Marine Corps Logistics

the republic essays

the republic essays The Republic by Plato (427-347 B.C.) is a basically an examination of the "Good Life," or the harmony achieved by applying pure reason and justice. As a typical Plato piece, the book itself is a series of arguments between Socrates, Plato's mentor, and several other theorists. They argue issues concerning the social conditions of an ideal republic, which is chiefly Plato's vision projected through the book's words into our minds' eye. The book contains many ideas that really made sense to me and that surprised me because you could apply these standards to any group of people, of any race, and any economic background anywhere in the world. Even more surprising is that this was written so long ago and yet still today we are reading Plato's theories, but I don't think we're really paying attention, looking at all the chaos in the world today. In the story, Socrates is returning to Athens from a festival when he meets Polemarchos on the road. Polemarchos insists that Socrates accompany him home where they greet his father and start right into a discussion of old age. Socrates says, "It seems right to enquire of them [meaning the elderly men], as if they traversed a long journey which perhaps we will have to traverse." This makes sense to me, as I can relate to it personally. I have long email discussions with my grandfather in California, with whom I am very close. He is writing a book on our Irish ancestry and I am to continue it. With each email he writes, he encloses little bits and pieces of his beliefs, which I find very interesting and save in a folder which I am planning to use to write a book about his life to be passed on from generation to generation of Curleys in the future. According to my grandfather, I still have a lot to learn. And I believe it. The next topic of discussion with Socrates concerns justice or "doing the right thing." Socrates believes that "right living" is basically dutiful service to othe...

Kafka's 'The Trial' Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Kafka's 'The Trial' - Essay Example Elizabeth KÃ ¼bler-Ross (1969), the author of ‘On Death and Dying’, describes the emotional cycle through the stages of denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. On the other hand, these ideas are tested in order to understand fully the way a man lived the last year of his life in a story called, ‘The Trial’. The stages KÃ ¼bler-Ross discussed are said to be a way to interpret the life of K. most especially during the time he was in the difficult stage of his life. As a Doctor, KÃ ¼bler-Ross makes a significant move on writing the book because it helps the patients and also her colleagues to comprehend with the cycle of emotional states of a person. Sometimes even Doctors are having difficulties admitting to themselves that a patient is dying and they just could not do something about it. But how effective these ideas can be to lighten up someone who is in the stage of depression? The cycle does not only pertain to a dying person, but also to a person who is in a bad situation such as hearing that a relative died, losing a career and other. Accordingly, it is fundamental to analyze KÃ ¼bler-Ross’ ideas and specifically apply to the story of ‘The Trial’. The novel is all about Josef K., a man who works in a bank as a senior clerk that was taken into custody by two agents. It was an unexpected arrest and the two agents did not discuss why K. was caught. He was then asked to wait for further instructions by the Committee of Affairs. Consequently, he was able to meet various people significant in his life and the case gets aggravated. It then changed his personality of being a confident man to an uneasy man just like the people he has met before (Kafka, 1984). Thus, the story depicts the life of K. and how he tried to cope up with a series of events that significantly defined his life before his death. The life of K. became vague in the story and reflects the

The Promise of Stem Cell Research for Solving Complex Medical Problems Paper

The Promise of Stem Cell for Solving Complex Medical Problems - Research Paper Example It is evidently clear from the discussion that stem cell research might seem to be a catch-all solution to a myriad of clinical problems. If the public listens to certain corners of the bioethics field, stem cell research might seem to be a scientific solution that comes at a great cost to human life. Of course, most approaches to stem cells contain far more nuance than â€Å"for† and â€Å"against† embryonic cell research; however, it is a polarizing subject that is divisive even among researchers in the field. The purpose of this paper is to define some of the challenges—both ethical and scientific—posed to embryonic stem cell research, which includes looking at possible future directions for clinical practices, research agendas, and ethical systems that might oppose the use of embryonic stem cell lines. Overall, the â€Å"promise† of stem cell research includes not only the potential for benefiting mankind with novel kinds of treatment for painfu l and debilitating diseases, but also the potential for creating these treatments in ways that do not harm human dignity. First, a distinction should be drawn between embryonic and adult stem cells, particularly with regard to differences in their potentials to grow and regenerate tissues. Stem cells in general are a rare subset of primitive cells that, at the single-cell level, can self-renew as well as give rise to mature, differentiating daughter cells. According to the NIH, embryonic stem cells are grown easily in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues. Accordingly, isolating these cells from an adult tissue is difficult, and methods to develop more cells in cell culture have not yet been developed. This distinction is significant insofar as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies. In other words, adult stem cells cannot provide a sufficient level of coverage for stem cell research, let alone stem cell treatments on a public leve l. Therefore, stem cell research is normally biased toward the use of embryonic stem cells. Such stem cells are taken from embryos that are fertilized in vitro. The development of cells in a laboratory setting is known to scientists as â€Å"cell culture.† Embryonic stem cells are grown by transporting cells from a pre-implantation embryo into a culture environment that holds a nutrient-rich base known as a culture medium. Over the process of development, the cells divide and coat the surface of the dish into which they were transported. Once a cell line is developed, the original stem cells can produce millions or perhaps billions of embryonic stem cells for researchers to utilize in making discoveries and potentially treating diseases. Stem cells that proliferate in a cell culture of an extended period of time but have not differentiated into a specific kind of cell are known as â€Å"pluripotent† (meaning, literally, not constrained toward a specific developmental p athway). These cells are truly useful because they can be

