Compare what it book says and what textbook says. Ten words from Essay

Compare what it book says and what textbook says. Ten words from textbook - Essay Example At the beginning of the book, Corrie describes the old and strangely built Dutch house, which was the house of her birth because this was to go on to, being the main setting of the book. Inside this house is a secret room where political prisoners and Jews who were getting away from the Nazis were hid. We see from the very beginning of the book that the Ten Booms were essentially very kindhearted people who went out of their way to help the poor and bonded well amongst themselves. Corrie's siblings are portrayed as people she found her best friends in and her aunts as grownups she looked up to. Taking in people to provide refuge started when one Jewish woman ended up at the Ten Booms' doorstep and asked for protection following her husband's arrest by the Nazis. This gave a start to the hiding place for the Jews. However, the story is not a bed of flowers as Corrie and her family soon had to face the Nazi Invasion of Holland, their country of residence. The Ten Booms became an essential part of the Resistance Movement and provided shelter for people fleeing the Nazi forces in a hidden room should the house ever be raided. The book talks about how they did practice runs everyday in case their house was ever raided. During the time all this was happening, Corrie sometimes had serious doubts about whether what she was doing was right or not but always came up with the conclusion that she was by keeping her faith in God strong. Even though the family and their wards prayed very hard that a raid should not happen, it eventually did due to the Dutch traitor named Jan Vogel. Ironically, the Jews in the secret hiding place were saved but the Nazis took the Corrie, her father and sister Betsie into custody. As luck would have it, the father died ten days after arrest and Corrie who was unwell at the time of arrest was put into solitary confinement. The book talks about ho every time Corrie came near despair, her faith in God kept her going y giving her something to do. During her solitary confinement, she just had a black ant for company with whom she shared her bread. This alone gave her the strength she needed to pass the lonely days and nights of her confinement when she saw this ant struggling to take the piece of bread back through the crack in the floor. A few months later both Corrie and Betsie were reunited at Vught Prison and the two sisters were able to catch up on what happened to both of them during the separation. Betsie had a weak heart from birth and Corrie knew she had to be with her sister ever more now. Both sisters wished for release but instead were transported in boxcars into the infamous Ravensbruck Prison in eastern Germany where living conditions were so horrific that Betsie became more and more ill. Despite the uncomfortable living premises and Betsie's continuously failing health, the two sisters kept bringing the word of God to any prisoner who listened and found strength in it. Corrie habitually sneaked in a tiny vitamin bottle for Betsie and also distributed vitamins to whoever needed them. Betsie was very sure that they will be released at the beginning of the year 1945 which

Tobacco Industry Essay Example for Free

Tobacco Industry Essay Philip  Morris Pakistan is beginning to feel a financial pinch, and is already reducing the scale and scope of some of its manufacturing operations inside the country. In a statement released to the press on Saturday, the company announced that it will be reducing the operations in its smallest factory, located in Mandra, near Rawalpindi. The company cited â€Å"difficult economic conditions† including high taxes and low consumer purchasing power as a primary reason for the decision. The decision was described by Philip Morris as â€Å"difficult, but necessary. Among the key factors that specifically affected Mandra was a government regulation known as SRO 863(I), a 2010 law that effectively bans the marketing and sales of the smaller 10-cigarette packs, which were the mainstay of the company’s operations near Rawalpindi. Given the fact that Mandra is the company’s smallest factory, and that its main product is now illegal, the operational costs per cigarette at the plant would effectively become too high to be sustainable. â€Å"The main activity of the factory has become obsolete,† said the company in its statement. It, however, declined to say whether the factory would be completely shut down. Philip Morris did not disclose how many of its 2,363 employees in Pakistan work in Mandra and how many of them would be laid off. The company did, however, state that it would be paying the laid off workers a severance package that would exceed the legal minimum requirements. â€Å"We are committed to ensuring that all retrenched employees are treated fairly and with dignity, and genuinely appreciate the contributions that each and every employee has made over the years,† said Arpad Konye, the managing director at Philip Morris Pakistan, in the statement released to the press. The troubles at the Mandra facility are the latest in Philip Morris’ woes in Pakistan. The company had been operating as a joint venture with the Lakson Group (the parent company of Century Publications, the publisher of The Express Tribune) until 2007. In that year, the global company bought out its local partner’s share to retain well over 97% of the Pakistani subsidiary. (The remainder is listed on the Karachi Stock Exchange). The acquisition, however, does not appear to have turned out well. Profits have gone from Rs1. billion in 2007 to Rs573 million in 2010, a nearly 62% drop. The year 2011 appears to have gone even worse, with the company earning a net loss of Rs284 million for the first three quarters of the year, ending September 30, 2011. Philip Morris Pakistan has perennially been the number two player in the Pakistani tobacco industry, outshone by the Pakistan Tobacco Company, the local subsidiary of British American Tobacco. Industry insiders say that Pakistan Tobacco has better market penetration with its higher-end brands than Philip Morris. Philip Morris got into a cut-through price war with Pakistan Tobacco over the lower-end brands,† said one person familiar with the matter. â€Å"And Pakistan Tobacco has an unassailable advantage on the higher-end segment of the market because of their Benson amp; Hedges and Gold Leaf brands. † Philip Morris appears to have come out the worst of that price war, with revenues declining by 3. 9% to Rs24. 7 billion during the first nine months of 2011. By contrast, Pakistan Tobacco’s revenues went up by 12. 3% to Rs49. 9 billion during the same period.

