an American and led his followers to believe that the American system was not helping the black community of the country. Thus negatively impacting the view the rest of America had on their community. Malcolm had a very pessimistic view concerning the future of blacks in America. Malcolm once said, The job of the Negro civil rights leader is to make the Negro forget that the wolf and the fox both belong to the (same) family. Both are canines; and no matter which one of them the Negro places his trust in, he never ends up in the White House, but always in the dog house.(Ali) Malcolm had a cynical outlook on the future of black Americans. He believed they wouldnt get anywhere unless they resorted to violent acts against the whites. His contemptuous views invoked passionate rage and hate amongst his followers and drove them to seek vengeance and participate in violent protests which, in turn, negatively affected the direction the movement was heading. In his speech Gods Judgement of White America Malcolm states, Is it possible for America to escape this divine disaster? If America cant atone for the crimes she has committed against the twenty-two million Negroes, if she cant undo the evils she has brutally and mercilessly heaped upon our people these past four hundred years, then America has signed her own doomand our own people would be foolish to accept her deceitful offers of integration into her doomed society at this late date!(Ali) Malcolm doesnt believe that America can get out of the social depression it has dug itself into. He brings up the idea of integration and shuts it down saying it will never help out the problem within Americas society. Integration was the one thing that would have and did save the black community and Malcolm thought it would not assist their cause. Malcolm frequently denounced the peaceful protests of the nations great civil rights leader, Martin Luther King. He once said, The goal has always been the same, with the approaches to it as different as mine and Dr. Martin Luther Kings non-violent marching, that dramatizes the brutality and the evil of the white man against defenseless blacks. And in the racial climate of this country today, it is anybodys guess which of the extremes in approach to the black mans problems might personally meet a fatal catastrophe first non-violent Dr. King, or so-called violent me.(Ali) With two different approaches to solving their crisis Malcolms and Dr. Kings ideas constantly clashed. Malcolm disregarded Dr. Kings ways and believed only his own ways were the right way to go. This however proved to be incorrect and his tactics would become highly controversial and unsuccessful during this movement. Kings peaceful protests were clearly more effective than Malcolms yet Malcolm still criticized King s beliefs. While Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., was teaching blacks to fight racism with love, Malcolm X was telling blacks to understand their exploitation, to fight back when attacked, and to seize self-determination by any means necessary. Malcolm spoke publicly of his lack of respect for King, who would, through a white mans religion, tell blacks to not fight back.(Hamilton) Malcolms teachings of the Islam taught him about the mistreatment of blacks and he believed that the only solution was through violence. Malcolm fought hard and stampeded through anything that got in his way, like Martin Luther king. He disagreed with Kings beliefs and believed that violence was the only answer. Those violent teachings created a negative effect amongst African Americans and caused chaos, terror, and violent dangerous protests within America. Malcolm was blatantly racist towards whites and very outspoken about it which gave the civil rights movement a bad image from the perspective of fellow Americans. Ive never seen a sincere white man, not when it comes to helping black people. Usually things like this are done by white people to benefit themselves. The white mans primary interest is not to elevate the thinking of black people, or to waken black people, or white people either. The white man is interested in the black man only to the extent that the black man is of use to him. The white mans interest is to make money, to exploit.(Ali) Instead of trying to reason, Malcolm decided to criticize and negatively stereotype the white people. This had a negative impact on the uprise of the black movement. It created even more reason for the whites to continue their oppression and discrimination of African Americans. The common enemy is the white man.(Ali) Malcolm tells his followers that the white man is the enemy. In a nation w here more than half the population is white, calling the major populous the enemy isnt exactly the best plan. Rather than reason with whites, Malcolm decided to attack them and go to war with them. Malcolm was against the one thing that would have changed civil rights in the most influential way; desegregation. In his speech Gods Judgment of White America he said,If this white government is afraid to let her twenty-two million ex-slaves go back to our country and to our own people, then America must set aside some separate territory here in the Western Hemisphere, where the two races can live apart from each to her, since we certainly dont get along peacefully while we are here together.(Ali) Malcolm did not want integration, which would give blacks more freedom and rights. Instead he wanted the country to split into two and have the entire country be segregated. Malcolm strongly believed that integration will weaken black power and influence. He stated, If I have a cup of coffee that is too strong for me because it is too black, I weaken it by pouring cream into it. I integrate it with cream. If I keep pouring enough cream in the coffee, pretty soon the entire flavor of the co ffee is changed; the very nature of the coffee is changed. If enough cream is poured in, eventually you dont even know that I had coffee in this cup. This is what happened with the March on Washington. The whites didnt integrate it; they infiltrated it. Whites joined it; they engulfed it; they became so much a part of it, it lost its original flavor. It ceased to be a black march; it ceased to be militant; it ceased to be angry; it ceased to be impatient. In fact, it ceased to be a march.(Ali) By saying this Malcolm is rejecting the help from whites. Whites marched with the blacks in a march to help out the black movement. Even though they probably could have done a great deal for the movement, Malcolm still thought they didnt belong. Although he was a revolutionary and a very influential leader of African Americans, his teaching worked in the opposite way he was intending them too. His public protests and beliefs had a negative effect on the civil rights movement. Malcolm had great influential power and had great effect on thousands of people. His teachings carried on to greater changes in the United States during the 60s and 70s. He significantly impacted the Black Power Movement and other Civil Rights activists and revolutionized African American protests. Although his beliefs werent always morally correct Malcolm was a courageous, influential leader that greatly altered the time in which he lived.. Ali, Noaman. Malcolm-X.org. 13 Dec. 2007 . Gallen, David. Malcolm X As They Knew Him. New York: Carroll Graf, 1992. Hamilton, Neal A. Malcolm X. Facts On File. American History Online. Facts On File. 7 Nov. 2007 . X, Malcolm. The Ballot or The Bullet. Cleveland, Ohio. 3 Apr. 1964. Student Resource Center Gold. Gale. Westview Lib., San Diego, CA. 8 Nov. 2007 . Research Papers on Malcom XCapital Punishment19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraWhere Wild and West MeetQuebec and CanadaEffects of Television Violence on ChildrenComparison: Letter from Birmingham and CritoAssess the importance of Nationalism 1815-1850 EuropeThe Effects of Illegal ImmigrationHip-Hop is ArtRelationship between Media Coverage and Social and

