The Bureaucratic Model Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

The Bureaucratic Model - Essay Example There are usually rules that govern the conduct of individuals at all levels, which are important in enhancing harmonious relations in the workplace and the maintenance of justice and equality not considering a person’s background. Lynn (1998) observes that consistency is maintained while on the other hand it is possible to avoid and deal with potential risks. People are safe guarded against injustices.Bureaucracy tends to help people to accomplish tasks in a well designed and organized way. In its perfect form, it can lead to efficiency in operations while on the other hand, people respect the rules involved and therefore it is possible to maintain high efficiency with minimal supervision. Farrell & Morris (1999) argue that the system presents people with chances to serve the nation and also to learn ways of coping with challenges. Honesty and reliability are the basis for bureaucracy and the members who are involved in the system are expected to maintain competence and to en sure that their clients’ needs are satisfied.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Even though bureaucracy presents a systematized way of delivering services, it is associated with a number of inefficiencies. Seitel (2006) argues that for decisions to be implemented there are certain rigid procedures that have to be adhered to, which leaves no room for improvement. The public administration involves extensive write-ups and documentation, and is prone to hindrances due to red-tapes. India is one of the countries where bureaucracy is pronounced.

The Developing Business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words - 1

The Developing Business - Essay Example Many organizations refer to sustainability as corporate social responsibility (CSR). Thus, CSR will be used in the essay to refer to social and environmental sustainability. The terms, sustainability and corporate social responsibility refer to the practical contributions that businesses can make to sustainability. Many companies in recent times have incorporated social and environmental sustainability in their financial statements. (Gray, 2006, p.81) said that reporting social sustainability is crucial because the sustainability apprehensions of individuals, communities and governments facilitate shaping the world in which organizations operate.Sustainability reporting at the enterprise level also intends to represent an organization’ssocial, environmental and economic performance. Social sustainability reporting is aimed at reflecting the external costs and benefits of an organization that are not otherwise identified. Conventionally, ‘labour hires capital’ with the prominence on individual, environmental and social profit. On the contrary, capital hires labour with the superseding prominence on making a ‘profit’ over and beyond any advantage either to the industry itself or the employees (Epstein and Buhovac, 2014, pg. 29). These two differences provide a major contrast to how the accountant views of business operation. Another difference that arises is that of the conflicts created by professional values and managerial logic. Accountants view the firm in professional term, meaning any notion that does not involve accounting principles is rendered irrelevant. The CSR function, on the other hand, is based on managerial logic whereby the businesses engross in broad activities so long as profits are recognized from the business endeavours. Theoretical work on CSR accounting has created different theories as to the motivation of firms to report or release information on their CSR actions, many of

Tuition Fees in British Universities Essay Example for Free

Tuition Fees in British Universities Essay Review   all   the   arguments   for   and   against   the   introduction   of   Tuition   Fees   for   entry   into   British   Universities   as   reported   in   the   media. Introduction British   higher   education   enjoyed   the   golden   days   of   70s   –   80s   when   the   generous   support   of   taxpayer   was   even   protected   from   the   intrusion   of   the   Government   by   the   autonomous   University   Grants   Committee.   During   this   period,   not   only   there   were   no   tuition   fees   but   there   was   also   a   generous   means-tested   mandatory   grants   enjoyed   by   most   of   the   students. However,   these   generous   facilities   could   not   be   maintained   since   the   beginnings   of   1980s   and   the   gradual   abolition   of   support   started   with   eliminating   the   overseas   students’   subsidies,   limitations   in   the   eligibility   for   general   social   welfare   grants   and   the   freezing   of   mandatory   grants.    Eventually   grants   were   totally   abolished   in   1997   and   were   replaced   by   loans.   (Johnstone,   2004)   The   Labour   party   represented   by   Mr   Charles   Clarke,   Secretary   of   State   for   Education,   proposed   legislation   for   top-up   fees   which   became   law   in   the   Higher   Education   Act   2004,   though   it   will   be   implemented   in   the   2006   –   2007   academic   year. Previously   the   undergraduate   fees   in   most   universities   were    £1,050.   