Analysis and consideration prior to developing operations in Research Paper

Analysis and consideration prior to developing operations in Australian wine industry - Research Paper Example The recommendations given will aid the company to settle and establish itself without many problems. In addition, the techniques used to do this study include evaluation of other wine companies, government’s policies, and other deterministic factors. Here, competitiveness refers to the forces that are likely to hamper productivity while attractiveness refers to profitability of a business venture by a company. The continent has good climatic conditions for growing vineyards, a rich cultural heritage of wine making and skilled work force. Moreover, most of the wines industries and vineyards are owned by families, with a few commercial plantation and firms. Australia produces three percent of the world’s wine, and is the second to Italy largest wine exporter country (Allen, 2003, p.43). Primarily, the wine industry in Australia is experiencing rapid growth and international recognition in the present days (Gibson, 2010, p.301). This nation has some of the world’s most proficient winemakers, mainly based in the southern region. The industry highly depends on the export especially to the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand. (Kym, 2004, p.264) The common regions of wine production are south and west Australia, Victoria, and New South Wales, which have a wide range of grapes produced. Australia is largely a tropical region; however, some parts such as the south have warm temperate and cooler climates (Gibson, 2010, p.301). Wine production is done in the cooler region of the country. Needless, other regions without the conducive climate for vineyards growing have used methods like irrigation that facilitate production of grapes. The Shiraz type of grape is the most common as it grows even in the warmer parts of Australia, while other types of grapes like the chardonnay and cabernet sauvignon have adapted well to the climatic conditions. In addition, the landscape has a system

