How to Write an Analytical Essay

1In the first paragraph really explain what it is about. Ads by Google Technical Writing ToolsTechnical Communicators Resource. TCS 2 Includes FrameMaker, RoboHelp www. Adobe. com 2Start to plot out what you want to write. Do this underneath your introduction. 3Come up with a main idea for each paragraph. Explain your main idea; maybe throw in a quote that will help to explain it in better detail. 4Back up your ideas with examples. If you're writing a descriptive essay, consider a personal example. Otherwise, find an objective example to support your analysis. 5Follow these procedures for each paragraph that you need to write. 6State your conclusion. Restate your introduction and leave the readers thinking. Make your conclusion something very brief and to the point that anyone could read. Ads by Google Resume Writing ResultsJob-Winning Resume Writing Services Personalized & High Quality Resumes resumes. FINS. com Company brochuresYoung Zeck Image Communications creates high-impact brochures www. youngzeck. com dit TipsBeginnings and endings are good places to use quotes, metaphors, and repetition, for effect, because introductions and conclusions should not have any details or in-depth analysis; that is what your body paragraphs are there for. Ads by Google Paper RaterFree Online Grammar Check, Writing Analysis, and More www. PaperRater. com If you are writing a formal analysis or critique, then avoid using colloquial writing. Though informal language may bring some color to a paper, you do not want to risk weakening your argument by influencing it with verbal slang. Ask yourself â€Å"What am I trying to prove? † The answer should be in your thesis. If not, go back and fix it. edit WarningsAvoid making your essay too tacky by using too few quotations. Remember that you want to incorporate others' ideas, too. Don't try to add useless sentences to make an analytical essay longer; it is better to leave it short and to the point. Make each sentence count. edit Things You'll NeedPaper Pen/pencil Spell checker (if using a computer) Thesaurus Microsoft Word (if using a computer) Articles for You to Write

History of Globalization Great Depression Essays

History of Globalization Great Depression Essays History of Globalization Great Depression Essay History of Globalization Great Depression Essay The consensus about the causes of the Great Depression remains today very little. Through empirical testing, Fickler and Parker (1994) considered the main mono-causal theories and showed that none of them could explain on their own the depth, the length and the consequences of the Great Depression. This international crisis was a complex phenomenon which resulted from the combination of different occurrences. We shall then consider each of these parameters and evaluate the extent to which they contributed to cause the Great Depression. The Great Depression may firstly be considered as the result of structural Issues f the inter-war economy induced by World War l. Both political and economic structures were indeed deeply disrupted by the international conflict which tore the whole world up. Disruption of production during the war had permanent effects on trade patterns, trade politics and policy preferences. World War I may be an indirect cause of the Great Depression to the extent that it had profound consequences on international trade and investment flows. First of all, war-induced diversion of production(Horopito, 2004, 33) logically created a propitious context to the rise of protectionist measures. As a matter of fact, World War I had a deep Impact on the Inter-war real economy. The Inter-war period was marked by excess supply issues due to two mall mechanisms. Firstly, non- European primary production highly expanded owing to trade restrictions during the war. As the world economy returned progressively to freer trade after 1918, these new sources of supply induced an extra-offer and a downward pressure on prices. This harder competition reawakened a real demand for protectionist policies. Secondly, European heavy-industry over-expanded in order to sustain the war effort. This over-expansion led to post-war excess supply and contributed to the development of protectionist forces. This protectionist tendency is confirmed by the increase of post-war tariffs across the major trading countries. Protectionist measures depend on the scarcity of productive factors; that is to say that governments protect sectors for which the main factor of production is scarce. For example, Britain and France implemented high tariffs on capital-intensive manufacturing Industries, whereas the united States of America set protective tariffs on labor-Intensive manufactures. This shift In trade policy preferences may have averred the Great Depression. The rise of barriers and the increase of trade costs Down lea Inane to market Allegations, Down In terms AT volume AT trace Ana international capital flows (Haynes, Jacks and Recourse, 2009). Market disintegration is undeniably harmful to economic growth and global competitiveness, owing to the fact that it implies a strong tightening of outlets and a growing uncertainty in the global economy. In this way, World War I deeply affected the structures of trade policy preferences and entailed a shift in international cooperation. These consequences described above may have contributed to cause the Great Depression. Nevertheless, it seems that the sasss global crisis resulted not only from this international context but a greater number of