However,   by   the   implementation   of   differential   fees   or   top-up   the   universities   will   be   able   to   charge   much   more.   According   to   the   Guardian   (2002)   â€Å"The   new   proposals   would   mean   that   universities   could   charge   nearer   the   real   cost   of   studying,   thought   to   be   an   average   of    £5,000   in   the   UK.   But   depending   on   the   institution,   department   and   course,   it   could   be   much   more.   More   loans   would   be   available   to   allow   students   to   pay   fees   up   front.† This   issue   has   been   debated   by   different   parties   and   is   still   facing   a   lot   of   opposition   despite   the   fact   that   it   is   meant   to   be   implemented   in   the   academic   year   2006   –   2007.   In   this   paper   I   am   going   to   study   the   arguments   for   and   against   under   the   following   headings: The Political   Debate Universities and   Students’   Point   of   View Conclusions The   Political   Debate The   Government’s   debate   for   top-up   tuition   fees   originates   from   describing   the   role   and   mission   of   universities   and   the   challenges   they   face   to   accomplish   their   goals.   Mr   Clarke   summarises   the   ambitions   that   the   Government   is   planning   to   achieve   by   the   proposal   in   his   white   paper   as: â€Å"First,   our   universities   have   to   make   better   progress   in   harnessing   our   knowledge   to   the   process   of   creating   wealth. And,   second,   they   have   to   extend   the   opportunities   of   higher   education   to   all   of   our   population,   irrespective   of   their   personal   and   economic   background†Ã‚   (Clark’s   White   Paper   Speech) Then   he   further   states   the   role   of   universities   nationally   in   adapting   to   the   changing   world   and   effecting   change   rather   than   being   affected   by   it. â€Å"In   short,   in   a   world   of   accelerating   change,   we   all   need   to   understand   that   our   societys   principal   weapon   in   ensuring   that   we   master   change,   rather   than   surrendering   to   it,   is   our   education   system,   and   principally   our   universities† Then   he   identifies   the   missions   of   the   universities:   â€Å"†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã‚   are   research,   knowledge   transfer   and,   perhaps   most   important   of   all,   teaching†Ã‚   (Clarke,   White   Paper   Speech)   Then   he   describes   the   challenges   universities   face   to   achieve   these   missions   and   argues   for   an   ‘endowment’   device   as   the   best   solution   for   creating   ‘a   financial   regime’.   However,   this   will   take   a   long   time   before   it   becomes   a   reliable   resource.   Therefore   he   argues   for   the   short   term   funding   and   concludes: â€Å"As   countries   throughout   the   world   have   discovered,   requiring   students   to   contribute   to   the   cost   of   their   education   is   the   only   realistic   alternative.† The   Government’s   justification   is   that   this   is   only   fair   since   graduates   earn   double   the   earnings   of   non-graduates   and   therefore   should   contribute   to   the   system   producing   the   considerable   economic   benefits   they   will   enjoy   as   graduates.   It   is   also   pointed   out   that   the   taxpayer   will   rightly   make   a   comparison   and   ask   what   they   benefit   from   their   support   of   the   system. The   Secretary   of   State   for   Education   announced   the   details   of   the   Government’s   proposal,   which   can   be   summarised   in   the   following   points: Universities will   be   able   to   vary   fees   from    £0   to    £3,000      but   fees   can   vary   between   courses,   not   just   between Disadvantaged students   will   get   financial   support   to   study   what   they   want   when   they All students   will   also   protect   by   abolishing   up-front      This   means   no   student      or   their   family      has   to   find   tuition   fees   before   they   start   their   course. Students will   be   helped   further   by   increasing   the   student   loan   in   line   with   living      Students   shouldnt   have   to   rely   on   credit   cards   and   commercial   debt. The bursary   system   will   also   be   fair   on   both   students   and   the   universities,   who   will   use   some   of   their   extra   income   to   provide The   immediate   criticism   made   was   that   the   Labour   Party   effected   the   legislation   though   their   manifesto   promise   regarding   tuition   fees   reads:   â€Å"We   have   no   plans   to   introduce   University   top-up   fees,   and   have   legislated   to   prevent   their   introduction.   The   defensive   rebuttal   made   by   the   Labour   Party   is   that   the   legislation   will   not   take   effect   during   2001   –   2005   Parliament   which   angered   even   the   supporters   of   the   Labour   Party   who   did   not   like   this   mechanism   of   defence. On   the   other   hand,   the   Liberal   Democrats   Party   has   a   strong   counter   debate   based   on   a   number   of   points.   