The Beveridge Report, 1942: Causes and Effects

The Beveridge Report, 1942: Causes and Effects CHAPTER 2: The publication of the Beveridge report in December 1942 is one of those moments in history which offer a unique challenge to historians. It is an event about which everybody at the time had a viewpoint. I recall my Grandfather telling me that William Bevridge was the architect of the welfare state, and the publication of his report marked a turning point in the lives of working class people across Britain. It is therefore a challenge for the historian to ignore their pre-conceived notions, and write an account of the Beveridge report based upon the information as it stands, rather than based upon perceptions. To write about what truly motivated Beveridge, what his true principles were, and what the real aims of the report were, rather than making assumptions based upon what is seen at face value. That is what I aim to do here. To understand the work, one has to understand the man, and that will be my starting point for this chapter. William Beveridge was a Liberal, indeed he became a liberal MP in 1944, but he was not a liberal in the classic tradition. Indeed, Beveridge would probably have more in common with the Liberal Democrat tradition of today than he would with the tradition of Lloyd George, and it should be remembered that he flirted with the idea of joining the Labour party at around the time he wrote his report. Various writers have wrestled with the idea of placing Beveridge somewhere on the left to right political spectrum, but in truth, any attempt to try and place him in this way would do the man and his work a disservice. Probably the best analysis is that of the Williams’ in ‘A Beveridge Reader’ and reiterated by Robert Leaper: â€Å"Beveridge was never a grand social theorist; he always favoured a practical, problem centred approach.†(1) From the evidence I have seen, it would be best to describe Beveridge as a pragmatist. He saw a problem, and looked for the best solution to solve the problem as he saw it. He showed no apparent concern for where the solution may have had its origins, only that the solution solved the problem. This is not to say that Beveridge did not have underlying principles. It has been argued by Albert Weale that two persistent themes run through his work: â€Å"The first is the belief that virtually the prime goal of public policy should be the development of an efficient economy capable of high levels of productivity. Underlying Beveridge’s conviction on this point, there appears to have been a tacitly assumed belief in the paradox of capitalist production: capitalism resulted in a highly unequal distribution of wealth, and yet it was the only system capable of producing sufficient wealth to eradicate poverty. The second persistent element in his social theory was Beveridge’s view that a highly centralized bureaucracy, staffed with public-spirited officials, would be the leading instrument of social reform.†(2) Having looked at what Beveridge was, it is also vitally important to understand what both he and his report were not. Beveridge was not a socialist and he was not a revolutionary, and neither was his report. As Eveline Burns points out: â€Å"In this context it can be seen that the Beveridge report is evolutionary, rather than revolutionary. The great contribution of the author consists in his recognition of the fact that the end of one stage of development had in fact been reached and that the time was ripe for the reorganization and new unification of the various programs in conformity with the changed social attitudes.†(3) Whilst I have broken with any idea of this being a report of revolutionary proportions, I must also break with the argument of Bartholemew, which I believe was somewhat dismissive of the report. He states: â€Å"So what did Beveridge propose? It was very simple. Everyone would make flat-rate contributions to a national insurance scheme. Those who fell ill, became unemployed or reached retirement age would, in return, receive flat-rate payments. That is it. The rest was detail.†(4) Bartholemew may technically be correct. The report did contain a lot of detail centred on this core principle. But the report also contained a vision or blueprint for the future, and in many respects, it was this part of the report which was of particular interest, as Beveridge went far beyond his initial remit. It is some of these ideas which I would like to look at now. As Burns points out: â€Å"It should be noted first of all that the report is essentially concerned with assuring freedom from want, in so far as want is due to interruptions of income or to the occurrence of costs unrelated to income to which all or the vast majority of the population are at some time or other liable.†(5) But this attack on want only formulated one part of the overall objectives, which was to attack what Beveridge described as the five giants. Beveridge stated in his second of three guiding principles: â€Å"The second principle is that organisation of social insurance should be treated as on part of a comprehensive policy of social progress. Social insurance fully developed income security; it is an attack upon want. But want is one only of the five giants on the road to reconstruction and in some ways the easiest to attack. The others are disease, ignorance squalor and idleness.†(6) Within the report, it was only the giants of want and by implication, idleness which were tackled head on. But with some imagination, it is not difficult to foresee the origins of the NHS, the development of a comprehensive education system and a local authority house building programme within its pages. Beveridge embodied within his plan, a vision for the future, which could be tackled piece by piece, beginning with want. The picture painted by Beveridge was an overall scheme which he described as follows: â€Å"The scheme embodies six fundamental principles; flat rate of contribution; unification of administrative responsibility; adequacy of benefit; comprehensiveness; and classification. Based on them and in combination with national assistance and voluntary insurance as subsidiary methods, the aim of the plan for social security is to make want under any circumstances unnecessary.†(7) Up to this point, I have tended to focus upon the social dimension of the Beveridge report, but as I have said before, we should not loose sight of the pragmatic dimension of the man. In signing of the report in 1942, Beveridge claimed it was marked by â€Å"economy in administration, adequacy in benefits and universality in scope.†(8) It is the aspect of economy in administration which is most commonly neglected when looking at the Beveridge report, and in assessing the man behind it. One of the most important motivations behind the report was the desire to rationalise the existing system which consisted of a set of unconnected bodies working under rules laid down by up to six different agencies. This system was seen by Beveridge among others as not only inefficient but also expensive in administration costs. Beveridge claimed in the report that: â€Å"Social insurance and allied services, as they exist today, are connected by a complex of disconnected administrative organs, proceeding on different principles, doing invaluable service but at no cost in money and trouble and anomalous treatment of identical problems for which there is no justification. In a system of social security, better on the whole than can be found in almost any other country, there are serious deficiencies which call for remedy. It is not open to question that , by closer co-ordination, the existing social services could be made at once more beneficial and more intelligible to those whom they serve and more economical in their administration.†(9) The same point is made in a rather more cynical manner by Bartholemew: â€Å"People who looked at the detail and actually read his words understood that the old Victorian was not proposing the bonanza which many assumed then and continue to believe. Keynes advised Beveridge on his costings and said, ‘the Chancellor of the Exchequer should thank his stars that he has got of so cheap.’ Members of the economic section of the Treasury believed that the Beveridge plan was actually cheaper than the provision which existed previously.†(10) The desire of Beveridge to create a more rational economic system as well as being a primary motive more his war on want, was also an important contributing factor in his desire to see a nationwide health system. Writing just after the publication of the report, Leo Wolman wrote: â€Å"These amount to saying that the scheme, in order to work and to avoid building up excessive expenditures and costs, must provide that the insured be kept healthy and fit for work and remain in employment lest they settle down too often and too long to living on the insurance benefits. The report attempts to translate these assumptions into practical proposals by calling upon the government to face the problems of the post-war unemployment and by laying the foundations for an unprecedented system of health and rehabilitation benefits and services.†(11) What Wolman observed in Beveridge was a belief that by introducing a health care system alongside the social care system, the health of people would be improved, leading to less stress being put on the social security fund through sickness. This desire to maintain the health of the workforce is also linked to Beveridge’s desire for greater efficiency. As Beveridge points out in his report: â€Å"It is in the interest of employers as such that the employees should have security, should be properly maintained during the inevitable intervals of unemployment or of sickness, should have the content which helps to make them efficient producers.