economic parameters. Many scholars studied the Great Depression and its origins in the late 20th century. Certainly useful to understand current economic phenomena, the Great Depression arouses both academic and public interest. We shall then see which causes have been put forward and how convincing they each are. First of all, Anna Schwartz and Milton Friedman put forth the hypothesis of a monetary cause of the Great Depression. According to their analysis, movements in the real economy can be linked to the disruptions in the financial sector at that time. The Great contraction of the money supply (Friedman and Schwartz, 1963) may be an explanatory factor of the Great Depression to the extent that it worsened deflation. This hypothesis seems to be supported by empirical facts; money supply dropped by 35% in the United States, a great number of banks bankrupted, and prices decreased by approximately 33%. The banks failure induced a decrease of private wealth and a drop of money supply, which both contributed to exacerbate fellatio. The monetary explanation of the Great Depression implies a failure of the Federal Reserve in its role of lender of last resort. The simultaneity of deep deflation and continuous contraction in money supply reveals a systemic flaw. Schwartz and Friedman claim that the Federal Reserve had the ability to block deflation and therefore limit the damages of the crisis. As a matter of fact, the Federal Reserve did not lend to banks to avoid panics and did not implement a monetary expansion whereas the amount of gold allowed such a policy in the early sasss. The monetary lice of the United States may have in this way contributed to the strengthening of the Great Depression, but this hypothesis does not explain the reasons behind the behavior of the Federal Reserve and fails to explain the crisis on its own. The monetary hypothesis is not enough if considered as an isolated cause, especially since it cannot account for the unprecedented decline of output during the Great Depression (Brenan, 1983). In this perspective, financial disruptions other than shocks to the money supply also have an impact on the level of prices and level of output. The main argument supporting this non-monetary explanation is debt deflation and financial markets inefficiency. Firstly, over-indebtedness and deflation in the inter-war period led to a downward deflationary spiral which was detrimental to the global economy. Deflation created indeed an increase of real debt burdens for many countries, and therefore drove them to insolvency. To this phenomenon is added a decrease of aggregate demand, which contributes to worsen deflation in a villous clear mechanism (Hasher, 1 ) secondly, ten Atlanta panics enlarger markets efficiency. Financial disruptions of the recession period led to misinformation and inefficient allocation of funds from lenders to borrowers, which induced an increase in the cost of credit. As credit intermediation was getting more expensive, this non-monetary mechanism contributed to lower aggregate demand and therefore to make the recession even worse (Brenan, 1983). The combination of the monetary hypothesis and non-monetary financial disruptions seems to provide a satisfactory understanding of the phenomenon that contributed to turn the initial recession into the Great Depression. However, these approaches mainly account for the experience of the United States and do not entirely apprehend the international nature of the crisis. The main cause of the internationalization of the financial crisis remains in the major flaws induced by the gold standard, which provide a reasonable hypothesis to comprehend the Great Depression as an international economic cataclysm (Parker, 2002). Issues linked to the reconstruction of the gold standard during the inter-war period constitute the most important factor explaining the cause, the depth and the Engel of the Great Depression. It is here essential to go back to the premises of the gold standard in order to understand how its mechanisms combined with contextual conditions led to the Great Depression. During the 1870-1914 period, the gold standard operated as a fixed exchange rate system, that is to say that each national currency was convertible in gold at a fixed exchange rate. The success of the whole system is based on free flows of gold between countries involved and requires free international capital flows. The gold standard allows indeed an automatic adjustment f trade balances, known as the Home mechanism, which requires specific conditions to work efficiently. Countries experiencing a trade deficit lose gold to the benefit of their trading partners. In order to meet the gold standard rules, this phenomenon leads to a monetary contraction and to the rise of interest rates. The trade balance can progressively go back to equilibrium through an increase of foreign capital influx in countries losing gold. In addition to this mechanism, money contraction in these countries applies a downward pressure on prices. The improvement of imitativeness therefore contributes to re-establish the trade balance equilibrium. Such an adjustment mechanism requires a strong international commitment and a real cooperation within members in order guarantee smooth gold and capital flows on an international scale. Predictably enough, the gold standard was suspended during World War I but by the end of 1928, the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Germany had re- established the system of pegged exchange rates. If it worked between 