Firstly   they   think   that   top-up   fees   are   unfair   for   a   number   of   reasons: They claim   that   tuition   fees   widened   the   gap   between   social   classes   the   evidence   for   which   is   provided   by   the   independent   National   Audit   Office,   which   belongs   to   the      In   their   research   report   in   the   Student   Income   and   Expenditure   Survey   2002-2003   they   conclude   that   â€Å"The   social   class   gap   among   those   entering   higher   education   is   unacceptably   wide   and   has   widened. Tuition fees   have   been   a   strong   disincentive   for   access   to   higher   education;   and   now   with   the   top-up   fees   this   situation   will      In   fact,   this   is   the   conclusion   of   Professor   Claire   Callender   of   South   Bank   University   who   conducted   a   research   for   the   Government.   He   concludes:   Top-up   fees   of    £3000   will   put   even   more   poor   students   off   university. The poorest   students   are   affected   most   of   all   by   the   debt      This   is   evidential   in   the   Student   Income   and   Expenditure   Survey   which   reports   that   in   2002-2003,   the   poorest   students   affected   by   the   burden   of   debt   were   43%   more   than   the   rich   students.   More   evidences   were   provided   by   Barclay   in   a   survey   conducted   in   2004   (Annual   Survey   of   Expected   Student   Debt)   which   revealed   that   the   projected   average   debt   on   graduation   is    £12,069   (up   10%   on   the   previous   year).   Barclays   surveys   also   predicted   that   debt   on   graduation   will   triple   by   2010,   to    £33,708. Another point   indicating   social   classes   gap   is   the   fact   that   poor   students   take   longer   hours   of   paid      Statistics   of   Students   Income   and   Expenditure   Survey   of   2002-2003   report   that   58%   of   students   took   paid   work   during   term   time   while   this   was   47%   in   the   survey   of   1998-1999.   This   situation   is   particularly   bad   for   students   on   longer   courses,   e.g.   medical   students According to   their   ‘Sign   the   Petition’   article   titled   â€Å"Scrap   Tuition   Fees   and   Top-up   Fees†Ã‚   the   repayment   system   is   also      In   their   own   words: â€Å"The   post-graduation   repayment   system   will   impose   what   amounts   to   a   very   high   marginal   rate   of   income   tax   (higher   than   the   rate   paid   by   a   millionaire)   on   those   least   able   to   pay      young   graduates   just   out   of   college   and   those   working   in   lower   paid   jobs   in   the   public   services   and   voluntary   sector   (disproportionately   women   and   from   the   ethnic   minorities).   The   House   of   Commons   Library   concludes   that   graduates   earning   as   low   as    £35,115   are   already   paying   a   marginal   tax   rate   of   50%,   as   they   pay   off   their   student   loans.   They   will   be   doing   so   for   a   great   deal   longer   to   pay   off   much   greater   debts   if   top-up   fees   are   introduced   as   the   Government   proposes.   The   Library   figures   also   reveal   that   graduates   earning   as   little   as    £15,000   will   pay   a   marginal   tax   rate   of   42%,   more   than   the   current   marginal   rate   for   the   very   highest   earners.† Secondly,   the   Liberal   Democrats   claim   that   top-up   fees   will   not   solve   the   funding   problem.   While   there   is   no   question   that   universities   need   money,   the   important   question   is   where   this   money   should   come   from.   The   Government’s   argument   in   support   of   top-up   fees   is   that   it   will   create   â€Å"a   more   sustainable   funding   regime†,   the   same   justification   of   for   tuition   fees   which   did   not   sort   out   the   funding   problem   for   universities.   Similar   results   are   expected   with   top-up   fees. Top-up   fees   will   not   solve   the   funding   problem:   Everybody   agrees   that   universities   need   more   money.   The   question   is,   where   should   the   money   come   from?   The   Government   says   that   top-up   fees   are   needed   in   order   to   create   a   more   sustainable   funding   regime.   But   exactly   the   same   argument   was   used   to   justify   tuition   fees.   Instead,   funding   per   student   by   the   taxpayer   was   cut   during   Labours   first   term   in   office   and   tuition   fees   merely   plugged   the   gap,   leaving   universities   no   better   off.   The   same   is   likely   to   happen   with   top-up   fees. Thirdly   the   Liberal   Democrats   believe   that   the   Government’s   scheme   is   inefficient. â€Å"The   Government   is   switching   from   up-front   fees   to   post-graduation   repayment   via   the   student   loan   system.   The   cost   to   the   taxpayer   of   financing   this   debt   will   be   substantial.   