Parliamentary sovereignty

Parliamentary sovereignty Although in theory Parliament is sovereign, the problematic reality is that British constitutional arrangements ensure that true power lies with the Executive. Part A: Many countries such as the United States have a written constitution but Britain does not, however it must have something which is at the heart of its constitutional arrangements[1] and this need is fulfilled by the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. The traditional and most often applied definition of parliamentary sovereignty is that of Dicey, who stated, the principle of parliamentary sovereignty means the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament[2]. From this definition, three fundamental principles can be derived; the first is that Parliament can make or unmake any law. An example of this principle in practice; The Septennial Act 1715 was passed to extend the life of Parliament from three to seven years out of fear of the effects of an election. His Majestys Declaration of Abdication Act 1936 demonstrates Parliaments ability to alter the line of succession to the throne and the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 demonstrate Parliament legislating over its own procedures. The War Damage Act 1965 overruled a House of Lords decision in Burmah Oil Company v Lord Advocate [1965][3] and is a demonstration of Parliaments ability to make or unmake any law as it was able to legislate with retrospective effect. The second principle of Diceys theory is that Parliament cannot be bound by its predecessors or bind its successors. This affirms Thomas Paines theory that, every age and generation must be free to act for itself, in all cases as the ages and generations which preceded it[4]. Vauxhall Estates Ltd v Liverpool Corporation [1932][5] concerned conflict between The Housing Act 1925 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1919 where it was held that the provisions of the later act would apply; this is known as implied repeal and demonstrates Parliaments inability to bind its successors. Ellen Streets Estates Ltd. v Minister for Health [1934][6] also held that the later Act must apply and it was stated that the intention of Parliament to repeal the legislation must be given effect just because it is the will of the legislature[7]. The third basic principle of Diceys theory is that no-one can question Parliaments laws, as Blackstone stated, true it is, that what the Parliament doth, no authority on earth can undo[8]. In Edinburgh Dalkeith Railway Co v Wauchope [1842][9], Wauchope sought to challenge an Act of Parliament on the grounds that he was not given notice of its introduction as a bill into Parliament. His challenge was rejected on the basis that the courts are precluded from investigating whether the proper internal procedures have in fact been complied with[10], this is known as the enrolled act rule, affirmed in Pickin v British Railways Board [1974][11]. The courts cannot question the validity of an Act of Parliament or declare it void; illustrating the role of the judiciary in upholding the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. Exceptionally in R (Jackson) v Attorney General [2005][12] the validity of the Hunting Act 2004 and use of the Parliament Act 1949 were challenged. It was affirmed that regardless of the way an Act has been passed, even if using the Parliament Acts, the courts cannot challenge the validity of primary legislation. However Jackson did raise issues of sovereignty in practice, Lord Hope stated, the English principle of the absolute legislative sovereignty of Parliamentis being qualified[13]. Parliamentary sovereignty is apparently sustained, particularly by the judiciary and is justified in that the main legislative House, the Commons, is democratically elected. Yet the acknowledgement by Lord Hope in Jackson recognises that the concept is increasingly subject to limitations. Lord Steyn in Jackson also recognised the dominance of the Commons by the executive- the government, the power of a government with a large majority in the House of Commons is redoubtable[14], and warned that use of the Parliament Acts creates a danger of exorbitant assertion of government power[15]. This assertion of power that Lord Steyn warns of should theoretically be prevented by the constitutional principle of the separation of powers. The doctrine of the separation of powers is largely associated with Baron Montesquieu who based his famous exposition of the doctrine on his understanding of the British constitution[16]. He identified three institutions of the state; the legislature that makes the laws, the executive that formulates and influences policy and the judiciary that adjudicates upon and imposes sanctions for breaking the law. Montesquieu argued that the result of these three powers concentrated in the same man or the same body[17] would pose a threat to individual liberty and that to prevent excessive concentration of public power the functions of each should be allocated clearly. However Jennings identified that Montesquieu did not mean that the legislature and executive should have no influence over the other, butthat neither should exercise the power of the oth er[18]. There should be a system of checks and balances in place to avoid concentration of power. The United States is an example of strong separation as the written constitution embeds the doctrine; the structure and power of the three institutions is laid out within Articles 1-3. Checks and balances are in place to ensure separation of power, for example the Presidents proposed legislative programme is checked by congress and the Supreme Court. There is however, in practice, fusion between the legislature and executive in the British constitution; for example the constitutional convention that members of the executive come from one of the Houses of Parliament, the executive, far from being separated from the legislature, is drawn from within its ranks[19]. The Prime Minister, is also by convention a member of the House of Commons; the legislature. In contrast, in the United States the president is separately elected and may be of a different political party than the one with a majority in either or both Houses of Congress. Under the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 there is imposed a statutory limit of 95 government ministers that may come from the House of Commons and prohibition of certain groups from becoming members such as civil servants and judicial office holders. This to some extent preserves separation however through its majority in the House of Commons the executive it is still likely to have the ability to dominate proceedings. By convention, the political party that wins the most seats at a general election forms a government the executive and a first past the post electoral system ensures that it will have a large majority of seats in the House of Commons. Dicey recognised this as a worrying shift in power stating that the majority party in the House can arrogate to itself that legislative omnipotence which of right belongs to the nation[20]. Essentially there is a concern that the executive can control the legislative supremacy of Parliament and ensure that its legislative proposals are enacted. There is also a fusion of function as the executive is involved in law making through delegated legislation. A large amount is made by Ministers and departments of the executive concerning important matters with justification in its efficiency compared with the passing of an Act of Parliament. It can also be made by those with specialist knowledge whilst MPs may not have the relevant expertise. However it conflicts with the theory of Parliamentary sovereignty as the executive is the supreme law making body in terms of the amount of legislation produced. Subsequently power lies with the executive at the expense of the legislature, some have depicted this state of affairs as an abdication by Parliament from its principle constitutional role in favour of the executive[21]. Prerogative powers are an example of fusion as they leave considerable power in the hands of the executive and allow Ministers to legislate without the consent of Parliament. However to some extent this is limited by judicial review as in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995][22], where it was held that it was unlawful for the Home Secretary to introduce changes to a scheme which were incompatible with an Act of Parliament. The unwritten British constitution is based largely on conventions and this is an important contributor to fusion between the legislature and executive. Although in theory Parliament is sovereign, in practice this legislative supremacy of Parliament is effectively inherited by the executive giving it true power. The constitutional theorist Walter Bagehot argues that far from being a problem, this fused relationship had clear merits, the efficient secret of the English Constitution may be described as the close union, the nearly complete fusion, of the executive and legislative powers.