1870-1914, the inter-war period was a completely different time, and the re-establishment of the old standard was doomed to failure. We can firstly underline a difference in terms of wages flexibility. Before World War l, wages were relatively flexible, and an adjustment was possible in case of a bad shock on the gold standard system. The rise of democracy, socialism and trade unions during the inter-war period made this adjustment more Doolittle to Implement. I Nils macerate progress also reluctance political costs of neglecting the internal balance. Because of electoral stakes, it became essential for governments to deal with unemployment rates, and internal affairs progressively overrode the gold standard necessity to maintain a sound external balance. As a result, the main conditions to ensure currency convertibility was often not observed, I. E. A domestic monetary policy based on long-term prices stability and a commitment to fiscal soundness (Hamilton, 1988). In addition to this, an other characteristic of the inter-war period was against the gold standard success. World War I left inter-allied debts and war reparations as a legacy, which favored non-financial disputes and damaged international cooperation. This contextual aspect partially explains the difficulty to get cooperation between central banks. The academic literature analyzing the structural flaws of the inter-war gold standard is very broad (Gingerers, 1986; Teeming, 1989; Brenan and James, 1991). Four main technical defects may however be considered as the cause of the gold standard collapse. Firstly, the lack of coordination between gold-losing countries and gold-gaining countries produced asymmetries in their responses. As described above, a lost in gold reserves must be followed by a decrease of money supply in order to meet the gold standard requirements. This condition was not observed during the inter-war period, and governmental behavior led to deflation and deeper recession. Countries experiencing gold influx did not implement monetary expansion and therefore corrupted the equilibrating mechanism. In the absence of this appropriate monetary policy, gold-gaining countries such as France and the United States kept extracting gold from the reserves of other countries and imposed even more deflation on gold-losing countries. In 1929, France and the United States indeed concentrated most of the world gold reserves and did not implement monetary expansion. Secondly, the system was widened so that national currency could be back not only by gold reserves but also by reserves of a foreign convertible currency. This new parameter introduced instability and risk as a great pressure was put on some countries. The United Kingdom, for instance, had to control its domestic money supply in accordance with its gold reserves, but also needed to closely follow the amount of currency possessed by foreign actors. Thirdly, the lack of power of central banks negatively impacted cooperation within members. For example, the Bank of France was not allowed to participate in open market operations, and the Federal Reserve failed to detect that a monetary expansion in the United States would benefit the whole world. Last but not least, each government fixed its own parity rate unilaterally when Joining the gold standard. Some countries over-valued their currency and others under-valued it, creating a situation in which the return to the equilibrium was nearly impossible. The system was in that way doomed to fail since it was biased from the very first moment it was re-established. It is obvious that the gold standard was highly corrupted in the inter-war period and that its dysfunctions intrinsically made it unsustainable. Empirical research has proven that the recovery of national economies was highly dependent on leaving the gold standard, which adds value to this hypothesis. By leaving the gold standard, governments were able to use monetary policy as an economic tool again. The obstinacy of political leaders to remain in this fixed exchange rate system explains ten Patten an ten rear Depression. The gold standard hypothesis appears to be a key explanation of the mechanisms that led to the Great Depression in the sasss. As a matter of fact, it allows to comprehend not only the flaws of monetary policies within trading countries, but also he deflationary spiral which significantly dropped the level of international output. Both the monetary hypothesis and the hypothesis of non-monetary financial disruptions seem to follow on from the major flaws of the gold standard. The latter performed as a policy constraint and prevented countries from using the monetary tool in order to revive their economy. This kind of mechanism is reminiscent of the situation encountered by the Euro-zone during the 2008 economic crisis. The requirements related to the common currency do not allow members to use monetary policies with the aim of adjusting their external balance. Even though the 2008 crisis and the Great Depression are assuredly different, bearing in mind historical precedents allows a sharper understanding of current events, in particular when it comes to strategic choices and policy preferences of the main political leaders and policy-makers. Bibliography Brenan, B. S. (1983), Monetary effects of the financial crisis in the propagation of the Great Depression, American Economic Review, June. Brenan, B. S. And H. James (1991), The Gold Standard, Deflation, and Financial Crisis in the Great Depression: An International Comparison, in R. G.

