Realism in contemporary politics

Realism in contemporary politics Which international relations theory best describes the worlds events? This is plainly a question highly likely to be exclusively asked by an international relations professor to his/her international relations students during a lecture. The students have to be analyzing this question very critically by taking all the found facts into careful consideration before deciding on anything. Not surprisingly, whilst some students will probably decide to choose interdependent liberalism or classical realism as their preferred answers, some others, by contrast, might prefer another distinguishable theory, for example, Marxism or Mercantilism. Yet, none of them nevertheless are either completely right or wrong. They all have their own supporting evidence based on passed histories and/or today worlds ongoing events to illustrate their own particular arguments. However, some if not all of the evidence is not concrete or convincing enough which can potentially draw criticisms or rebuts from tho se who are in an opposition side. As an international relations student, I to my preference will select neorealism or structural realism of Kenneth Waltz as the best international relations theory to explain the worlds political practices and tendency. Neorealism specifically refers to a theory which tries to explain that the state system, not human elements, is the mere determinant of the state behaviors. It whispers to the ears of all the states that they all have to act in accordance with the anarchy of the system to survive and prosper. People can act morally and ethically in their society within their confined territory. But states cannot and should not do the same thing otherwise they could treacherously place themselves in danger and more execrably in demise. This is chiefly because within a sovereign state, there is a central government or authority standing by to help regulate peoples social behaviors so that social order and peace can prevail and thereby peace and harmony. That is why we can see there are great lots of nice people whose good deeds override and outweigh bad deeds as they interact with one another in society. But we can also see that states more often than not fight, kill, destroy or sack each other for its own exclusively personal gains. Some states, such as Morn, Charm Civilizations, were already unmade. Albeit the League of Nations, Japan embarked on invading countries in Asia, and Germany in Europe; no (world) government or effectively strong international organization disciplined them. The US, despite disagreement from other big powers and UN, did stage war against Iraq. Recently, North Korea has bombed the South. This is not to mention many other cases. These highlight and exemplify ever-lasting anarchy of the system wherein (destructive) attacks and wars are always possible. The so-called Balance of Power widely known to be originally developed by Kenneth Waltz is a paradigmatically typical example of the worlds political trends. Balance of power specifically refers to the means by which a state in the anarchical state systems is highly likely to manipulate its ability, for example by forming an alliance with another or other states, simply in order for itself to better if not best stand up to a more powerful or superior state by which it feels threatened. Relative gains, which mean one state feels insecure when another has gained something out of the anarchical state system, and the endeavors to increase power to well ensure national interests, security, and survival can also potentially lead to balance of power. A sheer number of events demonstrate this mere claim. Recently, the USA has been to Indonesia and India and pledged to strengthen their mutual existing ties and relationships. From the political perspectives, we can see that the US does so simply and mainly to balance its power with China who apparently seems cunning and bullying over many worlds issues. European Union is also another supporting example. EU member states are bound and tied together not only economically, but also politically by pooling some of their sovereignty chiefly in order to balance its economic and political power with the rest of the world, including the US, the Oriental, and the developing countries which are emerging as potential challenging competitive rivals both economically and politically. One more relevant example falls on the case of ASEAN. ASEAN has called for the intervention from the US and Russia in the South China Sea issues, and this is perceived by the world as sort of balance of power by ASEAN with more economically and militarily powerful China . A main and original objective of ASEAN on which it has still centrally focused to-date is to strengthen its intra-regional economy so that it can well compete with the rest of the world, in particular the developed countries. This can also be viewed as balance of power. China is also a particularly obvious example of balance of power. China who used to be much inferior to the US economically and militarily now has virtually become the only USs equal. China has strived so hard for ages and for generations to build its powerhouse in order that its power can be balanced with the US so that China will never ever be easy to be threatened or coerced by the worlds only superpower. That is the very reason why China has been so wily in playing political and economic games in the international arena. China has publicly and secretly supported and granted military and economic aids without strings attached to the authoritarian and