[23] Lord Hailsham used the term elective dictatorship[24], to criticise the way in which the executive may control the legislature. Part B: In light of this, it is to be critically evaluated to what extent this fusion is problematic; whether the checks and balances as prescribed by the doctrine of the separation of powers are effective enough to prevent abuse of power by the executive; in particular Parliamentary scrutiny. There is a concern that the Government in general is too dominant over parliamentary proceedings[25] such as the Parliamentary timetable and legislative process. The majority of Bills considered by Parliament will be introduced by the executive and derive from its policy commitments. With its strong majority in Parliament the executive is subsequently able to secure its policies into law and this is predominately through control of its members rather than active engagement with the issues[26].   Party members are told by government whips to vote in accordance with the party line and are unlikely to deviate from this requirement as supporting the party is beneficial; they are more likely to be promoted to a position within the executive. Almost all bills are approved by each House even if they are amended and by convention the Queen cannot refuse the royal assent. Delegated legislation such as statutory instruments and orders in council are also a significant example of the legislative power of the executive; in particular Henry VIII clauses of the parent act allowing statutory instruments to change the primary legislation itself. It is argued that these clauses go right to the heart of the key constitutional question of the limits of executive power[27]. The Legislative Regulatory Reform Bill (LRRB) when introduced into Parliament contained many of these clauses which would have enabled Ministers to make delegated legislation amending, repealing or replacing primary or secondary legislation. It was termed the abolition of Parliament bill because of the power it would give to Ministers; it also proposed limitations on Parliamentary scrutiny of these actions by Ministers. Parliamentary scrutiny of the executive is of fundamental importance in ensuring that the government acts under the law and in accordance with the principles of constitutionalism and democracy[28]. John Lockes theory of the consent of the governed[29] is such that a governments legitimacy to use state power is only justified and legal when derived from the people. Therefore the executive should be accountable to Parliament, as a representative of the electorate. The theoretical underpinning of this accountability is the convention of ministerial responsibility. Collective responsibility is such that Ministers must publicly approve the Cabinets decisions or resign; this serves to strengthen the executive further by always showing a united front but does not enhance transparency. Individually Ministers must bear responsibility for the actions of their departments. There are various scrutiny mechanisms used to hold the executive and its Ministers to account for their actions; however their effectiveness is often doubtful. Ministerial Question Time enables Members of Parliament to question government Ministers in the House of Commons. This method of obtaining information and scrutinising the actions of the executive is not a spontaneous affair[30] as there is notice given of the questions to be asked. However there is strength in that the answers given are recorded and subsequently become a part of public records. The Ministerial Code outlines that ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament[31] and that ministers should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public[32] providing firm regulation on the answers to be given. Question Time is televised and it is arguable that this is successful at providing public insight of the executive being held to account. However it is problematic as the televised element leads to a theatrical and superficial occasion.   Parliament may face difficulty in questioning the executive as there are various restrictions on the types of question s that can be asked; Ministers are only questioned on matters directly within their responsibility, with some subjects excluded completely such as the personal powers of the monarch and defence and national security[33]. Ministers can also refuse to answer questions on grounds including cost of obtaining the information or whether the question is in the public interest. They can also refuse to answer certain questions under the restrictions in the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Furthermore, if a Minister refuses to answer a question they cannot be pressed to answer it. These limitations on questioning are therefore problematic and prevent proper scrutiny; the obtaining of information, by MPs on behalf of their constituents, lies at the heart of the scrutiny process ill-informed debate will not be effective[34]. As questions are not limited to the opposition party it is arguable that as sycophantic questions are frequently asked[35] Question Time is used by the executive to promote its own views and party achievements. This does however have the benefit of raising party morale and confidence in seeing the party leaders perform well in Parliament. Although this then becomes more about the political relationship rather than scrutiny, with the parties trying to expose weaknesses in each other. Written questions are arguably a more effective mechanism for obtaining information rather than oral questions. The Cash for Questions scandal was also problematic as Members were being paid to table certain questions for Ministers and therefore not effectively scrutinising their actions. Its reputation for holding Ministers to account was also somewhat ruined. For Prime Ministers Question Time questions are notified in writing and this first formal, open question is usually to ask the Prime Ministers engagements for the day providing a neutral peg on which to hang a supplementary, and real, question[36].   