The   Explanatory   Notes   published   alongside   the   Higher   Education   Bill   indicate   that,   in   order   to   raise    £1   billion   for   universities   in   top-up   fees   income,   the   cost   to   the   taxpayer   will   be   in   the   region   of    £445   million†Ã‚   (Scrap   the   Tuition   Fees   article). Finally   the   liberal   Democrats   are   of   the   opinion   that   education   should   be   free   and   nobody   should   be   denied   access   to   learning   because   of   their   financial   abilities.   This   cannot   be   achieved   unless   tuition   is   free. The   Liberal   Democrats   are   challenged   by   a   valid   question:   What   would   you   do?   They   promise   that   they   would   abolish   all   tuition   fees.   In   other   words   they   would   cancel   the   present    £1125   and   make   sure   that   no   other   charge   will   be   considered. In   addition   they   would   assist   the   low-income   students   by   reintroducing   maintenance   grants   to   meet   living   costs   and   restore   the   students’   right   to   housing   and   unemployment   benefits   during   summer.   The   assistance   will   not   be   limited   to   students   it   will   also   be   extended   to   universities   by   providing   more   resources   that   will   enable   them   to   recruit   and   retain   good   staff   and   improve   the   quality   of   services   in   terms   of   buildings   and   libraries   etc.   A   more   ambitious   resolution   is   the   following: â€Å"Develop   a   21st   century   higher   education   system   which   would   bring   together   universities,   further   education   and   e-learning,   open   up   routes   to   technical   and   vocational   as   well   as   academic   qualifications   and   make   it   easier   for   those   who   wish   to   study   part-time†Ã‚   (Scrap   Tuition   Fees   article† However,   how   is   this   going   to   be   achieved?   The   Liberal   Democrats   say   that   these   commitments   can   be   funded   by   their   proposed   50%   income   tax   for   those   who   earn   more   than    £100,000.   Whether   this   would   be   sufficient   or   not   is   another   question   to   be   answered. Universities   and   Students’   Point   of   View Universities   UK,   a   body   representing   vice-chancellors,   is   of   the   opinion   that   the   Education   Bill   (which   is   now   a   law)   is   necessary   and   fair.   (Brown,   2003)   Brown   emphasises   the   need   for   increased   funding   for   university   teaching,   which   had   been   reduced   over   the   last   two   decades   resulting   in   universities   facing   difficulties   to   achieve   their   main   goals.   He   asserts   that   â€Å"we   risk   losing   our   international   reputation   for   the   quality   and   effectiveness   of   our   higher   education   system.† Another   Universities   UK   authority   asked   to   comment   by   the   BBC   News   commented   as   follows: â€Å"Lets   look   at   what   is   actually   being   proposed   in   the   UK.   The   package   here   offers   students   no   up-front   fees,   loan   forgiveness   at   25   years,   no   real   rate   of   interest,   a   generous   grant   and   bursary   system   and   a   cap   on   the   fee   itself.   By   these   means,   the   UK   scheme   seeks   to   avoid   the   problems   which   others   have   found   elsewhere.   What   is   being   proposed   in   the   UK   will   ensure   that   the   poorest   students   will   be   better   off   while   studying   under   these   arrangements   than   they   are   now      and   they   are   also   effectively   indemnified   against   low   earnings   after   graduation.† Therefore,   we   can   conclude   that   universities   support   the   Government’s   proposal   and   see   it   as   the   most   appropriate   solution.   Brown   in   his   articles   dismissed   the   counter   argument   of   the   Conservatives   and   concluded   that   the   Government’s   proposal   is   fair   and   offers   a   sustainable   solution: â€Å"Universities   are   asking   for   a   major   increase   in   funding,   partly   from   public   funds   and   partly   from   individuals.   Given   the   scale   of   the   funding   gap,   Universities   UK   thinks   it’s   fair   to   ask   those   who   benefit   most   from   higher   education   –   graduates   –   to   contribute   proportionally   more   to   its   costs.   While   the   higher   earnings   of   graduates   mean   that   the   majority   of   UK   taxpayers   who   earn   over    £100,000   have   benefited   from   higher   education,   a   significant   proportion   of   this   group   have   not.   We   therefore   consider   this   solution   to   be   a   relatively   poorly   targeted   way   of   raising   the   necessary   money,   compared   with   the   form   of   progressive   taxation   offered   by   the   Government   proposals   which   targets   only   those   who   have   been   to   university.† On   the   other   hand,   students   represented   by   National   Union   of   Students,   seem   to   be   against   the   to-up   fees   scheme   and   are   pointing   out   the   fall   in   applications   for   universities   which   they   describe   as   â€Å"extremely   worrying†.   