corrupt states (governments) who are often condemned and warned by the West to sever development aids on the ground of human rights violations or economic or political concession. It is not only that, China has also manipulated its skills to depreciate its own currency and thus increase its exports at the expense of others particularl y the US. The US has heavily responded to China. That is why the main item in the agenda of this year G-20 summit held in Seoul is surely currency issue. Neorealists can also be reasonably right to argue that the world can be characterized by security dilemma. Security dilemma specifically means that whilst a state is building its defensive capabilities, others will follow suit by building their own, and more often than not defensive capabilities can potentially be converted into the offensive, so wars or armed conflicts are more prone to be escalated then. Trying to shift balance of power and to protect national interests can potentially result in security dilemma as well. There are many of worlds emerging issues acting as clear cut examples to illustrate the point. The US was the first-ever state to introduce nuclear weapon. And then, USSR stool the nuclear technology from the US and built its own nuclear weapon. Facing the security dilemma, the two did compete with each not only over nuclear weapons, but also over other military technologies. After Cold War between these two superpowers came to the demise, other smaller states especially the authoritarian states started building nuclear weapons as well, leading to nuclear proliferation and spread. North Korea, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, India, China are believed to possess nuclear weapons. Taiwan, Japan, Viet Nam and a few others are also believed to be ready and willing to produce nuclear weapons also. Thus, we can say the US has been encountering even greater security dilemma. The US has been so tricky and pragmatic in maintaining its global-scale powerful position, role and influence so that it can ensure its own national interests; the US has manipulated oil politics in the Middle East. Given this behavior, China has been trying to be as powerful as the US through whatever sly means it can access; China supports the corrupt states whilst the West does not; China depreciates its national currency for its economic gains in spite of subsequent undesirable results to other economies; China becomes extremely starving for oil and natural resources; that is why South China Sea has been claimed by the newly emerging power. Not only China, others will also follow suit what China has done. Then, the US meets with another security dilemma. States seek for material power and capability in order to insure for states survival and defend their security in an uncertain and anarchy world. Due to this reason, Israel possessed monopoly nuclear weapon in Middle East mainly because she wants to defend herself from her neighbor countries who always want to revenge with for times. However, Iran viewed that Israel building nuclear weapon is not for defensive, so Iran strives very hard to devel op nuclear program and claim that she will wipe out the Jewish state out of the map one time. Self-help is also a characteristic feather of the worlds politics. A country in this anarchical state system must largely rely on itself; it would be too risky for her to trust others. The country must then build its own defensive capabilities to enhance its ability to protect itself from any aggression by any other state. Albeit a democratic state, the US built nuclear weapons simply to ensure its postwar national security and survival. China also spends more of its national budget on its national defense or military. It is mainly because they both and others are aware of possible danger or attacks in this anarchical international system. They must be always ready for any possible attacks. Kenneth Waltz can also be logically correct to convince that great power relations can potentially lead to international change especially more often than not at the event that great powers fall, rise, or their balance of power shifts. The great powers set the world scene for the rest. Cold War, WW I and II, UN (P-5), LN, colonialism, globalization are all the worlds milestones which were all initiated by the great powers who dominated the world at each time. Modern state system at the very beginning was exclusively in Europe, but now it has spread all over the world. In the past, the powerful states (European states) used military as their tool to harm the weaker (in Asia and Africa) by coming and colonizing those weak, vulnerable states, and now they use economy or globalization, instead; the developing or poor countries are more or less at the mercy of those developed countries; only a few Asian states, such as Japan, could help themselves get out of the apparent exploitation by t he developed. The infamous and famous Cold War was the mere product of ideological conflict between the two superpowers the US and the USSR at the time. Japan and Germany who were great powers gave birth to WWII. Pursuing national interests and seeking to augment power to ensure greater national security and survival also highlights the fact that neorealism and realism in general are applicable in the today world. No any single state in this anarchical system would let her national interests left behind and thus her national survival endangered. She must fight and struggle for the better. She would prefer declaring war to placing her state interests in danger. Armed conflicts between India and