Neutralization, Reaction between alkali and ammonium compound Essay Example

Neutralization, Reaction between alkali and ammonium compound Essay Example Neutralization, Reaction between alkali and ammonium compound Paper Neutralization, Reaction between alkali and ammonium compound Paper Strength of Acid and Alkali, Reacting Masses, Volumetric AnalysisIn which of the following cases may it obtain a complete neutralization?(1)25.0 cm3 of 0.120 M sulphuric acid and 50cm3of 0.120M sodium hydroxide solution(2)50.cm3 of 0.5 M Sodium hydroxide and 0.025 moles of aqueous ammonium chloride(3)20.0cm3 of 0.100M phosphoric acid and 30.0cm3 of 0.200 M potassium hydroxide solution(4)Dissolve 0.2025g of solid sodium hydroxide in water and make up to 250cm3 of solution, then 25.0cm3 of this solution is added to 50.0cm3 of 1M hydrochloric acidA.2B.1, 3C.3, 4D.1, 2, 4Option 1:H2SO4(aq) + 2NaOH(aq) Na2SO4(aq) +H2O(l)Mole ratio of H2SO4 : NaOH = 1:2?Using the formula,Molarity of a solution M or mol dm-3= Number of moles of solute (mol) / Volume of solution (dm3)?Number of moles of solute (mol)= Molarity of a solution M or mol dm-3X Volume of solution (dm3)Number of moles of H2SO4 given: 0.12 X (25.0 /1000)= 0.003molNumber of moles of NaOH given: 0.12 X (50.0/1000)= 0.006molMole ratio o f H2SO4 : NaOH = 0.003 /0.006 = 1:2Therefore, option (1) is correct.Option 2 :NaOH(aq) + NH4Cl (aq) NaCl(aq)+ NH3(g) + H2O(l)Mole ratio of NaOH : NH4Cl = l :1?Using the formula,Molarity of a solution M or mol dm-3= Number of moles of solute(mol) / Volume of solution (dm3)?Number of moles of solute(mol)= Molarity of a solution M or mol dm-3X Volume of solution (dm3)Number of moles of NaOH given: 0.5X (50/1000)= 0.025molMole ratio of NaOH : NH4Cl = 0.025/ 0.025= 1:1This indicates that neither NaOH nor NH4Cl will be in excess, thus the reaction is complete. However, option (2) is still incorrect as the reaction between alkali and ammonium compound is not considered as neutralization. Neutralization refers to the combination of hydrogen ions, H+(aq) and hydroxide ions ,OH-(aq) ( or oxide ions,O2- ) to form water molecules, H2O(l). The product of neutralization can only be salt and water.Therefore, option (2) is incorrect.Option 3This option tests the understanding of strength of acid an d alkali.Many students may have already rejected this option immediately when they have the first look on it as they have the common misconception that compared with a strong acid of the same volume and concentration, a weak acid requires a smaller amount of alkali for complete neutralization, as a result, the alkali will be in excess,thus it is not a complete neutralization. In fact, during neutralization with a strong alkali such as sodium hydroxide solution, more and more molecules of the weak acid will ionize and eventually all the molecules ionize to give H+ (aq) ions.Also, they may over-focus on the concept that weak acid can react with strong alkali to produce acidic salt, instead of normal salt.e.g : H3PO4(aq) + NaOH(aq) NaH2PO4(aq) +H2O(l)H3PO4(aq) + 2NaOH(aq) Na2HPO4(aq) +2H2O(l)These above reactions are absolutely correct, but we have to answer carefully for what the