†(12) It is worth noting that Beveridge received widespread support among the business community based upon his arguments of it leading to greater efficiency of the workforce. Samual Courtauld, chairman of the fabric firm, speaking to the Manchester Rotary Club in February 1943, declared himself: â€Å"Strongly in favour of the principles and almost all the proposals of the Beveridge report. I have not the faintest doubt that if we can survive the first severe business contraction which arises after the war, social security of this nature will be about the most profitable long-term investment the country could make. It will not undermine the moral of the nation’s workers: it will ultimately lead to a higher efficiency among them and a lowering of production costs.†(13) We have up to now focussed upon two dimensions of the aims and principles of the Beveridge report: the social and the economic. What we must now do is look at the political principles and aims of the report. I do not refer to party political aims but the underlying political aims. The aims of doing what is best for the nation as Beveridge saw it. There is good evidence that Beveridge saw a danger in men returning from war, seeking a better world and seeing nothing better than before. There is also evidence that there was a fear of possible consequences within the House of Commons. Beveridge wrote in his report: â€Å"There are yet others who will say that, however desirable it may appear to reconstruct social insurance or to make other plans for a better world of peace, all such concerns must now be put on one side, so that Britain may concentrate upon the urgent task of war. There is no need to spend the words today in emphasising the urgency or the difficulty of the task that faces the British people and their Allies. Only by surviving victoriously in the present struggle can they enable the freedom and happiness and kindliness to survive in the world. Only by obtaining from every individual citizen his maximum effort, concentrated upon the purposes of war, can they hope for early victory. This does not alter three facts: that the purpose of victory is to live into a better world than the old world; that each individual citizen is more likely to concentrate upon his war effort if he feels that his government will be ready in time with plans for that better world; that if these plans are to be ready in time, they must be made now.†(14) If the warnings of Beveridge were relatively subtle, then those expressed by Conservative MP, Quinton Hogg, in the parliamentary debate on 17th February, 1943, were very much to the point: â€Å"Some of my honourable friends seem to overlook one or two ultimate facts about social reform. The first is that if you do not give people social reform, they are going to give you social revolution. Let anyone consider the possibility of a series of dangerous industrial strikes following the present hostilities, and the effect that it would have on our industrial recovery.†(15) Whilst I am not totally convinced that this was a major factor in the reasoning of Beveridge, the lessons of what happened post 1918 would not have been lost on him. I do also believe that it strongly influenced Beveridge’s ability to sell the proposals to the Conservative part effectively. The true extent of this will be looked at in the next chapter. It has been argued by John Jacobs that â€Å"the impetus for what was to become the Beveridge report came from the TUC, who had for some time been pressing the Government for a comprehensive review of social insurance.†(16) Whilst there is no doubt that the TUC had a degree of influence, this is a far too simplistic model. It is my view that the origins of the report, and the principles within the report lie in the growing realisation that the world was changing, that there was a need both socially and economically for systems in place to be made more efficient. William Beveridge had a long history within this area of study and fully understood the deficiencies of the system. As has previously been emphasised, the report was not revolutionary in its ideas. But it was a document which exerted an immense influence upon the future of social policy in Britain. In essence, I would describe the report as the attempts by a pragmatist to rationalise an irrational system. FOOTNOTES: Social Policy and Administration Vol 25, No 1, March 1991 : Article By Leaper, R page 4 Political Studies Vol 27, Issue 2, June 1979 : Article By Weale, A page 288 American Economic Review Vol 33, No 3, September 1943 : Article By Burns, E page 519 Bartholemew, J : The Welfare State Were In (Politico, London, 2004) page 57 Prev Cite, Burns page 513 Beveridge, W: The Beveridge Report on Social and Allied Services 1942 (HMSO, London, 1942) page 1 Ibid Page 2 Thane, P : The Foundations of the Welfare State (Longman, Harlow, 1998) page 235 Prev Cite, Beveridge page 6 Prev Cite, Bartholemew page 58 Political Science Quarterly Vol 58, No 1, March 1943: Article By Wolman, L page 6-7 Prev Cite, Beveridge page 109 Manchester Guardian, February 19th, 1943 Prev Cite, Beveridge page 171 Hansard Parliamentary Debates: 17th February, 1943, Col 1818 Jacobs, J : Beveridge 1942-1992 (Whiting and Birch, London, 1992) page 140 CHAPTER 3: Time magazine printed on December 14th, 1942: â€Å"Not since the day of Munich had the British press given such play to any single story. War news was all but pushed from the pages of London’s war-curtailed dailies. Many of them devoted half their space to news of the document which, in the midst of war, looked forward to a better post-war world. The Beveridge Report, published last week was the biggest event for Britons in many years.†(1) In our present day age of cynicism towards anything political, it is difficult to imagine the idea of a government commissioned report selling 90,000 copies in its’ first week, and eventually seeing sales of 600,000. Even less, the idea of people cueing outside HMSO in London to buy a copy. Such euphoria today is usually reserved for the latest Harry Potter adventures. But in December 1942, this is exactly what happened. People wanted to but and read this document. It was headlined by ‘Time’ as ‘Rare and Refreshing Beveridge.’ This is probably an accurate representation of how people in Britain saw this report. A rare opportunity to read something new and refreshing. The Beveridge report appeared to capture a mood in a way which was not seen before, and is extremely unlikely to be seen again. What is also unlikely to be seen again is a document with such overwhelming approval. Bartholemew notes that: â€Å"In a survey at the time, nineteen out of twenty people had heard of the report and almost all were in favour of it.†(2) The Mass Observation Archives provide us with a valuable insight as to the public perception of the report at the time. Typical of the responses was that of a male skilled worker of 50, from Streatham: â€Å"I have read it and think it champion and will take a load off the minds of people. The most important proposals, well they are all very important but suppose the Retirement Pension and Unemployment increase are perhaps the greatest benefit. It should be passed as quickly as possible. I do not see how anybody can oppose it except perhaps the Insurance Companies but they don’t matter, they have feathered their nests long enough.†(3) Two things are interesting to note from this. Firstly, how enthusiasm can lead people to see things which are not there; in this case the promise of higher pensions and unemployment benefits. Secondly, the cynicism towards the insurance companies which would today, probably be directed towards the politicians. Amid the euphoria, there were comments which, although not really dissent, questioned some of the assumptions. The following is an opinion of a woman regarding family planning: â€Å"Well I’m one of the bad selfish women; I had only one child because I didn’t want any more. And now that my husband and I have parted I’m not particularly sorry. I think my young daughter looks forward to having a family of three or four. But of course she may change her mind when she marries or after she’s had one. After all, it’s such a terribly personal problem. I think that family allowances and better housing and more hope of social security would make a difference to the number of children in better off working class and lower middle class homes. But I don’t think anything on earth would make the educated classes start having large families, because they simply don’t want them.†(4) This is a rejection of the idea that family allowance payments would lead to larger families, This is an interesting observation in light of concerns at the time concerning the declining population. What should be clear from these observations of public opinion is a confirmation of what Bartholemew said. There was widespread public support for the Beveridge plan, to such an extent, the government acted sooner on the proposals than they had initially wanted. There is a general belief that the public support put pressure on the government to accept the conclusions of the report whilst the war was in progress. In light of this overwhelming public support, it is interesting to look at where opposition and criticism to the report came from. From what I have seen, I would place the opposition and criticism to the report into four different groups; government opposition (particularly the treasury), the Marxist left, the Right Wing of the Conservative Part, and Feminist opposition. I have not analysed opposition from insurance companies separately as their arguments correspond with those of the Tory right, and are fairly self explanatory. What is necessary is to look at the nature of the opposition from these four groups; what motivated their opposition, and to look at what extent these oppositions were ideological or practical. This will provide a better picture of where the country stood at this time. As I have mentioned earlier, public opinion compelled the government to act in a way which it did not really want to. There were concerns within the government regarding Beveridges’s plan, particularly from the Treasury. This position has been well explained by Pat Thane: â€Å"The treasury expressed serious doubts about the possible effects of Beveridge’s plans on the post-war fiscal situation. They feared that it would require a high level of taxation which would discourage saving and hinder post-war expansion. A fierce debate was conducted among government economic advisors between those who argued that need could be met more effectively and cheaply by benefits means-tested on the same basis as the newly introduced annual tax returns and adjusted to local cost-of-living variations, and Keynes, who admitted the logic of this view but argued that this was impossible without a reform of the system of direct taxation, which was not immediately practicable, and that contributory insurance was a useful means of making employers share the costs of welfare. Keynes was convinced that the Beveridge plan was the cheapest alternative open to us and that the feared financial difficulties could be avoided by careful Treasury management.