Pakistan, Malaysia and Singapore, Cambodia and Thailand, and South Korea and North Korea all emphasize the priority state interests. Endangered by terrorism, the US has taken actions to fight war on terror across the globe; a good example is the US invaded Afghanistan. Modeled by the US trick in world politics such as oil politics, China is doing the same thing; China has been known to be so cunning in increasing its global power; it supports the corrupt states; it manipulates its currency; it improves its military sector and so forth. Kenneth Waltz argues that world is also characterized by the uneven distribution of capabilities and this can lead to international war or conflicts. This point is strong. Of course, the state capabilities are never ever equal. If all the states of the system had the equal capabilities, then the worlds genuine peace could exist. Because of unequal capabilities, ASEAN and China who seems much more powerful are having long-standing conflicts with each other over South China Sea. WWI and II can also understood to have caused by the shift of balance of power to Germany and Japan, making the two become more powerful than other powers at the time. China and the US seem not to end up with any war with each other as they both have similar capabilities. But they both still have some sort of peaceful conflicts which are not yet international conflicts, but need international precaution or proactive solution, for example over the issue of currency and democracy. During cold war, the US and Sovi et maintained some type of peace as they did not escalate to war because they both had similar ability to destroy each other, yet some international happenings also explained Cold War, such as civil wars in Viet Nam, Korea, Cambodian, and so on. International competition claimed by neorealists can also be a true feather of world politics. In the past, we can see the competition between Sparta and Athens. And now we can see the resembled relations between the US and Soviet during cold war and betwixt the great powers before and during World Wars. They used military as their tools to compete or fight each other. Now that military tools have become obsolete, they used different tools in this different world context. They use economy or globalization or tree market/trade to compete with each other. China is competing with the rest of the world especially the potential region such as ASEAN, the US, Japan, and EU. That is why we can see there have emerged the group of eight, regional organizations, the group of twenty, free trade agreements, and so on and so forth. Realism argues that the theory well explains the actions of the middle and great powers who always act in reference to the anarchy of the system. They will always use balance of power methods to survive any danger or threat potentially posed by a more powerful or superior. However, the small or the weak vulnerable states are another different story. They are actually on the margins of the systems; their actions must be guided by the principle of bandwagon; they must bandwagon or side with the great powers, for example in an international crisis, to protect themselves from as well as to survive other superiors aggressive power. And these actions, as neorealists argue, are perceived to be negligible or insignificant. When the US illegally invaded Iraq, some less powerful countries such as Australia supported the US by sending some of their troops to help the US fight in Iraq as well. Kenneth Waltz also argues that domestic politics is in no sense relevant in intentional system. No matter whatever regime type or domestic political methods and/or whoever statesman a state has, she must ensure her national security, survival, and interests in the system. A state has to act in the system differently from what a person is expected and supposed to act in a confined territory. These two aspects cannot and should not be applied to each others context, for the two contexts are really differentiated. A state must act with accordance to this worlds anarchy. A democracy might fight a war if necessary notwithstanding her firmly held belief in human rights or peaceful problem-solving principles. A number of evidence from what states used to practice and have practiced support the claim. South Korea has been militarily threatened by North Korea. The former therefore readies itself for any possible attack or war from the latter. That is why we can see a sheer number of military maneuvers of friendship between the US and South Korea in her territory. The US is worldwide known to be the father and the biggest proponent of democracy. Yet, it has nonetheless been repeatedly and allegedly accused of having committed human rights infringements in the Middle East. It was not only that; the US used to be condemned for covertly and overtly advocating authoritarian states for its own personal gains, for example, by helping support (even bloody) military coup dà ©tats to topple democratically elected leaders. Cambodia is a democratic country, yet it has better relations with authoritarian states such as China and Vietnam than the democracies such as Thailand, the US and the West which are known to be strong democracies and democracy advocates. Singapore and Malaysia, India and Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, Cambodia and Thailand warned each other to fight a war if no concession has not made as demanded. China and Viet Nam more often than not have had bitter relations with each other for ages though they both have shared the same communist ideology and similar culture and so