The wide range of supplementary questions asked, without notice, means the Prime Minister needs to be able to demonstrate his competence across a full range of government policy[37] and this spontaneity provides stronger scrutiny. However Prime Ministers Question Time is allocated only 30 minutes per week; providing a very short amount of time for questioning. Various debates on the floor of the House of Commons are also an opportunity for scrutiny. They are often used to express the view of an individual Member and the support for this view attracting public interest and media coverage; subsequently pressure is placed on the government to respond depending on its support. However debates are limited by the adversary framework in which they are held[38] and Ministers are often not to be questioned on their responses which is problematic as it prevents deeper questioning on the issues. A vote on a motion of no confidence is arguably the most effective at holding the executive to account; if the government is defeated the convention is that it must resign or seek dissolution of Parliament and call a general election. Parliament therefore does have ultimate power in withdrawing its confidence however this is not really a threat due to party discipline; it is more likely to be of influence on the government. A vote of no confidence is rare and even more rarely successful; the last time a government lost such a vote was in 1979 where the Callaghan Government resigned and called a general election. Select committees examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the principal government departments[39] and also investigate other matters of public interest or concern. They are composed, by convention, of backbenchers and this theoretically increases their independence, they are also free to decide which matters to investigate without government approval. Select committees also have the power to send for persons, papers and records[40] to assist in their work and often provide highly influential reports, however they are perhaps more successful in drawing media and subsequently public attention to issues of importance. The party whips also have great influence, if not total control, over membership[41] chairmanship is open to any party and it is therefore possible it will be chaired by an executive party member creating the problem of further dominance within the committee. Committees can also only investigate a small proportion of the activities of the department as they are constrained by time and with each department having its own committee; it is more difficult to investigate issues that cut across several departments. They are also only capable of advising on matters and with no powers to impose sanctions, this is problematic as it does not allow active control. Select committees are also subject to several limitations, such as that there is no obligation that the government should cooperate with them; when the select committee on defence started its inquiry into the Westland Helicopter affair, the government refused to allow witnesses from the Department of Trade and Industry to give evidence. They justified this in saying that giving evidence would have major implications for the conduct and relations of the government. Civil servants have often been forbidden from appearing on the grounds of national security or excessive cost[42]. This is problematic as the executive is protected from real scrutiny by shielding the inner workings of govern ment[43]. Britains unwritten constitution is problematic as its basis on conventions enables the executive to inherit the legal sovereignty of Parliament and subsequently it is the dominant institution to which the other two institutions react[44]. Parliamentary scrutiny does not control the executive, it merely reacts when necessary. This is problematic as it is one of the checks and balances in place to prevent the concentration of power that Montesquieu warned would be a threat to liberty. The executive often appears to abuse its power through its dominance of the legislative process to pass legislation for its benefit and even dominate the mechanisms for its own scrutiny. Lord Hailshams description of an elective dictatorship appears to be the problematic reality. [1] Broadbent,G., Public Law Directions, (2009),   p.50 [2] Dicey, A.V, An Introduction to the Law of the Constitution, (1885), p.38 [3] AC 75 [4] Paine, T., Rights of Man, (1987), p.204 [5] 1 KB 733 [6] 1 KB 590 [7] Ibid at p.597 per Maugham LJ [8] Blackstone, W.,   Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-69) [9] 8 Cl Fin 710 [10] Alder, J., Constitutional and Administrative Law, (2007), p. 201 [11] AC 765 [12] UKHL 56 [13] Ibid at [104] per Lord Hope [14] Ibid at [71] per Lord Steyn [15] Ibid at [101] per Lord Steyn [16] Barendt, E., Separation of powers and constitutional government, (1995) Win Public Law 599 at p.599 [17] Montesquieu, De lEsprit des Lois, (1794) p.165 [18] Jennings, The Law and the Constitution, (1959) App. 1 [19] Barnett, H., Constitutional and Administrative Law, (2009), p.83 [20] Weill, R., Dicey was not Diceyan, (2003) 62 Cambridge Law Journal 474 at p.490 [21] De Smith, S.A., Constitutional and Administrative Law, (1977), p.321 [22] [1995] 2 A.C. 513 [23] Bagehot, W., The English Constitution, (1867) p.12 [24] Lord Hailsham, Elective Dictatorship (1976) [25] Reform of the House of Commons Select Committee, First Report, Rebuilding the House,   (November 2009) para. 23 [26] Wright, T., British Politics: A Very Short Introduction, (2003), p.88 [27] HL Deb Vol. 643 col. 165 14 January 2003 [28] Barnett op. cit., p.385 [29] Locke, J., Two Treatises of Government, (1824), p.215 [30] Barnett op. cit., p.386 [31] Cabinet Office, The Ministerial Code, (July 2007), p.6 [32] Ibid [33] Erskine May, 1997, Ch.17 [34] Hough, B., Ministerial responses to parliamentary questions: some recent concerns, (2003) Sum Public Law 211 at p.211 [35] Alder op. cit., at p. 306 [36] Barnett, op. cit., at p. 387 [37] Barnett, op. cit., at p. 499 [38] Bradley, A.W., Ewing, K.D., Constitutional and Administrative Law, (2007), p. 217 [39] Standing Orders of the House of Commons, (2009), at p. 150 [40] Ibid at p. 156 [41] Barnett, op.cit., at p. 393 [42] Cabinet Office, Departmental Evidence and Response to Select Committees, (2005) at para. 70 [43] Alder op. cit., at p. 310 [44] Griffin, J.A.G., The Common Law and the Political Constitution (2001) 117 Law Quarterly

The Significance of Language in Richard Wright’s Black Boy :: Wright Black Boy Essays

The Significance of Language in Richard Wright’s Black Boy Richard Wright had the "privilege" to experience America society, probably, at its worst. He saw how humans had the ability to treat other humans. His autobiography tells the tale, but it also gives life to words, to language. Wright had a gift for writing and he uses many techniques to bring that writing to life; for example, the exchange of words between whites and blacks gives the reader insight as to how much respect each race held for each other, or the degree of imagery he uses to bring the book to life. Both of these techniques show how language-words set us apart in society. Back in the 1920's there were lines set before a black man that he was expected not to cross. Blacks were looked down upon in American society; not just by whites, but by everyone, including Jews. When a white person spoke to a black person, that white person expected and demanded respect from that black person. And if the kind of respect that was sought after was given, then you might as well run and never come back. Richard saw this in his everyday life, it was normal, and he conveys it in his writing. For instance, when Richard is arguing with his principal about his valedictorian speech the language that comes from Richard is full of anger and resentment; however, though his tone sings one tune, his words sing a totally different one. The words that Richard spits out at his principal are filled with a certain respect that is not practiced or learned but built in. In any place that Richard ever worked or visited if and when he encountered a white man or woman he removed his hat an d always answered with "yes or no ma'am" or "yes or no sir". That kind of respect and speech had always been around and was assumed around. Richard knew that if you were black and in the white-world you didn't speak until spoken to; and this can be found all through Black Boy. Imagery, Richard uses a plethora of it throughout his book. It is the collection of images that helps you see what Richard is trying to show the world. When Richard is arguing with his principal, you can picture it perfectly.... This tall skinny black boy standing in a small office arguing with this red faced fat white man who is sitting at a desk.