In   the   words   of   NUS   president   Kat   Fletcher,   â€Å"The   drop   in   applications   is   extremely   worrying,   and   suggests   that   top-up   fees   and   the   debt   they   represent   are   deterring   potential   students. According   to   Mandy   Telford,   National   Union   of   Students   president: â€Å"If   top-up   fees   come   in,   then   more   and   more   students   will   be   forced   to   choose   their   course   based   on   its   cost   and   therefore   put   themselves   at   a   disadvantage   before   they   even   graduate.   Increased   fees   will   mean   some   employers   will   look   at   the   cost   of   a   course   rather   than   a   graduates   ability.   Furthermore,   if   the   Government   does   not   provide   a   decent   student   funding   package,   then   those   students   forced   to   work   long   hours   in   paid   work   will   be   unable   to   get   involved   in   CV-enhancing   extra-curricular   activities.   This   will   further   widen   the   gulf   between   the   haves   and   have-nots   on   campus   and   after   grad uation.† It   is   obvious   that   the   students   are   against   the   scheme   and   are   worried   about   consequences   they   portrait   whether   they   are   actual   or   assumed   ones. Conclusions It   is   definite   that   the   scheme   proposed   by   the   Government   is   facing   a   lot   of   opposition   mainly   from   obviously   the   Liberal   Democrats,   the   UK’s   well   organized   National   Student   Unions,   the   Labour   Party’s   vocal   political   left.   This   is   so   despite   the   fact   that   some   parts   of   the   Government’s   proposal   seem   fair   and   plausible. It   would   have   been   in   the   interest   of   all   parties   concerned   to   remove   the   issue   from   the   political   agenda   and   refer   it   to   professionals   to   study   and   recommend   feasible   solutions. References Johnstone, D. Bruce (2004) – Fear and Loathing of Tuition Fees: An American Perspective on Higher Education Finance in the UK – downloaded on 12 December from: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/Publications/Fear%20and%20Loathing%20of%20Tuition%20Fees%20PDF.pdf Liberal Democrats (scraptuitionfees.com) – Why do the Liberal Democrats oppose tuition fees and to-up fees? – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://www.scraptuitionfees.com/pages/Why.phtml Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia – Top-up fees – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-up_fees Curtis, Polly – Clarke comes out fighting over fees -Guardian Unlimited (November 26 2003) – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/queensspeech2003/story/0,13994,1093724,00.html Newspaper Article Students Want Top-Up Fees Looked at as Applications Fall The Birmingham Post February 16, 2006. Newspaper Article – Charles Clarke’s statement to the Commons – Guardian Unlimited (January 22 2003) – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://education.guardian.co.uk/specialreports/tuitionfees/story/0,,880051,00.html Nigel Brown (2003) – What’s it worth? The case for variable graduate contributions: A report for Universities UK – Universities UK BBC News Viewpoints: Tuition fees – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3583401.stm Webb, Steve –Liberal Democrat MP (11 August 2003) – Current Features: Top-up Fees Cause Universal Concern – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://www.libdems.org.uk/parliament/feature.html?id=5133navPage=features.html Guardian Unlimited (November 26 2003) – Paying the price in education – downloaded on 11 December 2006 from: http://education.guardian.co.uk/students/tuitionfees/story/0,12757,1093673,00.html Sing Gill, Parmjit MP (25 January 2005) – Adjournment Debate: University top-up and tuition fees – downloaded on 11 December 2006 fro: http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/parliament/showBriefing.asp?id=20

Kants Categorical Imperative Essay Example for Free

Kants Categorical Imperative Essay Kantian ethics is a deontological, absolute theory proposed by Immanuel Kant in the late 1700’s. Kant taught that an action could only count as the action of a good will if it satisfied the test of the Categorical Imperative. The categorical imperative is based around the idea to act solely for the sake of duty. For example, you should share your sweets because it is a good thing to do; not because it makes you feel good. Consequentially, Kant would justify the good feeling you do when you perform a good act as a bonus not a reward. This opposes the hypothetical imperative which is where you act simply so you receive a of reward of some sort. The categorical imperative is based upon universable rules; maxims. These maxims are absolute moral statements that Kant says should be used everywhere by everyone and should thus never be broken. For example, do not kill. Additionally, the categorical imperative does not take individual situations into account. This means it is applicable to all situations and very straight forward to follow considering that everyone allegedly has