†(5) To the historian, this Treasury opposition was by far the most important. In analysing the political climate of the day, it shows differences of thinking at the highest levels of government at a time of war, and when a coalition government was considered to be united. But even more importantly, this Treasury opposition was to continue into the period of implementation, and as we shall see later on, these arguments had profound consequences upon how the Beveridge plan was implemented. It should also be noted at this stage that opposition within Government was not restricted to the Treasury. Ironically, Bevin was initially strongly opposed to the conclusions of Beveridge, believing that it was contrary to the interests of the trade unions, which were best met by higher wages, although the TUC were strongly behind the plan. Whilst the majority of the Socialist movement including the Labour Party, the TUC and interestingly the Communist Party, were firmly behind the plan, the Marxist left were strongly against the plan on ideological terms. Their position is well summarised by a Socialist Party of Great Britain pamphlet written in 1943: â€Å"We propose to show that this apparently philanthropic gesture on the part of the Government will not be an entirely unmixed blessing for the working population, and the approval with which it has been received by different sections of political opinion arises in some cases from the complete lack of knowledge that whatever benefits, if any, may accrue to a certain number of workers, the employers will most certainly gain on balance in the long run.†(6) The essence of the Marxist left position was that capitalism was the cause of poverty and could not be reformed. It would therefore be wrong for socialists to support attempts to reform the system to make it more palatable. Groups such as the socialist party of Great Britain also viewed the report as an attempt to placate the working class, and prevent any possible social revolution at the end of the war. The position of these groups was in the overall scheme of things, of little relevance. This may not have been the case if the Communist Party, by far the largest Marxist organisation, had adopted a Marxist position rather than the reformist position of the TUC. If the opposition of the Treasury was practical, and the opposition of the left was ideological, then the opposition of the Tory right was a combination of the two. There existed then as now, a strong desire to minimise the role of government in affairs as much as possible, and so there was a natural ideological objection to the government run social insurance scheme. Conservative MP, David Willetts has reflected upon the Tory opposition, and has drawn the following conclusions: â€Å"Conservatives were wary of Beveridge for two main reasons. The Conservative Party conference of 1943 passed a motion ‘That this conference is of the opinion that the existing friendly societies should remain part of our social security system’ in response to the fear that Beveridge’s ambitious new social insurance scheme would undermine friendly society provision, a fear which proved well founded. There was also a worry that these benefits would not be as well-targeted as Beveridge hoped.†(7) As I referred to at the start, there was a certain coronation between the position of the Tory right and that of the Insurance companies, whose primary concern was that they would loose a lot of business by Beveridge’s proposals. Their position was on the whole supported by the Tory right. The position of the Tory right was certainly more influential than that of the left, by virtue of the fact that they had a voice in parliament, but we should not overestimate the strength of their opposition in overall terms. Indeed, their position had little impact upon the outcome of the report. There was probably greater support for their position within government than was apparent, but political expediency led others to take a more liberal position. The most interesting ideological position was that of the feminist movement. Their position has been effectively laid out by Sheila Blackburn: â€Å"Socialist feminists maintain that, despite women’s sterling war effort, Beveridge deliberately reduced married women, with regard to social security, to second class citizens. This, they insist, Beveridge achieved via three means. First, Beveridge specified that married working women should pay reduced national insurance contributions and, as a result, they received lower benefits. Second, socialist feminists discuss how Beveridge made arrangements for married working women. Third and most importantly, feminists criticise Beveridge for assuming that the majority of married/co-habiting women would abandon paid work to be financially supported by a male bread winner.†(8) We must be careful at this stage to avoid moving away from the question we are looking at; that is opposition at the time to Beveridge. The feminist debate upon Beveridge continues to this day, and we must avoid using current arguments and imposing them upon feminists in 1942. But there is a strong body of evidence to suggest that these arguments formed part of the feminist opposition at the time. This has been reflected by Leaper in looking at the demands of the Woman’s Freedom League. They demanded: â€Å"that men and women should in marriage not be treated as a team but as individuals each paying equal contributions and receive equal benefits; and that in every case men and women should pay the same and receive the same benefits.†(9) He has also quoted the following extract from Abbott and Bompass who published a fierce feminist critique of the report in 1943: â€Å"It is where the plan falls short of being really mutual in character, where it shuts out or exempts from all direct participation over nine million adult women, where it imposes financial burdens on men alone, instead of spreading them equitably over all, that it fails and is open to criticism.†(10) The importance of the feminist lobby should not be overstated. Whilst there was extensive feminist opposition to Beveridge, he also gained much support, as Blackburn has pointed out: â€Å"Beveridge’s views were largely in accord with those of the majority of the organised women’s movement in Britain in the 1930’s and 1940’s; and it seems futile and somewhat patronising to berate both him and them for failing to think what they ought to have thought from the vantage point of the 1990’s.†(11) I would summarise that the feminist position was important in 1942, but had little impact upon the implementation of the Beveridge proposals. The importance of the feminist position has been in the ways in which the welfare state has been altered, taking on board many of the feminist arguments. I would be my argument therefore, that the feminist argument has gained in strength and credibility over time, and is now highly influential in the shape of the welfare state. The Beveridge report was without doubt a monumental document, which gained public acclaim to an extent which we are unlikely to ever see again. One should not underestimate the role of Beveridge himself in gaining this support. In many respects, Beveridge was a very modern politician. He manipulated the media very effectively, building up substantial support for his report before it was published. As a result, the opposition was limited. As I have mentioned, the most important opposition came from the Treasury, and this opposition did impact upon the way Beveridge was implemented. But on the whole, the support was far too extensive for it to be ignored, and the spirit, if not all the detail became the foundation of the welfare state. FOOTNOTES: Time: Monday, December 14th, 1942 Bartholemew, J : The Welfare State Were In (Politico, London, 2004) page 56 Mass Observation Archive: Topic Collections on Social Welfare and the Beveridge Report, 1939-1949 Ibid Thane, P : The Foundation of the Welfare State (Logman, Harlow, 1998) page 236 Website: www.worldsocilaism.org Website: www.davidwilletts.org.uk Woman’s History Review Vol 4, No 3, 1995: Article By Sheila Blackburn page 371 Social Policy and Administration Vol 25, No 1, March 1991: Article By Leaper, R page 18 Ibid page 18 Prev Cite Blackburn page 376 BIBLIOGRAPHY: Titmuss, R : Essays on the Welfare State (Unwin University Books, London, 1963) Political Quarterly Vol 14, No 2 : Before and After Beveridge Journal of Social Policy Vol 27, No 1 : Article By Jim Tomlinson The Economic Journal Vol 53, April 1943 : Article By Owen, ADK Historical Journal Vol 35, No 3, 1992 : Article By Fielding, S Review of Economic Studies, Vol 11, No 1, 1943 : Article By Hicks, JR