Factory Farming Essay Essay

Factory farming is one of the most controversial topics talked about around the world. Most people just believe their perfectly packaged meat from the supermarket comes from a normal farm. Little do they know, it’s much more than that. Consumers have no idea what animals go through just for them to have a great chicken or steak dinner. Jessica Leader of the Huffington Post states, 99% of the meat in the United States comes from factory farms. (Leader, paragraph1). Factory farming according to Webster’s Dictionary is a farm on which large numbers of livestock are raised indoors in conditions intended to maximize production at minimal cost. This doesn’t sound so hurtful or damaging, but according to the Huffington Post, these operations cause distress for the animals that live there, and they are given chemicals, antibiotics and sometimes they even have diseases (Paragraph 2). Factory farming, in my opinion is really animal savagery and there is nothing healthy or positive about it. There are actually many health and environmental problems associated with industrial farming. For example, Jonathan Foer in his book, â€Å"Eating Animals† states â€Å"These animals are genetically engineered, restricted in mobility and fed unnatural diets.† (Page 34) Anything unnatural obviously can’t be healthy for the animals let alone the people who are being fed these animals after they are packaged and sent away to markets. In addition, factory farms are not healthy for the environment. A farm with 10,000 hogs produces as much fecal waste as a small city with 40,000 people, says Robert Martin of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of public health. (Kristof, Nicholas, page 2). Food people are consuming and fecal waste should not even be in the same association with each other. The hogs in a single country of North Carolina produce half as much waste as all of the people living in New York City. That fact right there clearly shows that factory farms are usin g very unsanitary conditions just to harm these animals, as well as the environment. Although not intentional, these farms hurt the animals without a care because people need to eat. Mass amounts of waste is a perfect example of air pollution. Soil used for vast crops as well as the manure are  the largest contributors to air pollution from the farms. Another big health risk of factory farming is the use of chemicals/antibiotics. Antibiotics are medicine prescribed from a doctor to humans or animals to kill infections and more then 80% of antibiotics was produced in 2011 to be fed to livestock. (Leader, #2) Factory farmers are giving these to the animals who aren’t sick. Routinely they are given antibiotics, in order to help them grow quicker in small living conditions. Infections can also be given because of antibiotics, which puts Americans at risk everyday because of overuse (Paragraph 13). The animals are fed the medicines to fight disease that they don’t have, pretty much infecting the humans as well. People could be getting sick because of the f oods their eating everyday without even knowing it. Taking antibiotics not prescribed to you sometimes allows unwanted bacteria to grow causing a person to get sick when they weren’t going to be in the first place. Although there seems to be no positive reasons as to why factory farming could benefit anyone, the only benefit besides people not starving really is it’s efficiency. Because it’s a fast and organized system, these farms have no choice but to make a lot of money for themselves and the government. Consumers are obviously buying all things that are being made mainly because they don’t really know what’s being put into the meat they are buying. Because there are not enough reasons to convince me why factory farming is positive to anyone at all, I think that it’s a very negative way to get our food. Kristof states in his article â€Å"Is That Sausage Worth This?† that animals, â€Å"Live out their adult lives without exercise or meaningful social interaction; it’s like a life sentence of solitary confinement in a coffin†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Kristof, Nicholas, Paragraph 7). In no way, shape or form is that fair to an innocent animal. Animals shouldn’t have to be kept prisoners in small places just to be poisoned, killed and eaten. All of the various drugs and chemicals are harming the animals and humans that it touches. More animals are being slaughtered and fed different chemicals that aren’t safe for people to be eating all the time. If the government truly cared about societies health, they would try to stop unsanitary and unhealthy conditions such as this. In 1906, a situation just as similar to this had risen with the meat packing industry. In that year, Upton Sinclair a reformer/socialist released his book The Jungle which told a horrible story of Chicago’s meat packing industry. Because of this book, society started to change severely. The issue of the unsanitary and unfair working conditions got to the president and he knew he had to make a change. President Theodore Roosevelt had a bill signed on June 30th of that same year, called The Meat Inspection Act. This banned packers from using unhealthy dyes, chemical preservatives and adulterants. By studying what happened to improve the industry in the 1900’s I believe that our food system could then make some changes. This act should still be in effect, but the way it’s been worked around, it seems as if factory farming really isn’t harming people at all. It’s an undercover system. Obama already started trying to fix these problems by undertaking a push beginning in 2010 to strengthen antitrust of the meat industry. Kristof, Nicholas, Paragraph 4). I still believe that overtime they could find better products to give the animals that are safer and healthier for both them to live a little longer, and us to be healthier. Personally, I believe that if people including myself start to buy more healthier, organic foods, and less meat, producers will start to realize that maybe people are seeing the truth. Organic foods are just made in a safer way, without really harming animals and they’re also more nutritious as well. Also, in some way people need to be informed of what’s really being put into their food and actually try to make a difference instead of sitting there and watching themselves be harmed by things that should be giving them a better well being. Over time, hopefully factory farms die out and there will be a better system to produce our foods. Analysis of Sources Form Give the following information for each source that you use in your research paper. Source 1) Title of Source 9 Facts About Factory Farming that Will Break Your Heart . Name of Author Jessica Leader . Date of publication March 17, 2014  . Publisher: The Huffington Post . Where did you find the source? Online . Type of Source (Is your source a book, magazine, newspaper, journal, etc?) The source is an online article from a newspaper. Credentials of the author: Check your source for information about the author or google his/her name) Jessica Leader is the Huffpost Green associate editor. Publisher: How long has the publisher been in business? What other publications does the publisher publish?