Pericles Funeral Oration - Thucydides Version

Pericles Funeral Oration - Thucydides Version Pericles funeral oration is a speech written by Thucydides for his history of the Peloponnesian War. Pericles delivers the oration not only to bury the dead, but to praise democracy. Pericles, a great supporter of democracy, was a Greek leader and statesman during the Peloponnesian War. He was so important for Athens that his name defines the age Periclean (The Age of Pericles), a period when Athens rebuilt what had been destroyed during the recent war with Persia (the Greco-Persian or Persian Wars). The people of Athens, including those from the countryside whose land was being pillaged by their enemies, were kept in crowded conditions within the walls of Athens. Near the start of the Peloponnesian War, a plague swept the city. We dont know for sure what the plague disease was. A recent best guess is Typhoid Fever. At any rate, Pericles succumbed to and died from this plague. [Thucydides on the Plague] Prior to the plagues devastation, Athenians were already dying as a result of the war. Pericles delivered a rousing speech lauding democracy on the occasion of funerals, shortly after the start of the war. Thucydides fervently supported Pericles  but was less enthusiastic about the institution of democracy. Under the hands of Pericles, Thucydides thought democracy could be controlled, but without him, it could be dangerous. Despite Thucydides attitude towards democracy, the speech he puts in Pericles mouth supports the democratic form of government. Thucydides, who wrote his Periclean speech for his History of the Peloponnesian War, readily admits his speeches are only loosely based on memory so shouldnt be taken as a verbatim report. In the speech, Pericles says: Democracy allows men to advance because of merit instead of wealth or inherited class.In a democracy, citizens behave lawfully while doing what they like without fear of prying eyes.In a democracy, there is equal justice for all in private disputes. This closely resembles the official attitude of those modern nations that favor democracy. Thucydides writes: Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences; if no social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition. The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbour for doing what he likes, or even to indulge in those injurious looks which cannot fail to be offensive, although they inflict no positive penalty. But all this ease in our private relations does not make us lawle ss as citizens. Against this fear is our chief safeguard, teaching us to obey the magistrates and the laws, particularly such as regard the protection of the injured, whether they are actually on the statute book, or belong to that code which, although unwritten, yet cannot be broken without acknowledged disgrace. Source:Pericles Funeral Oration Features on Democracy in Ancient Greece and the Rise of Democracy Ancient Writers on Democracy AristotleThucydides via Pericles Funeral OrationPlatos ProtagorasAeschinesIsocratesHerodotus Compares Democracy With Oligarchy and MonarchyPseudo-Xenophon