The Milky Way :: Essays Papers

The Milky Way http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/messier/more/mw_sky.html The Milky Way is the home of our Solar System along with at least 200 billion other stars and planets. It contains thousands of clusters and nebulas. It is the home of nearly all the objects of Messier’s catalog that aren’t their own galaxies. The mass of our giant galaxy is somewhere between 750 billion and one trillion solar masses. The diameter is estimated to be about 100,000 light years. The galaxy has three main components: a disk, in which the solar system resides, a central bulge at the core and an all encompassing halo. The disk of our galaxy exhibits it’s spiral structure and is part of the prominent nuclear region which is part of a notable bulge/halo component. http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/gal_milky.html The Milky Way is categorized as a Hubble type Sb or Sc spiral. It is unclear if the galaxy has a bar in its spiral so that is why its classification is unsure. The image above is that of the spiral galaxy M83, which is thought to be similar in size and shape to our Milky Way, causing some to classify our galaxy as a Abbc type spiral. The bright ban of light seen at night, is usually what is referred to as the Milky Way. The bright plane is actually the disk of our galaxy. The disk is composed of mostly Population 1 stars, which are blue and fairly young, which range between a million and ten billion years old. The disk of our galaxy has four spiral arms, which contain interstellar matter, diffuse nebulae, and young stars and open star clusters emerging from that matter. The spiral arms are also where the active star formations take place. The arms are approximately 300 pc thick and 30 kpc in diameter. The red stars, or the older stars, in our galaxy are located in the bulge component, which is the center of our galaxy. These Population II stars are thought to be 10 billion years old. The bulge component also contains the globular star clusters. It is estimated that our galaxy has about 200 globulars, but we know about 150. These globular clusters are consolidated toward the Galactic Center. Harlow Shapley concluded that the center of the Milky Way lies at a cpnsiderable distance in the direction of Sagittarius.

Acca Question Essay

Theory Introduction, basic probability theory, definition, laws of probability, conditional probability, independent and dependent events, applications. Unit No. 2Random Variables Introduction, Random numbers and their generation, Application of random numbers, concepts of random variables and their construction, Discrete and continuous random variables. Unit No. 3Equations Solving fist degree equations, Quadratic equations, Solution of quadratic equations by different methods, inequalities, absolute value, Co-ordinate system Unit No. 4Linear Equations Characteristic of linear equations, Slope- intercept form, determining the equations, Applications. Unit No. 5Matrices and Determinants Matrices, Different kinds of Matrices, Addition, Subtraction and Multiplication of matrices, Determinants, Application of matrices and determinants. Unit No. 6Inverse of Matrices Expansion of determinants, different Properties of determinants, Cofactors and minors of elements of a matrix, Cramer’s rule, Solution of system of linear equations by use of matrices. Unit No. Differentiation Derivatives, Differentiation of explicit and implicit functions, maxima and minima, Applications of derivatives. Unit No. 8Partial Derivatives Partial Derivatives, maxima and minima for functions of multi-variables Applications of partial derivatives. Unit No. 9Optimization First derivative test. 2nd Derivative test, Curve sketching, Revenue, Cost and profit applications in business. Recommended Book:- 1. Applied mathematics for Busine ss, Economics and the Social Sciences. By Frank S. Budnick. Mcgraw-Hill

Free Essays on Gay Marriage Argumentative

Discrimination is the Voice of Ignorance Marriage is one of the fundamental establishments of the United States. As a young person, one looks forward to many goals in their lifetime: career success, a good life, and very often marriage to the person they love and a family together. This is one of the biggest parts of our American life and culture. Very few heterosexuals would be willing to put their right to marry on a ballot for voter approval, or even in their wildest dreams [nightmares?] have to consider doing that. However, in the past ten years that is a prospect gay men and women are facing all over our United States. Why is American culture so unaccepting of homosexual marriages and what are the reprocutions of this for homosexual couples and for all of our citizens? Homosexuality, as a lifestyle has always been under great fire in our culture. Homosexuality has been defined and termed in many contexts. The West Chester University Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Services states that , Given the variable aspects of sexual orientation and given evidence that an individual’s sexual orientation may change over time, it is difficult to provide a precise and universally accepted definition of homosexuality. In general terms, homosexuality may be described as the capacity to find affection and or sexual satisfaction with someone of the same gender. Focus founder and fundamental Christian leader, James Dobson, however, simply defines homosexuality as a sin and says homosexuals can be cured in God’s name (Egelko, 3/2000 p2). As one can see from these two examples alone, the definition of this lifestyle isn’t focused solely on what a homosexual is, but rather how individuals feel about the way of life. In day to day living, the homosexual lifestyle is most likely not much different from the heterosexual or straight lifestyle. A homosexual still gets up in the morning and goes to work or to school. They still have dinner with family or frien... Free Essays on Gay Marriage Argumentative Free Essays on Gay Marriage Argumentative Discrimination is the Voice of Ignorance Marriage is one of the fundamental establishments of the United States. As a young person, one looks forward to many goals in their lifetime: career success, a good life, and very often marriage to the person they love and a family together. This is one of the biggest parts of our American life and culture. Very few heterosexuals would be willing to put their right to marry on a ballot for voter approval, or even in their wildest dreams [nightmares?] have to consider doing that. However, in the past ten years that is a prospect gay men and women are facing all over our United States. Why is American culture so unaccepting of homosexual marriages and what are the reprocutions of this for homosexual couples and for all of our citizens? Homosexuality, as a lifestyle has always been under great fire in our culture. Homosexuality has been defined and termed in many contexts. The West Chester University Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Services states that , Given the variable aspects of sexual orientation and given evidence that an individual’s sexual orientation may change over time, it is difficult to provide a precise and universally accepted definition of homosexuality. In general terms, homosexuality may be described as the capacity to find affection and or sexual satisfaction with someone of the same gender. Focus founder and fundamental Christian leader, James Dobson, however, simply defines homosexuality as a sin and says homosexuals can be cured in God’s name (Egelko, 3/2000 p2). As one can see from these two examples alone, the definition of this lifestyle isn’t focused solely on what a homosexual is, but rather how individuals feel about the way of life. In day to day living, the homosexual lifestyle is most likely not much different from the heterosexual or straight lifestyle. A homosexual still gets up in the morning and goes to work or to school. They still have dinner with family or frien...