____Not sure how long the publisher has been in business, but she wrote several articles in the Huffington Post . Reasons why this source is reliable:____Real information and real live pictures to show how gruesome factory farming is. Reasons why this source may be unreliable: There may be some opinions listed, not all people may be heart broken from this. Source 2) Title of Source Eating Animals . Name of Author Jonathan Safran Foer . Date of publication 2009 . Publisher: Little, Brown and Company . Where did you find the source? I was told to read this novel last semester in English 12. Type of Source (Is your source a book, magazine, newspaper, journal, etc?) Source is a book . Credentials of the author: Check your source for information about the author or google his/her name) Foer is most known for his two novels Everything is Illuminated and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Known especially for his storytelling in non-traditional ways . Publisher: How long has the publisher been in business? What other publications does the publisher publish? His first novel was published in 2002, and he’s written many other books as well. Reasons why this source is reliable: first hand source, someone who has experienced and studied factory  farming on his own. Reasons why this source may be unreliable: The novel includes a lot of his opinion and a reader may interpret those things as facts. Source 3) Title of Source Is That Sausage Worth This? Name of Author Nicholas Kristof . Date of publication February 19, 2014 . Publisher: The New York Times . Where did you find the source? CUNY online library . Type of Source (Is your source a book, magazine, newspaper, journal, etc?) Online, newspaper article. Credentials of the author: Check your source for information about the author or google his/her name) Columnist for The New York Times since 2001, writes op-ed columns that are in the paper twice a week. Mr. Kristof won the Pulitzer Prize two times, in 1990 and 2006. Publisher: How long has the publisher been in business? What other publications does the publisher publish? He joined the Times in 1984, and as well as columns in the paper he is the author of a chapter in a book on George W. Bush. Reasons why this source is reliable: He has been in the business for a very long time, so he is clearly smart and speaks facts. Reasons why this source may be unreliable: Newspaper columnists can too make mistakes when writing. Source 4) Title of Source The Unhealthy Meat Market . Name of Author Nicholas Kristof . Date of publication March 12, 2014 . Publisher: The New York Times . Where did you find the source? CUNY online library . Type of Source (Is your source a book, magazine, newspaper, journal, etc?) Online, newspaper article. Credentials of the author: Check your source for information about the author or google his/her name) Columnist for The New York Times since 2001, writes op-ed columns that are in the paper twice a week. Mr. Kristof won the Pulitzer Prize two times, in 1990 and 2006. Publisher: How long has the publisher been in business? What other publications does the publisher publish? He joined the Times in 1984, and as well as columns in the paper he is the author of a chapter in a book on George W. Bush. Reasons why this source is reliable: He has been in the business for a very long time, so he is clearly smart and speaks facts. He wouldn’t continue to be working with the Times if he wasn’t knowledgable. Reasons why this source may be unreliable: Sometimes there are errors in breaking news. WORKS CITED Leader, Jessica. â€Å"9 Facts About Factory Farming That Will Break Your Heart (GRAPHIC PHOTOS).† The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 17 Mar. 2014. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/factory-farming-facts_n_4063892.html Foer, Jonathan Safran. Eating animals. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2009. Print. Kristof, Nicholas. â€Å"Is That Sausage Worth This?.† The New York Times. The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/20/opinion/kristof-is-that-sausage-worth-this.html Kristof, Nicholas. â€Å"The Unhealthy Meat Market.† The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Mar. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/13/opinion/kristof-the-unhealthy-meat-market.html

Good Leaders Are Made Not Born

A PROJECT REPORT ON BEHAVIOURAL ASPECT OF LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURAL ASPECT OF LEADERSHIP BUSINESS SCHOOL OF DELHI GREATER NOIDA SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY: PROF. VEENU ARORA ROHIT KUMAR PGDM(2011-13) INTRODUCTION Good leaders are made not born . If you  have the desire and will power ,you can become an effective leader. good leaders develop through a never-ending process of self study, education, training and experience.This guide will help you through that process. to inspire your people into higher  levels of teamwork, there are certain things you  must be, know ,and ,do. These do not come naturally, but are acquired through continual work  and study. The best leaders are continually working and  studying to improve their leadership skills. Before we get started, les define leadership. Leadership is  a complex process by which a person influences others to accomplish a mission, task or objective  and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and cohe rent.A person carries out this process by applying his or  her leadership attributes (belief, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills). Although your position as a  manager, supervisor, lead, etc. s and objectives in the organization, this power does not make you a leader†¦ it simply makes you the boss. Leadership makes people  want to achieve high goals and objectives, while, on  the other hand, bosses tell people to accomplish a  task or an objective. Bass' (1) theory of leadership states that there  are three basic ways to explain how people become  leaders, the first two explain the leadership development for a small  number of people.These theories are: Some personality traits  may lead people naturally into leadership  roles. Tg is  is THE  TRAIT