question asks.It said In which of the following cases may it obtain a complete neutralization? It is not n ecessary for the salts produced is acidic, we cannot eliminate the case that normal salt is formed.Whether the neutralization is complete or not can only be determined by mole calculation.H3PO4(aq) + 3KOH(aq) K3PO4(aq) +3H2O(l)Mole ratio of H3PO4: KOH = 1:3Using the formula,? Molarity of a solution M or mol dm-3= Number of moles of solute (mol) / Volume of solution (dm3)?Number of moles of solute (mol)= Molarity of a solution M or mol dm-3 X Volume of solution (dm3)Number of moles of H3PO4 given: 0.100 X (20.0 /1000)= 0.002molNumber of moles of KOH given: 0.200X (30.0/1000)= 0.006molMole ratio of H3PO4: KOH = 0.002 /0.006 = 1:3Therefore, option (3) is correct.Option 4:HCl(aq) + NaOH(aq) NaCl(aq) +H2O(l)Using the formula,Molarity of a solution M or mol dm3= Number of moles of solute (mol) / Volume of solution (dm3)Number of moles of solute (mol)Number of moles of HCl used: 1X (50/1000)= 0.05molFrom the chemical equation,We can see that mole ratio of HCl: NaOH = 1:1Number of moles of NaOH required for complete neutralization: 1X0.05mol= 0.05molNumber of moles in 250cm3 of NaOH: Mass(g) / Molar mass(gmol-1)= 2.025/(23.5 + 16.0 + 1.0)= 0.05molNumber of moles in 25 cm3 of NaOH : 0.005/10= 0.005 molMole ratio of HCl: NaOH = 1:1Number of moles of HCl reacted with 25cm3 of NaOH: 1 X 0.005 = 0.005mol?NaoH becomes the limiting reageant (HCl is in excess)The number of moles of HCl unreacted with NaOH :0.05-0.005 = 0.045mol?The neutralization is not completeSome students may forget to divide the number of moles in 250cm3 of NaOH by 10.Consequently, they wrongly think that 0.05 mol of NaOH reacts with 0.05 mol HCl , and so the neutralization is complete. We should remember to divide the number of moles in 250cm3 of NaOH by 10 as only 25cm3 of NaOH (one-tenth of the whole NaOH solution) is used to react with HCl.Therefore, Option (4) is incorrect.Overall : Only option (1)and (3) are correct so the correct answer is B.If a student chooses A, it means he has wrong concepts on mole calculation (reacting masses and volumetric analysis), neutralization and strength of acid and alkali.If a student chooses C, it means he has wrong concepts on mole calculation (reacting masses and volumetric analysis).If a student chooses D, it means he has wrong concepts on strength of acid and alkali.To conclude,The steps to tackle this question are as follows:1) See if there are reactions that are not considered as neutralization first. Option (2) can be eliminated instantly, thus the correct answer can only either be B or C.2) In both answers B and C, we can see that option (3) is included so it implies that options (3) must be correct. It is unnecessary to determine whether it is correct or not by mole calculation.3) We only need to determinate whether options (1) and (4) is correct or not based on mole calculation. If the calculation is correct, we can deduce that option (1) is correctwhereas option (4) is incorrect.4) Finally we can conclude that only options (1) and ( 3) are correct, which lead to the fact that the correct answer should be B.