forth. International cooperation, international institutions, non-state actors such as NGOs, civil society, and other international actors still cannot fully and totally replace the position, role, and importance of states as the main actors in the system. IGOs such as UN and international law are just like scrap paper for the great powers, who use them as tools to gain global powers and influence. Those newly emergent actors are of course increasingly challenging the states actors, but still states have a shelter to protect itself, i.e. state sovereignty principle. If a state does not consent or mandate another state or other actor to intervene into its own internal affairs, they will never ever be eligible to do anything, but just passively condemn. States cooperate with one another only on the basis of self-interests. Whatever concession and policy a state has made must be attributable to its national interests, indeed. If states are aware of losses or setbacks in the cooperation or some kind of agreements or treaties, then as a matter of fact they will never ever do so. Too vast body of innocent people were brutally and callously crushed to die or harmed in such countries as Botswana, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Cambodia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Burma, China, and others else where, where exist ethnic cleansings, genocides, internal conflicts, human rights contravention, and the like. This is simply because other states or actors especially the West and UN cannot do anything practically with the issues, but just passively condemn, as the hosts do not consent them to do so. UN is largely influenced by the great powers. Thus, it should not be a surprise that UN can be reflected as the great powers interests. UN has failed to deal successfully with many important issues as to address those issues was believed to be at the expense a great powers interests. UN has been successful in solving many issues, but mainly on the ground that to resolve those issues was believed to serve the great powers interests. Bipolar state system is logically claimed by the father founder of neorealism Kenneth Waltz to be more stable than the multi-polar one. The outbreaks of WWI and WWII and cold war are concrete examples to explain this mere fact. WWI and II broke out because of the multi-polarity at each of the time; there were greater suspicion, mistrust, and higher chance for shift in power. As a result, those great powers declared wars against each other. Cold war was a contrasting story. It was a period of peace for the world though it seems not. In conclusion, we can see that the world is best explained by neorealism rather than any other theories. Many events both in the past and now glorify and magnify the theory. The theory is more practical and applicable than the others. Therefore, it is highly-recommended that new international relations learners and scholars as well as the foreign policy-makers must be really careful in making any decisions. And the decisions are to be made on the basis of and in careful light of neorealism, otherwise overwhelming losses and regrets and more tragically demise can be made available for your states. Be careful and bear in your mind that your countrys future is in your hands. Firmly hold realism principles and prosper.

Literary Response to Gulliver’s Travels :: essays papers

Literary Response to Gulliver’s Travels 1.) Interpret the ending of Book IV in Gulliver’s Travels. How are we to understand Gulliver’s very strange behavior? In Book IV, Lemuel Gulliver’s fourth and final journey places him in the land of the Houyhnhnm, a civilization of intellectual, sensible horses, and senseless, inferior, and indecent humans. As Swift does throughout the novel, he ties his satire closely with Gulliver’s perceptions of the different world around him in his last adventure; these chapters do not change the method of Swift’s satire. During Gulliver’s experience in the land of Houyhnhnm, he encounters the wise and friendly Houyhnhnms, or horses, which are superior to the Yahoos, or salve humans. Although Gulliver is referred to as a â€Å"Yahoo,† the Houyhnhnms treat him with more respect than their captives, due to his intelligent division from the Yahoos. In theses chapters Gulliver comes to realize how much he loathes the human race, after being in contact with the Yahoos. Gulliver finds himself in a society controlled by creatures usually at the dispatch of humans, and in a sort of oblivion of his own, between the humane horses and the untamed, unruly Yahoos. The humans and their inability to compare to the Houyhnhnms instantly disgust him. Gulliver then grows fond of the Houyhnhnms and beings to enjoy life conversing with them about the differences in their worlds. He no longer desires to return to humankind. Soon Gulliver is accepted as an intellectual among the Houyhnhnms. He begins to think of every human he has ever known as Yahoos, and no longer has any respect for them, he thinks of the Houyhnhnms as the most respected and well-mannered living things on the earth. Gulliver is given a room, and is treated as a member of the family. However due to his acquired fortune, the Yahoos begin to complain and Gulliver is forced to return to Europe. He does not want to return to Europe, but decides that he would rather live with the barbarians that he once lived with, than with the uncivilized Yahoos. When Gulliver does arrive in England, he is filled with disgust and disgrace for them. For a year he cannot stand to be with his family, but instead buys two horses and speaks with them.