the innate knowledge to follow these rules; for example do not steal. However, since it is absolute it means you must ignore any emotional influences on your decisions. Kant’s morals truths are revolved around following reason, not feelings. For example, if you have to choose between saving your grandfather or an unknown baby; the baby should be saved considering it has longer to live and more potential. You must ignore any temptation to save your relative due to your emotional attachment because you know reason does not justify that decision. Unlike the hypothetical imperative, the categorical imperative uses ends not means so is non-consequentialist. Therefore, it is wrong to use someone or something to achieve a certain outcome. For example, to be kind to my mum simply so she gives me money to go shopping. Kant would object to this instance in that you should be kind to your mother since it is your duty to respect your parents and be a kind person. Kant believed in a kingdom of ends. This idea is if everyone followed universalisation we would all be treated with equal respect. Furthermore, the Kantian theory is based upon the concept that good will joined with duty accounts an action as good. â€Å"It is impossible to conceive anything at all in the world which can be taken as good without qualification except a good will†. Thus good will, to â€Å"act for the sake of duty†, should a priority in your actions in order to fulfil your purpose not for external motives. This duty is innate within every person as a priori so an individual’s experiences, or lack of, cannot justify an action which does not follow good will. Kant believed numerous qualities for example, courage, intelligence, ambition and honour all to make a situation morally poorer. Kant also introduces the idea of the Summun Bonum. This is derived from Kant’s postulates of practical reason; aspects that are necessary within his theory for it to work. Firstly we must have freedom in order to use the innate knowledge we attain to follow duty and good will to achieve good. The Summun Bonum is the ultimate goal for everyone to aim to achieve in order to accomplish the ultimate reward. This reward points towards the existence of a God since one can only attain Summun Bonum in the afterlife; it is not achievable on earth. This means someone must be in the afterlife to give reward you what you deserve. Furthermore, this makes sense of the inequality in life. For example, paedophiles living happier lives than charity workers. Kant would say your good will must be repaid in the afterlife. b) â€Å"Kant’s ethical theory has no serious weaknesses† (Jan 09) Kan? an moral ethics is an absolute, non-consequen? alist, deontological theory proposed by Immanuel Kant. It is divided into two categories; hypothe? cal impera? ve and categorical impera? ve. The hypothe? cal impera? ve is when an act depends upon something else whereas the categorical impera? ve is an independent ac? on. A main weakness to Kant’s ethical theory is the fact that it is revolved around ful#lling your supposed duty. But who decides your duty? And what if you have two conic? ng du? es, for example you to #ght for your country but also to support your family; which do you priori? se? There are no guidelines as to which to priori? se. Furthermore, there are no guidelines how to face not priori? sing your emo? onal a)achment. By not having any considera? on for your feelings, this theory has a massive weakness since you have to be very strong willed to convince yourself Kant is correct. Especially if you were ever actually put that posi? on it seems unrealis? c anyone would chose to apply these rules, for example to save a stranger over their family. However, people may object saying a key strength to Kant’s theory is that it is a simple, absolute theory that by being applicable to all sta? ons is allowing for all people from all backgrounds and circumstances to understand as long as they have ra? onal thinking; according to Kant all human beings have. â€Å"Everyone who is ideally rational will legislate the same universal principles† Pojman (2002:147). Another unavoidable weakness to Kan?an moral ethics is that his universable laws are not applicable to all situa? ons. For example, do not lie. Should we follow that and make someone unnecessarily distressed? Kan? an ethics is not a consequen? alist theory however humans ae naturally compassionate and sensi? ve for a reason. Furthermore, from this we can deduct that your reason might not be the best thing to do. It is not guaranteed since it does not take consequences into considera? on. There are some situa? ons which require consequences to be considered since the outcome is so severe it seems kinder just to break a rule. However in response to this some people may say a prime strength of Kant’s theory is that Kant has a great respect for human beings autonomy. Therefore, a lot of dignity is carried with his theory that we have the ability to use our own ra? onal. In conclusion, Kan? an ethics de#nitely has some serious weaknesses due to the unrealis? c priori? sing of those you don’t have emo? onal connec? ons to, the fact it is not clearly applicable to every situa? on and addi? onally that it is based upon following your ‘duty’ of which is a weak concept itself for reasons explained.