Presidents Commission on the Status of Women 1961-1963

President's Commission on the Status of Women 1961-1963 December 14, 1961 - October, 1963 While similar institutions with the name Presidents Commission on the Status of Women (PCSW) have been formed by various universities and other institutions, the key organization by that name was established in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy to explore issues relating to women and to make proposals in such areas as employment policy, education, and federal Social Security and tax laws where these discriminated against women or otherwise addressed womens rights. Protecting Women's Rights Interest in womens rights and how to most effectively protect such rights was a matter of growing national interest. There were more than 400 pieces of legislation in Congress which addressed womens status and issues of discrimination and expanding rights. Court decisions at the time addressed reproductive liberty (the use of contraceptives, for instance) and citizenship (whether women served on juries, for example). Those who supported protective legislation for women workers believed that it made it more feasible for women to work. Women, even if they worked a full-time job, were the primary childrearing and housekeeping parent after a day at work. The supporters of protective legislation also believed that it was in societys interest to protect womens health including womens reproductive health by restricting hours and some conditions of work, requiring additional bathroom facilities, etc. Those who supported the Equal Rights Amendment (first introduced in Congress soon after women won the right to vote in 1920) believed with the restrictions and special privileges of women workers under protective legislation, employers were motivated to higher fewer women or even avoid hiring women altogether. Kennedy established the Commission on the Status of Women in order to navigate between these two positions, trying to find compromises that advanced the equality of womens workplace opportunity without losing the support of organized labor and those feminists who supported protecting women workers from exploitation and protecting womens ability to serve in traditional roles in the home and family. Kennedy also saw a need to open the workplace to more women, in order to have the United States become more competitive with Russia, in the space race, in the arms race - in general, to serve the interests of the Free World in the Cold War. The Commission's Charge and Membership Executive Order 10980 by which President Kennedy created the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women spoke for womens basic rights, opportunity for women, the national interest in security and defense of a more efficient and effective utilization of the skills of all persons, and the value of home life and family. It charged the commission with the responsibility for developing recommendations for overcoming discriminations in government and private employment on the basis of sex and for developing recommendations for services which will enable women to continue their role as wives and mothers while making a maximum contribution to the world around them. Kennedy appointed Eleanor Roosevelt, former US delegate to the United Nations and widow of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to chair the commission. She had played a key role in establishing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and shed defended both womens economic opportunity and womens traditional role in the family, so she could be expected to have the respect of those on both sides of the protective legislation issue. Eleanor Roosevelt chaired the commission from its beginning through her death in 1962. The twenty members of the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women included both male and female Congressional representatives and Senators (Senator Maurine B. Neuberger of Oregon and Representative Jessica M. Weis of New York), several cabinet-level officers (including the Attorney General, the Presidents brother Robert F. Kennedy), and other women and men who were respected civic, labor, educational, and religious leaders. There was some ethnic diversity; among the members were Dorothy Height of the National Council of Negro Women and the Young Womens Christian Association, Viola H. Hymes of the National Council of Jewish Women. The Legacy of the Commission: Findings, Successors The final report of the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women (PCSW) was published in October 1963. It proposed a number of legislative initiatives but did not even mention the Equal Rights Amendment. This report, called the Peterson Report, documented workplace discrimination, and recommended affordable child care, equal employment opportunity for women, and paid maternity leave. The public notice given to the report led to considerably more national attention to issues of womens equality, especially in the workplace. Esther Peterson, who headed the Department of Labors Womens Bureau, spoke about the findings in public forums including The Today Show. Many newspapers ran a series of four articles from the Associated Press about the commissions findings of discrimination and its recommendations. As a result, many states and localities also established Commissions on the Status of Women to propose legislative changes, and many universities and other organizations also created such commissions. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 grew out of the recommendations of the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women. The Commission dissolved after creating its report, but the Citizens Advisory Council on the Status of Women was created to succeed the Commission. This brought together many with a continuing interest in various aspects of womens rights. Women from both sides of the protective legislation issue looked for ways in which both sides concerns could be addressed legislatively. More women within the labor movement began to look at how protective legislation might work to discriminate against women, and more feminists outside the movement began to take more seriously the concerns of organized labor in protecting womens and mens family participation. Frustration with progress towards the goals and recommendations of the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women helped fuel the development of the womens movement in the 1960s. When the National Organization for Women was founded, key founders had been involved with the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women or its successor, the Citizens Advisory Council on the Status of Women.