Carrefour Case Analysis

The purpose of this analysis is to highlight how Carrefour has financed its growth over the last four years i. e. 1968 through 1971 with the help of the Statement of Sources and Uses (Exhibit 1). In addition, the financing needs for the projected growth of the company will be reported and analyzed briefly. For this purpose Pro-forma Income Statements (Exhibit 2) and Pro-forma Balance Sheets (Exhibit 3) have been prepared for the next four years (1972 through 1975). From 1968 to 1971, Carrefour has used trade notes extensively as a source of cash. Other significant sources of funds are Other Current Liabilities, Accounts Payable, Shareholder's Equity and Long term debt. Most of the sources have been utilized to fund Building and also to generate more cash for the firm. A good portion of the sources have also been used to create more Inventories from 1968 to 1971. Land has been acquired during these four years as also other fixed assets and current assets. As is seen from the Pro-forma Balance Sheet, Carrefour would have to take significant amounts of Long Term Debt(at 10% Interest rate) in order to finance its expansion outside France. According to the projections, LT Debt would have to be increased to around 89% from 1971 to 1972 and 96% from 1972 to 1973 respectively. This means Carrefour would also have to pay huge amounts of interest on these debts. With revenue growth of 35% Carrefour would be able to support its debt and still earn fair amounts of profit including dividend payouts. However, huge amount of debt and interest expense might be risky and could lead to negative earnings if the actual revenue growth falls below the expected value of 35%. Exhibit 1 CARREFOUR STATEMENT OF SOURCES AND USES – 1968 to 1971 | |Â   |1968 |1971 |Change |Source/Use | |Intangible Assets |0 |1 |1 |Use | |Land |14 |28 |14 |Use | |Buildings & Equipment |50 |202 |152 |Use | |Other Fixed Assets 21 |49 |28 |Use | |Total Fixed Assets |85 |279 |194 | | | less: Depreciation |10 |63 |53 |Source | |Net Fixed Assets |75 |216 |141 | | |Investments & Advances |5 |19 |14 |Use | |Inventory |30 |107 |77 |Use | |Acounts Receivable |2 | 4 |2 |Use | |Other Current Assets |58 |124 |66 |Use | |Cash |18 |151 |133 |Use | |Total Current Assets |108 |386 |278 | | |TOTAL ASSETS |188 |622 |434 | | | | | | | | |Shareholders' Equity |39 |112 |73 |Source | |Special Provisions |0 |1 |1 |Source | |Long-term Debt |26 |64 |38 |Source | |Accounts Payable |0 |77 |77 |Source | |Trades notes (noninterest) |100 |244 |144 |Source | |Other Current Liabilities |23 |124 |101 |Source | |Total Current Liabilities |123 |445 |322 | | |TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY |188 |621 |433 | | | | | | | | |Master Check(Sources-Uses) |Â   |Â   |0 | | Exhibit 2 CARREFOUR PROFORMA INCOME STATEMENT |Past 3 yr avg of % of sales taken for| | |all items except Revenues and Int | | |Rates | | |Actual | |Actual |Actual |Actual |Actual |Pro Forma |Pro Forma |Pro Forma |Pro Forma | | | |1968 |1969 |1970 |1971 |1972 |1973 |1974 |1975 | | |Intangible Assets |0 |4 |1 |1 |5 |7 |9 |12 |0. 004 |0. 001 |0. 000 |0. 002 | |Land |14 |20 |25 |28 |50 |67 |90 |122 |0. 020 |0. 017 |0. 013 |0. 016 | |Buildings & Equipment |50 |82 |136 |202 |266 |359 |485 |654 |0. 080 |0. 094 |0. 090 |0. 88 | |Other Fixed Assets |21 |38 |52 |49 |95 |129 |174 |235 |0. 037 |0. 036 |0. 022 |0. 032 | |Total Fixed Assets |85 |140 |213 |279 |411 |555 |749 |1011 | | | | | |less: Depreciation |10 |22 |35 |63 |97 |142 |204 |287 |0. 100 |0. 069 |0. 112 |0. 094 | |Net Fixed Assets |75 |118 |178 |216 |314 |412 |545 |724 | | | | | |Investments & Advances |5 |10 |12 |19 |27 |36 |49 |66 |0. 010 |0. 008 |0. 009 |0. 009 | |Inventory |30 |65 |72 |107 |162 |219 |295 |399 | | | | | |Acounts Receivable |2 |2 |3 |4 |6 |8 |11 |14 |0. 002 |0. 002 |0. 002 |0. 002 | |Other Current Assets |58 |50 |75 |124 |157 |212 |286 |386 |0. 049 |0. 052 |0. 056 |0. 052 | |Cash |18 |51 |116 |151 |199 |268 |362 |489 |0. 050 |0. 080 |0. 068 |0. 66 | |Total Current Assets |108 |168 |266 |386 |524 |707 |954 |1288 | | | | | |TOTAL ASSETS |188 |300 |457 |622 |870 |1162 |1557 |2090 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Shareholders' Equity |39 |89 |98 |112 |206 |278 |375 |507 |0. 087 |0. 068 |0. 050 |0. 068 | |Special Provisions |0 |0 |1 |1 |1 |2 |2 |3 |0. 000 |0. 001 |0. 000 |0. 000 | |Long-term Debt |26 |25 |64 |64 |121 |237 |393 |605 | | | | | |Accounts Payable |0 |48 |61 |77 |124 |168 |226 |305 |0. 047 |0. 042 |0. 034 |0. 041 | |Trades notes (noninterest) |100 |79 |147 |244 |244 |244 |244 |244 | | | | | |Other Current Liabilities |23 |59 |86 |124 |173 |234 |316 |427 |0. 058 |0. 060 |0. 056 |0. 058 | |Total Current Liabilities |123 |186 |294 |445 |542 |646 |786 |976 | | | | | |TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY |188 |300 |457 |622 |870 |1162 |1557 |2090 | | | |

Oxidizing Agent Definition and Examples