Marquis de Montcalm in the French and Indian War

Marquis de Montcalm in the French and Indian War Marquis de Montcalm - Early Life Career: Born February 28, 1712 at Chateau de Candiac near Nà ®mes, France, Louis-Joseph de Montcalm-Gozon was the son of Louis-Daniel de Montcalm and Marie-Thà ©rà ¨se de Pierre. At the age of nine, his father arranged for him to be commissioned as an ensign in the Rà ©giment d’Hainaut. Remaining at home, Montcalm was educated by a tutor and in 1729 received a commission as a captain. Moving to active service three years later, he took part in the War of the Polish Succession. Serving under Marshal de Saxe and the Duke of Berwick, Montcalm saw action during the siege of Kehl and Philippsburg. Following his fathers death in 1735, he inherited the title of Marquis de Saint-Veran. Returning home, Montcalm married Angà ©lique-Louise Talon de Boulay on October 3, 1736. Marquis de Montcalm - War of the Austrian Succession: With the beginning of the War of the Austrian Succession in late 1740, Montcalm obtained an appointment as aide-de-camp to Lieutenant General Marquis de La Fare. Besieged at Prague with Marshal de Belle-Isle, he sustained a wound but quickly recovered. Following the French withdraw in 1742, Montcalm sought to improve his situation. On March 6, 1743, he purchased the colonelcy of the Rà ©giment dAuxerrois for 40,000 livres. Taking part in Marshal de Maillebois campaigns in Italy, he earned the Order of Saint Louis in 1744. Two years later, Montcalm sustained five saber wounds and was taken prisoner by the Austrians at the Battle of Piacenza. Paroled after seven months in captivity, he received a promotion to brigadier for his performance in the 1746 campaign. Returning to active duty in Italy, Montcalm fell wounded during the defeat at Assietta in July 1747. Recovering, he later aided in lifting the siege of Ventimiglia. With the end of the war in 1748, Montcalm found himself in command of part of the army in Italy. In February 1749, his regiment was absorbed by another unit. As a result, Montcalm lost his investment in the colonelcy. This was offset when he was commissioned mestre-de-camp and given permission to raise a regiment of cavalry bearing his own name. These efforts strained Montcalms fortunes and on July 11, 1753, his petition to the Minister of War, Comte d’Argenson, for a pension was granted in the amount of 2,000 livres annually. Retiring to his estate, he enjoyed the country life and society in Montpellier. Marquis de Montcalm - The French Indian War: The next year, tensions between Britain and France exploded in North American following Lieutenant Colonel George Washingtons defeat at Fort Necessity. As the French Indian War began, British forces won a victory at the Battle of Lake George in September 1755. In the fighting, the French commander in North America, Jean Erdman, Baron Dieskau, fell wounded and was captured by the British. Seeking a replacement for Dieskau, the French command selected Montcalm and promoted him to major general on March 11, 1756. Sent to New France (Canada), his orders gave him command of forces in the field but made him subordinate to the governor-general, Pierre de Rigaud, Marquis de Vaudreuil-Cavagnial. Sailing from Brest with reinforcements on April 3, Montcalms convoy reached the St. Lawrence River five weeks later. Landing at Cap Tourmente, he proceeded overland to Quebec before pressing on to Montreal to confer with Vaudreuil. In the meeting, Montcalm learned of Vaudreuils intention to attack Fort Oswego later in the summer. After being sent to inspect Fort Carillon (Ticonderoga) on Lake Champlain, he returned to Montreal to oversee operations against Oswego. Striking in mid-August, Montcalms mixed force of regulars, colonials, and Native Americans captured the fort after a brief siege. Though a victory, Montcalm and Vaudreuils relationship showed signs of strain as they disagreed over strategy and the effectiveness of colonial forces. Marquis de Montcalm - Fort William Henry: In 1757, Vaudreuil ordered Montcalm to attack British bases south of Lake Champlain. This directive was in line with his preference for conducting spoiling attacks against the enemy and conflicted with Montcalms belief that New France should be protected by a static defense. Moving south, Montcalm mustered around 6,200 men at Fort Carillon before moving across Lake George to strike at Fort William Henry. Coming ashore, his troops isolated the fort on August 3. Later that day he demanded that Lieutenant Colonel George Monro surrender his garrison. When the British commander refused, Montcalm began the Siege of Fort William Henry. Lasting six days, the siege ended with Monro finally capitulating. The victory lost a bit of luster when a force of Native Americans who had fought with the French attacked the paroled British troops and their families as they departed the area. Marquis de Montcalm - Battle of Carillon: Following the victory, Montcalm elected to withdraw back to Fort Carillon citing a lack of supplies and the departure of his Native American allies. This angered Vaudreuil who had desired his field commander to push south to Fort Edward. That winter, the situation in New France deteriorated as food became scarce and the two French leaders continued to quarrel. In the spring of 1758, Montcalm returned to Fort Carillon with the intention of stopping a thrust north by Major General James Abercrombie. Learning that the British possessed around 15,000 men, Montcalm, whose army mustered less than 4,000, debated if and where to make a stand. Electing to defend Fort Carillon, he ordered its outer works expanded. This work was nearing completion when Abercrombies army arrived in early July. Shaken by the death of his skilled second-in-command, Brigadier General George Augustus Howe, and concerned that Montcalm would receive reinforcements, Abercrombie ordered his men to assault Montcalms works on July 8 without bringing up his artillery. In making this rash decision, Abercrombie failed to see obvious advantages in the terrain which would have allowed him to easily defeat the French. Instead, the Battle of Carillon saw British forces mount numerous frontal assaults against Montcalms fortifications. Unable to break through and having taken heavy losses, Abercrombie fell back across Lake George. Marquis de Montcalm - Defense of Quebec: As in the past, Montcalm and Vaudreuil fought in the wake of the victory over credit and the future defense of New France. With the loss of Louisbourg in late July, Montcalm became increasingly pessimistic about whether New France could be held. Lobbying Paris, he asked for reinforcements and, fearing defeat, to be recalled. This latter request was denied and on October 20, 1758, Montcalm received a promotion to lieutenant general and made Vaudreuils superior. As 1759 approached, the French commander anticipated a British onslaught on multiple fronts. In early May 1759, a supply convoy reached Quebec with a few reinforcements. A month later a large British force led by Admiral Sir Charles Saunders and Major General James Wolfe arrived in the St. Lawrence. Building fortifications on the north shore of the river to the east of the city at Beauport, Montcalm successfully frustrated Wolfes initial operations. Seeking other options, Wolfe had several ships run upstream past Quebecs batteries. These began seeking landing sites to the west. Locating a site at Anse-au-Foulon, British forces started crossing on September 13. Moving up the heights, they formed for battle on the Plains of Abraham. After learning of this situation, Montcalm raced west with his men. Arriving on the plains, he immediately formed for battle despite the fact that Colonel Louis-Antoine de Bougainville was marching to his aid with around 3,000 men. Montcalm justified this decision by expressing concern that Wolfe would fortify the position at Anse-au-Foulon. Opening the Battle of Quebec, Montcalm moved to attack in columns. In doing so, the French lines became somewhat disorganized as they crossed the uneven terrain of the plain. Under orders to hold their fire until the French were within 30-35 yards, the British troops had double-charged their muskets with two balls. After enduring two volleys from the French, the front rank opened fire in a volley that was compared to a cannon shot. Advancing a few paces, the second British line unleashed a similar volley shattering the French lines. Early in the battle, Wolfe was hit in the wrist. Tending to the injury he continued, but was soon hit in the stomach and chest. Issuing his final orders, he died on the field. With the French army retreating towards the city and the St. Charles River, the French militia continued to fire from nearby woods with the support of floating battery near the St. Charles River bridge. During the retreat, Montcalm was hit in the lower abdomen and thigh. Taken into the city, he died the next day. Initially buried near the city, Montcalms remains were moved several times until being reinterred at the cemetery of the Quebec General Hospital in 2001. Selected Sources Military Heritage: Marquis de MontcalmQuebec History: Marquis de Montcalm Fort Ticonderoga: Marquis de Montcalm