Lens Discussion Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Lens Discussion - Research Paper Example The origination of the concept of Other was done by German philosophers who made use of the dialect to represent differing view. In particular, this concept was used to represent women who had a completely different way of looking at people and world. The concept of other was used by male dominated culture in order to perceive the values and future of world under the view of women. It is due to this reason that the concept of Other is applied for sex education and research (Peperzak, 1993). However, later on, with the advent of communication tools and imperials ventures, the usage of Other was done in order to discriminate cultures and societies who had an opposing view regarding British reign. It was merely because politics and economics in the past decades were independent. The decision-making and actions of one nation or organization did not really affect others. One state was careful about its own notions and interests by labeling the interest of other nations to be simply Other and not nations (Charlesworth, 2007). However, in most recent times, the usage of Other, notwithstanding philosophical self-consciousness, is done in order to replicate the idea of discrimination and differentiation. Some of the philosophers tend to defend the concept by noting that the usage of the concept is merely due to the need of increased insanity and relativism in rhetoric. Therefore, the usage of the concept of Other in an unethical manner is referred to as discrimination (Peperzak, 1993). The first person who used the concept of Other was Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel who was a German philosopher. The context in which the concept of other was first used was self-consciousness. Herein, the aspect of other merely helped in letting a person reached awareness of self by comparing it with those who have a differing view about life and everything in it. Other than Georg, the

Diverisity Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Diverisity - Research Paper Example ts and may involve an employee reporting a fellow colleague involved in unlawful or illegal activity to the in charge of the department but this only happens when the complaint systems are available. â€Å"There are some reasons to believe that people are more likely to take action with respect to unacceptable behavior within an organization if there are complaint systems that offer not just options dictated by the planning and control organization but a choice of option for confidentiality (Rowe, Wilcox and Horwad). With regard to external reporting, whistleblower may report to different persons depending on the severity of the case and range from media, law enforcement or watchdog agencies. In UK, whistle blowing is subject to public interest Disclosure act including culture of raising concerns apart of normal business activity of any well led NHS Organizations, culture free from bullying where staff have the freedom to speak out without being bullied, support to find alternative employments elsewhere in cases where the employee can’t continue working in the same organization after reporting. In USA, there are several contradictory laws on the subject which keep on varying from state to state and the subject matter of the whistle blowing. Still state laws protects employees who call attention for the violations, help with enforcement proceedings, or refuse to obey unlawful proceedings. The first act was established in 1863 as a false claim Act which was revised in 1986 which tried to combat fraud by supplies of United States during America’s civil war. The act encourages whistleblowers by promising them certain percentage of recovered money by the government and protecting them from retaliation from the employer. Another law that protects whistleblowers is the Lloyd-La Follette Act of 1912. This guaranteed the right of federal employees to give information to the United States Congress. A good example is the clean water Act of 1972with subsequent acts like

American Politics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

American Politics - Essay Example In the election of 1964, Lyndon Johnson positioned himself against his GOP opponent, Barry Goldwater. Johnson campaign ran a commercial entitled the "Daisy Girl" ad, which featured a little girl picking petals from a daisy in a field, counting the petals, which then signal into a launch countdown and a nuclear explosion in response to Goldwaters advocacy of using tactical nuclear weapons to fight communism in Asia. Johnson defeated Goldwater in the general election, winning 64.9% of the popular vote, and this was noted to be the largest percentage differential since the 1824 election. (Wikipedia, 2007a) (Paraphrasing made). In addition to nuclear weapon issue to address communism, anther critical issue in the election was that on civil rights. Thus despite Johnson’s winning the election, loss of support in Southern states was evident and signified a reversal in electoral fortunes for Democrats who had depended on the "Solid South" as an electoral base. The issue of civil rights divided conservative southern whites from the rest of the party, the political coalition of labour unions, minorities, liberals, and southern whites (the New Deal Coalition. Lyndon Johnson appeared to have taken advantage the issue with the 1963 assassination of J.K. Kennedy, who was has supported Civil Rights Act of 1964. (Wikipedia, 2007a) (Paraphrasing made). Hence the 1965 Voting Rights Act had an immediate impact on federal, state and local elections, so that with its passage on August 6, 1965, one quarter of a million new black voters had been registered, one third by federal examiners and within four years, voter registration in the South had more than doubled. Hence its effect in voter turnout was manifested at 74% in 1965 resulting a number of black leaders elected and in 1969, where Tennessee had a 92.1% voter turnout, Arkansas 77.9% and Texas 77.3%. (Wikipedia, 2007a) (Paraphrasing