Requirement for Marijuana Legalisation

Requirement for Marijuana Legalisation Christopher Cunningham The need of Marijuana I. Boost of Revenue and different types of marijuana a. The need of Marijuana in our country making the drug legal to use recreationally by all 50 states. The benefits are huge when it comes to all states benefiting from money that they have earned in one year is one billion dollars, which was Colorado who made that much money from sales. Can you imagine who will benefit from the marijuana sold, first the children will have better schools, equipment such as computers, physical exercise programs, not to mention the economy will start being better from years to come. The Boost of revenue can only make America great again and flourishing from all the money spent on the war and just maybe we can go back to the way it used to be, when jobs were easy to get and prices on goods were not outrageous. b. Indica is kush from afghanistan making you lazy. c. Sativa is alternatively gives you energy used for depression and exhaustion. d. Hybrid it gives you both Indica and Sativa which is why its hybrid. e. Cannabis compound THC and CBD carry there own properties in medicine. II. People who benefit from Marijuana a. The people who will benefit from marijuana sales are police officiers and I want to tell you why this is really important. The more police officiers out on the treats means there will be less crime happening, and less drug dealers on the streets. If that happens the state will benefit from all the revenue from marijuana. c. People who are sick will easily attain marijuana which to me is great. I have seen people who have certain diseases and they are always in pain and the doctor didnt give them medical marijuana because there is no use to using the drug or it is not legal for the patient to use. Being a parent who sees there child in pain will do anything in there power to make sure they feel better. Marijuana is that drug that can reduce pain and help people deal with there current diseases that normal medicine is not working. b. Helps with being skinny and raising your metabolism in some people. III. The types of diseases that need marijuana a. Glaucoma is an eye disease that puts pressure on the eye ball and damages the optic nerve in your eye. This also minimizes the effects of cancer causing agents. b. Alzheimer disease as shown to slow down the effects so that you may live a longer life. c. Stomach diseases like crones disease can subside with marijuana. d. Parkinsons disease can be controlled with marijuana. e. Lupus disease is when the body attacks itself similar to aids. f. hep c is controlled and side affects shortened and increases treatment. IV. People with chronic pain a. Multiple sclerosis is pain in the spine which is controlled with the drug marijuana. b. Helps with muscle spasms and can be subdued with marijuana. c. People who suffer from arthritis pain can be away with marijuana. d. PTSD is very common in veterans who served in the military calms them down and out bursts. e. Protects your brain after a stroke thanks to marijuana. g. Helps with concussions in sports thanks to marijuana. h. Relieves pain from chemotherapy patients another great reason. V. Conclusion I am very serious about this subject of getting marijuana legal in all states. The fact that all states will benefit from marijuana and obviously all the people in the state will benefit with better schools, roads, toll bridges will be paid off. Kids will have better equipment such as computers, physical exercise equipment will be good. My main point of having you guys agreeing with me is the people who cannot access the drug because only 28 states makes medical marijuana accessible to patients. I remember seeing this child and it was sad, she had seizures every 10 mins and can you imagine your child going through such pain. But thanks to cbd which is a liquid base marijuana that can be mixed in with food so that children can consume it. She was relieved from the seizures not happening that often, she was temporarily cured for that day.   As a parent I would give my child marijuana either by inhalation or cbd if it help them live a better life. References 23 health benefits of marijuana. (). Retrieved from www.businessinsider.com marijuana. (). Retrieved from www.fortune.com marijuana. (). Retrieved from www.nylin.org marijuana. (). Retrieved from www.wisetoast.com

The History of Jewish Persecution Essay -- Essays Papers