Did Timothy Quill behave appropriately towards Diana What is the best Essay

Did Timothy Quill behave appropriately towards Diana What is the best argument to the conclusion that he did not Would it have been different if he had given - Essay Example The doomed person has a right to decide about her life and body. It is not exactly euthanasia, because she was not particularly helped by any one in the deed. No doubt, there were indirect guiding hands that assisted her through every step towards the unhappy end. With all the amazing advancement in the world of science and medicine, we still have been unable to stop the pain, helplessness and suffering. A large amount of money is being continuously spent by all nations on cancer research; but till now, it had been done in vain, while cancer still remains the most dreaded and horrifying disease of all. The unreasonable striking of the disease, intolerable agony it causes, the hopelessness of an impending death sentence and the ultimate cruelty of an unbearably painful end – cancer had remained the worst killer of modern times, which unfailingly makes the human beings realise the mortality of life. Diane, who had already gone through another form of cancer rather successfully, was not horrified beyond limits. She was angry at her unrelenting fate, sad that she had to decide on her own death; but once she accepted it as her destiny, she neither fought against it, nor wasted her remaining short time, crying over it. Her only demand was that she should be allowed to make her own decision, which she eventually did, with a slight, but not pronounced help from Timothy. Timothy was aware of the outcome of a natural end and he had witnessed the agony of his patients dying of cancer, in sheer helplessness and impotency. After discussing the matter again and again with Diane, whom he admired by the way, in which she fought her various battles, Timothy decided to stand by her. He was convinced that Diane not only has taken the easy way out, but also has chosen the best alternative under the circumstances. She hardly had any great choices. Timothy knew how difficult it is to take one†™s own life,

Must young learners need teachers with a bachelor degree or not at all Research Paper

Must young learners need teachers with a bachelor degree or not at all - Research Paper Example Must young learners need teachers with a bachelor degree or not at all? Formal education requires that teachers should have at least a bachelor degree of education and must have passed the teachers licensure examination before they could be considered qualified to pursue the career of teaching. They may also improve their qualification by embarking on master and doctorate degree to possess high competence and skills in classroom administration and instruction Compared to previous system of education, modern teachers are required to be multidisciplinary in knowledge to ensure that they are able to impart full knowledge to their learners and the latter will acquire understanding and high capacity for retention of theories which they could use for critical relation with mundane and divine realities (University of California Commission on General Education, 2007). All educational institution sets standard for teachers to ensure that they are delivering quality education to the public and that they possessed core competencies on academic subjects (Atpe.org, 2013). Informal education on the other hand is not quite defined in its standards but this has been historically and philosophically developed through olden primary schools where children can be taught in an informal approach. This is done through creative ways such as excursion, painting or drawing, and mostly about reflecting on empirical experiences. Informal way of education simply requ ires â€Å"spontaneity, flexibility, naturalness, interests, sense of freedom, and self-expression. (Atpe.org, 2013, p. 1).† For primary learners who are yet at the new phase of learning process, teachers can be those who have attained certain level of education, though may not be certified yet, but is practicing such â€Å"broad and balance teaching through alternative pedagogic alternatives that is driven for conversion processes (Atpe.org, 2013, p. 1).† Who are the important people? In formal and informal education, the pivotal parties in the learning processes are the teachers, the learners, the school administrators, the local government and its agency on education, and the community, including parents The teachers are of course those professional and non-professional instructors leading the learning processes that are maybe transpiring within and outside the classroom. The learners are those that are formally enrolled in school with the interest of improving thei r knowledge base for their personal growth and to fulfil their dreams in life. The school administrators are essential part of the educational process because they are concern about administration of educational institution, the improvement of their human resources (teachers and staff), and are concern in attaining quality standard of educative processes, such as ensuring that classroom instruction are done in accordance to required curriculum, approaches or methods, and in accordance to the policies set by the Department of Education (University of California Commission on General Education, 2007). The government is also a stakeholder of education. They are responsible in formulating and implementing policies to ensure that quality education are maintained and offered by the schools for young learners and that resources are allocated for the fulfilment of the state’s vision on education and production of skilled and quality human resources (University of California Commissio n on General Education, 2007). The state could also intervene on some policy issues and infrastructural developments for public schools to address the fundamental needs to deliver that form of education that will not leave any child behind (University of Ca