Consent for Treatment and a Tax-Free Health Care Organization Research Paper

Consent for Treatment and a Tax-Free Health Care Organization - Research Paper Example There are three critical requirements to valid consent: the patient must possess the capacity to consent (mentally competent); consent obtained ought to be voluntary; and, the patient ought to have obtained adequate information to arrive at a decision regarding their treatment. The health practitioner can be reprimanded for failing to obtain a valid consent, which amounts to claims of clinical negligence. In theory, in instances in which harm has befallen the patient and the consent was obtained improperly, this could give rise to claims of assault or battery, and, in extreme cases, criminal charges. Overall, minors are not legally competent (not mentally competent) to consent to medical treatment. It is the practice for doctors, plus other medical professionals to obtain consent from parents or guardians for carrying out medical and surgical procedures. However, when the minor needs urgent medical attention and the parents cannot be reached (such as in a true emergency), then the doctor may begin treating the child devoid of a parental consent (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2003). The scenario presented is life threatening and the doctor can legally treat the minor devoid of parental or legal guardian has given consent. The minor can give informed consent devoid of parental intervention and thus the operation remains allowable. Cases in which minor’s consent is adequate for confidential care are infrequent since it applies only to emergency medical services, where parent’s consent is not readily available. The prospective impact of U.S. health care reform legislation on hospitals can be viewed from four critical areas: changes in funding and reimbursement; changes within clinical operations; transparency requirements; and, additional oversight measures (Rosenbaum, 2011). Under the tax-exempt status, hospitals must undertake a

Drug Laws in the United States Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Drug Laws in the United States - Research Paper Example There are different types of drugs, some of them which are quite complicated to be handled by the laws. However, one must consider few beneficial ones like Marijuana and Hemp. In this paper, let us analyse the drug laws of USA, while keeping this perspective in our mind. Drug Problem in USA: For almost a century now, US have been fighting against the problem of drugs. Billions of dollars are been spent in this effort; almost fifty billion dollars are spent yearly for controlling drugs. Sadly â€Å"Drug abusers continue to fill our courts, hospitals, and prisons† (History of the US Drugs Policy par.1). Drug laws and penalizations are all helpful methods which are used in controlling the abuse of drugs; but these methods are quite limited in order to completely eradicate the root of all such problems. Economy, Prison system and Decriminalization of drugs: If we see the feasibility of decriminalization in USA, we must first see that almost 45 million people have tried drugs in on e way or the other. Now the question is, how many of them can be imprisoned? If the focus turns to rehabilitation and education, then one can use the help of both rehabilitation and education effectively against drugs. ... tober, 2000, Portugal had taken a step which is yielded as one of the successful and significant landmarks in this arena and it made one to think quite differently. A decade ago, Portugal was struck with severe drug problems just like US is facing today. But Portugal acted quite differently by taking away all the criminal regulations from the drugs, including the top rated ones like cocaine, heroin etc. As a result, it led to a widespread fear that this act by Portugal would create horrible mess. But in adversely, it turned out to be quite helpful to those who are caught with drugs. As they were helped with treatment and also this new focus of the government wonderfully brought down the usage rate of drugs. Also wherever the drugs increased, the increment was found quite less. Apart from that all diseases related to drugs decreased in its statistics (Greenwald p.). As a result addiction rate dropped down â€Å"Five years later, the number of deaths from street drug overdose dropped from around 400 to 290 annually† (Vastag par.2). Actually the philosophy behind all this is that, decriminalizing broke the walls between the citizens and government, and room was created for education and treatment. This tactic paid off well for Portugal and it would surely help United States a lot. The Issue of Marijuana in the US: Marijuana is perhaps the most commonly used drug in US after alcohol and tobacco. And the United States government have been running long behind the regulations of marijuana. But thus, far the results are not satisfactory. In US from 1965 onwards, around 20 million marijuana offences have been recorded. Today it is more problematic than ever because more than a hundred million Americans are using it (Real World Ramifications of Cannabis Legalization and