The History of Jewish Persecution Every religious group has suffered a time when their religion was not considered to be popular or right. Out of all of these religious groups that have suffered, no one group has suffered so much as that of the Jewish religion. They have been exiled from almost every country that they have ever inhabited, beginning with Israel, and leading all the was up to Germany, France, Spain, England, and Russia. Not only have they been exiled but also they have suffered through torture, punishment, and murder. Thus, because of the history of the religion, the Jewish people have become a very resilient people. They have survived thousands of years carrying their religion with them from one country to the next and never loosing their faith. They have traveled form Eastern Europe, to the United States and have finally managed today to settle comfortable all over North America. The Jewish religion has suffered tremendously throughout the centuries, and unfortunately it did not become a ny easier for them during the twentieth century. The Jewish people's problems began long before the Common Era; they were persecuted long ago by King Nebuchadnezzer. Because of the treaty that was signed with King Nebuchadnezzer the Jews were uprooted from their home in Jerusalem and were forced into exile in the city of Babylon. The Jews were not treated poorly, though they were bitter because of being taken away form their beloved Jerusalem. Due to this bitterness they became more intensely Jewish than ever before. (1) After seventy years of exile the Jews were allowed to return to Jerusalem. Most of them gave up this option and elected to stay in Babylon. Those who stay in Babylon became ... ...s problems in the past. Many religions would have fallen and ceased to exist under this kind of persecution. To the Jewish believer this is perhaps because they are the ‘chosen people.’ This religion continues to prove its strength and resilience even today and will continue to do so. Works Cited 1) Fast, Howard. The Jews. The Dial Press, Inc., New York:1968. 2) Goldberg, David J. The Jewish People, A History and Their Religion. Viking, New York: 87. 3) Kantor, Mattis. The Jewish Time Line Encyclopedia. Jason Aronson Inc., New Jersey: 1992. 4) Perry, Marvin. Western Civilization A Brief History (third edition). Houghton Mifflin Company, New York: 1997. 5) Perry, Marvin. Peden, Joseph R. Von Laue, Theodore H. Sources of the Western Tradition third edition). Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston: 1995.

Performance Orientation

The degree to which a collective encourages and rewards (and should encourage and reward) group members for performance improvement and excellence. Assertiveness. The degree to which individuals are (and should be) assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in their relationships with others. Future Orientation. The extent to which individuals engage (and should engage) in future-oriented behaviors such as delaying gratification, planning, and investing in the future. Organizations in countries with high future oriented practices like Singapore and Switzerland tend to have longer term horizons and more systematic planning processes, but they tend to be averse to risk taking and opportunistic decision making. Humane Orientation. The degree to which a collective encourages and rewards ( and should encourage and reward) individuals for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring, and kind to others. Countries like Egypt and Malaysia rank very high on this cultural practice Institutional Collectivism. The degree to which organizational and societal institutional practices encourage and reward (and should encourage and reward) collective distribution of resources and collective action Organizations in collectivistic countries like Singapore and Sweden tend to emphasize group performance and rewards In-Group Collectivism. The degree to which individuals express (and should express) pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organizations or families. Societies like Egypt and Russia take pride in their families and also take pride in the organizations that employ them. Gender Egalitarianism. The degree to which a collective minimizes (and should minimize) gender inequality. Egypt and South Korea were among the most male dominated societies in GLOBE. Organizations not operating in gender egalitarian societies tend to discourage tolerance for diversity of ideas and individual. Power Distance. The degree to which members of a collective expect (and should expect) power to be distributed equally. A high power distance score reflects unequal power distribution in a society. Countries that scored high on this cultural practice are more stratified economically, socially, and politically; those in positions of authority expect, and receive, obedience. Uncertainty Avoidance. The extent to which a society, organization, or group relies (and should rely) on social norms, rules, and procedures to alleviate unpredictability of future events. The greater the desire to avoid uncertainty, the more people seek orderliness, consistency, structure, formal procedures and laws to cover situations in their daily lives.