Oxidizing Agent Definition and Examples An oxidizing agent is a reactant that removes electrons from other reactants during a redox reaction. The oxidizing agent typically takes these electrons for itself, thus gaining electrons and being reduced. An oxidizing agent is thus an electron acceptor. An oxidizing agent may also be viewed as a species capable of transferring electronegative atoms (especially oxygen) to a substrate. Oxidizing agents are also known as oxidants or oxidizers. Examples of Oxidizing Agents Hydrogen peroxide, ozone, oxygen, potassium nitrate, and nitric acid are all oxidizing agents. All of the halogens are oxidizing agents (e.g., chlorine, bromine, fluorine). Oxidizing Agent Versus Reducing Agent While an oxidizing agent gains electrons and is reduced in a chemical reaction, a reducing agent loses electrons and is oxidized during a chemical reaction. Oxidizer as a Dangerous Material Because an oxidizer may contribute to combustion, it may be classified as a dangerous material. The hazard symbol for an oxidizer is a circle with flames on top of it.

The Importance of Infrastructure

The Importance of Infrastructure Infrastructure is a term architects, engineers, and urban planners use to describe essential facilities, services, and organizational structures for communal use, most commonly by residents of cities and towns. Politicians often think of infrastructure in terms of how a nation can help corporations move and deliver their goods- water, electricity, sewage, and merchandise are all about movement and delivery via infrastructure. Infra- means below, and sometimes these elements are literally below the ground, like water and natural gas supply systems. In modern environments, infrastructure is thought to be any facility we expect but dont think about because it works for us in the  background, unnoticed- below our radar. The global information infrastructure for communications and internet involves satellites in space- not underground at all, but we rarely think about how that last Tweet got to us so quickly. Infrastructure is not American or exclusive to the United States. For example, engineers in nations across the globe have developed high-tech solutions for flood control- one system that protects an entire community. All countries have infrastructure in some form, which can include these systems: Roads, tunnels, and bridges, including the Interstate Highway SystemMass-transit systems (e.g., trains and rails)Airport runways and control towersTelephone lines and cellphone towersDams and reservoirsHurricane barriersLevees and pumping stationsWaterways, canals, and portsElectrical power lines and connections (i.e., the national power grid)Fire stations and equipmentHospitals, clinics, and emergency response systemsSchoolsLaw enforcement and prisonsSanitation and waste removal facilities for solid waste, wastewater, and hazardous wastePost offices and mail deliveryPublic parks and other types of green infrastructure Infrastructure Definition infrastructure:  The framework of interdependent networks and systems comprising identifiable industries, institutions (including people and procedures), and distribution capabilities that provide a reliable flow of products and services essential to the defense and economic security of the United States, the smooth functioning of governments at all levels, and society as a whole. - Report of the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, 1997 Why Infrastructure Is Important We all use these systems, which are often called public works, and we expect them to function for us, but we dont like to pay for them. Many times the cost is hidden in plain view- added taxes to your utility and telephone bill, for example, may help pay for infrastructure. Even teenagers with motorbikes help pay for infrastructure with every gallon of gasoline used. A highway-user tax is added to each gallon of motor fuel (e.g., gasoline, diesel, gasohol) sold. This money goes into what is called the Highway Trust Fund in order to pay for repairs and replacement of roads, bridges, and tunnels. Likewise, each airline ticket you buy has a federal excise tax that should be used to maintain the infrastructure needed to support air travel.  Both state and federal governments are allowed to add taxes to certain products and services in order to help pay for the infrastructure that supports them. The infrastructure may begin to crumble if the tax doesnt keep increasing enough. These exci se taxes are consumption taxes that are in addition to your income taxes, which also can be used to pay for infrastructure. Infrastructure is important because we all pay for it and we all use it. Paying for infrastructure can be as complicated as the infrastructure itself. Nevertheless, most people depend on transportation systems and public utilities, which also are essential for the economic vitality of our businesses. As Senator Elizabeth Warren (Dem, MA) famously stated, You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didnt have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. - Sen. Elizabeth Warren, 2011 When Infrastructure Fails When natural disasters strike, stable infrastructure is necessary for swift delivery of emergency supplies and medical care. When fires rage in drought-ravaged areas of the U.S. we expect firefighters to be on the scene until the neighborhoods are safe. All countries are not so fortunate. In Haiti, for example, the lack of well-developed infrastructure contributed to the deaths and injuries suffered during and after the earthquake of January 2010. Every citizen should expect to live in comfort and safety. On the most basic level, every community requires access to clean water and sanitary waste disposal. Poorly maintained infrastructure can lead to a devastating loss of life and property. Examples of failed infrastructure in the U.S. include: When the Oroville Dams spillway eroded, thousands of Californians evacuated, 2017Unsafe drinking water from lead supply pipes affected the health of children in Flint, Michigan, 2014Sewer spills during hard rains in Houston, Texas created a public health hazard, 2009The collapse of Interstate 35W Bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota killed motorists, 2007Failure of the levees and pump stations after Hurricane Katrina flooded communities in New Orleans, Louisiana, 2005 Governments Role in Infrastructure Investing in infrastructure is nothing new for governments. Thousands of years ago, Egyptians built irrigation and transportation systems with dams and canals. Ancient Greeks and Romans built roads and aqueducts that still stand today. The 14th-century Parisian sewers have become tourist destinations. Governments around the world have realized that investing in and maintaining a healthy infrastructure is an important government function. Australias Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development claims that It is an investment that has a multiplier effect throughout the economy, generating lasting economic, social and environmental benefits. In an age of terrorist threats and attacks, the U.S. has stepped up efforts to secure critical infrastructure, extending the list of examples to  systems related to Information and communications, gas and oil production/storage/transportation, and even banking and finance. The list is the subject of an ongoing debate. Critical infrastructures now include national monuments (e.g. Washington Monument), where an attack might cause a large loss of life or adversely affect the nation’s morale. They also include the chemical industry....A fluid definition of what constitutes a critical infrastructure could complicate policymaking and actions. - Congressional Research Service, 2003 In the U.S. the Infrastructure Security Division and the  National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center are part of the Department of Homeland Security. Watchdog groups like the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) keep track of progress and needs by issuing an infrastructure report card every year. Books About Infrastructure Infrastructure: The Book of Everything for the Industrial Landscape by Brian HayesThe Works: Anatomy of a City by Kate AscherMove: How to Rebuild and Reinvent Americas Infrastructure by Rosabeth Moss KanterThe Road Taken: The History and Future of Americas Infrastructure by Henry Petroski Sources President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, October 1997, pp. B-1 to B-2, PDF at https://fas.org/irp/crs/RL31556.pdf Summary, Critical Infrastructures: What Makes an Infrastructure Critical? Report for Congress, Order Code RL31556, Congressional Research Service (CRS), Updated January 29, 2003, PDF at https://fas.org/irp/crs/RL31556.pdf Infrastructure, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, Australian Government, https://infrastructure.gov.au/infrastructure/ [accessed August 23, 2015] Elizabeth Warren: There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own by Lucy Madison, CBS News, September 22, 2011, cbsnews.com/news/elizabeth-warren-there-is-nobody-in-this-country-who-got-rich-on-his-own/ [accessed March 15, 2017] Highway Trust Fund and Taxes, U.S.Department of Transportation, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/htffs.cfm [accessed December 25, 2017]   Ascher, Kate. The Works: Anatomy of a City. Paperback, Reprint edition, Penguin Books, November 27, 2007. Hayes, Brian. Infrastructure: The Book of Everything for the Industrial Landscape. Paperback, Reprint edition, W. W. Norton Company, September 17, 2006. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. Move: How to Rebuild and Reinvent Americas Infrastructure. 1 edition, W. W. Norton Company, May 10, 2016. Petroski, Henry. The Road Taken: The History and Future of Americas Infrastructure. Hardcover, Bloomsbury USA, February 16, 2016.

Labor Relations MGT 402 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Labor Relations MGT 402 - Essay Example cement of immigration laws would mean more deportations and make being an illegal immigrant a felony, and just because an illegal immigrant has a temporary worker pass does not mean that the worker will become an American citizen. The question is how would new immigration law effect labor relations in the U.S.? Some labor unions oppose the passing of these new immigration laws. The most prominent is the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations). The AFL-CIO is not opposed to new immigration laws, but wants only for responsible immigration laws to pass. The AFL-CIO states that any responsible immigration laws must contain the following elements: 5. Reform of immigration laws must consider the root causes of migration, and must take into account the global economic policies, as well as U.S. foreign policy that are pushing workers to migrate. (â€Å"Responsible Reform†) A prominent organization that wants the current immigration law proposal to pass is SEIU (Service Employee International Union), one union under the umbrella organization Change to Win. Change to Win not only includes SEIU, but also Laborers, Teamsters, UNITE HERE, Carpenters, United Food and Commercial Workers, and United Farm Workers. Establish an Earned Path to Citizenship for Hardworking Taxpaying Immigrants. The following list show why the SEIU is for the proposed immigration reform: Immigration reform is important to American workers, illegal workers working in America, and the industries employing them all. It is estimate that 5.8 million illegal workers were in the U.S. as of March 2005 (Camarota). Advocates of harsher immigration reform argue that if the millions of illegal immigrants are deported, more Americans would be employed, especially in jobs which require less education requirements. This is not exactly true. Illegal immigrant workers work along side Americans equally in lower paid jobs (Camarota). 84% of illegal immigrants do not

Finance for Business Decisions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Finance for Business Decisions - Essay Example AMP Limited’s financial data of 2011 shows that the company has 949,037 shareholders with a total share capital of 2,854,672,784 ordinary shares. The total number of Employees that work under the banner of AMP Limited is 6000, with 4131 employed and self-employed planners and has a relationship with 6,000 independent financial planners (AMP 2012). The company has two major business units, the first works under the name of AMP Financial Services where 4100 aligned and employed planners provide services regarding income protection, disability and life insurance, superannuation and superannuation services for business, retirement income, selected banking products and financial advices to its customers based in Australia and New Zealand. The second unit AMP Capital is diversified investment managers, who invest in fixed interest, property, diversified funds, equities and infrastructure. Currently they are managing $123 billion in assets for those who believe in AMP Capital and their strategies of creating wealth for their clients. The growth is on going with the emergence into different countries worldwide. The merger between AMP with AXA Asia Pacific Holding in 2011 gave a boost to the growth of AMP Limited as being the strongest business of Australia and New Zealand enhancing their services while it creates a competitive force in the financial sector. The investment in AXA Pacific Holding has proved to be a strong policy for the company’s future growth as the merger has increased sales, company has become more competitive and an expanding advisory force. Based on the financial report the company maintains its payout ratio of 75 to 85 percent by announcing a dividend of 14 cents per share for the year 2011. However, the net profit attributable to shareholder of the company declined by 11% and reached $688 million compared to $775 million in 2010. The underlying profit shows 20% increase of $909 million than the previous year, as the 9 months contribution