THEORY. Crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion, which brings extraordinary leadership qualities in an ordinary person. This is THE GREAT EVENT THEORY. People can choo se to become leaders. People can learn  leadership skills. This is THE TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY. It is most widely accepted theory today and the premise  on which this guide is based. When a person is deciding if  he respects you as a leader, hedoes not think about your attributes.He observes what you do so that he can know who you really are. He uses this observation to tell if you are an honourable and trusted leader, or a self serving person who misuses his or her  authority to look good and get promoted. Self serving leaders are not as effective  because their employees only obey them, not  follow them. They succeed in many areas because they present a good image  to their seniors at the expense of their  people. The basis of good leadership is honorable character and selfless service to your organization .In  your employees' eyes,  Your leadership is everything you do that  affects the organizations objectives and their well being. A  respected leader concentrates on what she is [be] (beliefs  and character), what she knows job, tasks, human nature), and what she  does (implement, motivate, provide direction). What makes a person follow a leader? People want to guided by those they respect and those who  have a clear sense of direction. to gain respect, they must be ethical. A sense of direction is achieved by conveying a strong vision of the  future. TWO MOST IMPORTANT KEYS OFLEADERSHIPHay's study examined over 75 key components of  employee satisfaction. They found that: trust and confidence in  top leadership was the single most reliable  predictor of employee satisfaction in an organization. Effective communication by leadership in three critical areas was  the key to win  organizational trust and confidence: helping the employees understand the company's overall business strategy. Helping employees understand how they contribute to achieving key  business objectives. Bring information with employe es on both  how the company is doing and how an own  employee's division is doing -relative to strategic business objectives.So basically, you must be trustworthy and you  have to be able to communicate a vision of where you are going. Notice how the â€Å"PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP† in the next section closely ties in with this. HUMAN RELATIONS The six most important words: â€Å"i admit i made a mistake. â€Å"The five most important words: â€Å"you  did a good job. â€Å"The four most important words: â€Å"what is  your opinion. â€Å"The three most important words: â€Å"if you please. â€Å"The two most important words: â€Å"thank  you. â€Å"The one most important word: â€Å"we. â€Å"The least most important word: PRINCIPLE OF LEADERSHIPTO HELP YOU BE, KNOW, AND DO, (2) FOLLOW THESE ELEVEN principles of leadership (later sections will expand on  gaining an insight into these principles and  providing tools to perform them):Know yourself an d seek self-improvement means continually strengthening your attributes. This can be accomplished through reading, self-study, classes, etc. be technically proficient. As a leader, you must know your job and have a solid familiarity with your employees' jobs. Seek responsibility and take  responsibility of your actions. Search for ways to guide  your organization to new heights.And when things go wrong, they will sooner or later, do not blame others. Analyze the  situation, take corrective action, and move on to the next challenge. Make sound and timely decisions. Use good problem solving, decision making and planning tools. Set the example. Be a good role model for  your employees. They must not only hear what they are expected to do but also see. Know your people and  look out for their well-being. Know human nature and importance of sincerely  caring for your workers. Keep your people informed. Know how to communicate with your people within the organization. Develop a sense of responsibility in  your people.Develop good character traits within your people that will help them carry out their professional responsibilities. Ensure that tasks are understood, supervised, and accomplished. Communication is the key to this responsibility. Train your  people as a team. Although many so called leaders call their  organization, department, section, etc. A team; they are not really teams†¦ they are just a group of people doing their jobs. Use the  full capabilities of your organization. By developing a team spirit, you will be able to employ your organization, department, section, etc. to its fullest capabilitiesFACTORS OF LEADERSHIP The four major factors of leadership are †¦.. THE FOLLOWER: Different people require different styles of  leadership. For example,  a new hire requires  more supervision than an experienced employee. A person with  a different attitude requires a different approach than one with a  high degree of  motivation. You must know  your people! The fundamental starting point is having a good understanding of human  nature: needs, emotions, and motivation. You must know your employees' be, know and do attributes. LEADER:  You must have an honest understanding of who you  are, what you know, and what you can do.Also, note that it is the followers, not the leader who determines  if a leader is  successful. If a follower does no it trust or lacks confidence in his or her leader, then she will be uninspired. To be successful you have to convince your followers, not yourself or your supervisors, that you are worthy of being followed. COMMUNICATION: You lead through two way  communication. Much of it is non-verbal. For instance, when you â€Å"set the example,† that communicates to your people that you would no task them to perform anything that you would not be willing to do.What and how you communicate either builds or harms the relationship between you and your emp loyees. SITUATION: All situations are different. What you  do in one leadership situation will not always work in another situation. You must use your judgment to decide the best course of action and the leadership style needed for each situation. For example, you may need to confront an employee  for inappropriate behavior, but the confrontation is too late or too early, too harsh or too weak, then the results may prove ineffective . ATTRIBUTES if you are a leader  that can be trusted, then the  people around you will learn to respect you.To be a good leader, there are things thtu must be, know, and do. these fall under the  leadership framework: BE a professional. BE a professional who possess good character traits. KNOW the four factors of leadership- follower, leader, communication, situation. KNOW yourself . KNOW human nature KNOW your job KNOW your organization. DO provide direction. DO implement. DO motivate. Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, Adjourning The Tu ck man model(2)shows the five stages that teams go through: from Forming to Storming to Norming to Performing to Adjourning.Forming In the Forming stage, team members are introduced. They state why they were chosen  or volunteered for the team and what they hope to accomplish within the team. Members cautiously explore the boundaries of acceptable group behavior. This is a stage of transition  from individual to member status, and of testing the leader's guidance both formally and informally. Forming includes these feelings and behaviors: Excitement, anticipation, and optimism. Pride in being chosen for the  project A tentative attachment to the team Suspicion and anxiety about the job.Defining the tasks and how they will be accomplished. Determining acceptable group behavior. Deciding what information needs to be gathered. Abstract discussions of the concepts and issues, and for some members, impatience with  the discussions. There will be difficulty in identifying some of the relevant  problems. Because there is so much  going on to distract members' attention in the beginning, the team accomplishes little, if anything, that concerns it's project goals. This is perfectly normal. Storming During the team's transition from the â€Å"As-Is† tothe â€Å"To-Be,† is called the Storming phase.All members have their own ideas as to how theprocess should look, and personal agendas arerampant. Storming is probably the most difficultstage for the team. They begin to realize thetasks that are ahead are different and  moredifficult than they imagined. Impatient about thelack of progress, members argue about just whatactions the team should take. They try to relysolely on their personal and professionalexperience, and resist collaborating with most  of  the other team members. Storming includes these feelings and behaviors:Resisting the tasks. Resisting quality improvement approachessuggested by other members.Sharp fluctuations in attitude about the teamand the project's chance of success. Arguing among members even when they agreeon the real issues. Defensiveness, competition, and choosing sides. Questioning the wisdom of those who selectedthis project and appointed the other  membersof the team. Establishing unrealistic goals. Disunity, increased tension, and jealousy. The above pressures mean that team  membershave little energy to  spend on progressingtowards the team's goal. But they  are beginningto understand one another. This phase sometimestakes 3 or 4 meetings before arriving at theNorming phase.Norming The Norming phase is when the team reaches aconsensus on the  Ã¢â‚¬Å"To-Be† process. Everyonewants to share the  newly found focus. Enthusiasmis high, and the team is tempted to go beyond theoriginal scope of the process. During this stage,members reconcile competing loyalties andresponsibilities. They accept the team, teamground rules, their roles in the team, and theindividuality of fellow members. Emotionalconflict is reduced as previously competitiverelationships become more cooperative. Norming includes these feelings and behaviors:An ability to express criticism  constructively.Acceptance of membership in the team. An attempt to achieve harmony  by avoidingconflict. More friendliness, confiding in each other, andsharing of personal problems. A sense of team cohesion, spirit,  and goals. Establishing and maintaining team ground rules and boundaries. As team members begin to work out their differences, they now have more time  and energy to spend on the project. Performing The team has now settled its relationships andexpectations. They can begin performing bydiagnosing, solving problems, and choosing andimplementing changes.At last team membershave discovered and accepted each  other'sstrengths and weakness, and learned what theirroles are. Performing includes these feelings andbehaviors:Members have insights into personal and  groupprocesses, and bett er understanding of eachother's strengths and weakness. Constructive self-change. Ability to prevent or work  through groupproblemsClose attachment to the teamThe team is now an effective, cohesive unit. Youcan tell when your team has reached this stagebecause you start getting a lot  of work done. Adjourning The team briefs and shares the  improved processduring the this phase.When the team finallycompletes that last briefing, there is always abittersweet sense of accomplishment coupledwith the reluctance to  say good-bye. Manyrelationships formed within these teams continuelong after the team disbands TEAM VS GROUP There are several factors that separate teamsfrom groups. Roles and  Responsibilities Within a group, individuals establish a set of  behaviors called roles. These roles setexpectations governing relationships. Roles oftenserve as source of confusion and conflict. Whileon the other hand, teams have a sharedunderstanding on how to perform their role.These rol es include: leader, facilitator,timekeeper, and recorder. Identity While teams have an identity, groups do not. It isalmost impossible to establish the sense of  cohesion that characterizes a team without thisfundamental step. A team has a  clearunderstanding about what constitutes the team's'work' and why it is  important. They can describea picture of what the team needs to achieve, andthe norms and values that will guide them Cohesion Teams have an esprit that shows a sense of  bonding and camaraderie. Esprit is the spirit,soul, and state of mind of the team.It is theoverall consciousness of the team that  a personidentifies with and feels  a part of. Individualsbegin using â€Å"we† more than â€Å"me. † Facilitate Groups have a tendency to get bogged down withtrivial issues. Ask yourself, â€Å"How much time getswasted in meetings you attend? † Teams usefacilitators to keep the team on the right path. Communication While members of a group are  centered uponthemselves, the team is committed to opencommunication. Team members feel they canstate their opinions, thoughts, and feelingswithout fear. Listening is considered as importantas speaking.Differences of opinion is valued andmethods of managing conflict are understood. Through honest and caring feedback, membersare aware of their strengths and weakness  asteam members. There is an  atmosphere of trustand acceptance and a sense of community. Flexibility Most groups are extremely rigid. Teams, howevermaintain a high level of flexibility, and theyperform different task and maintenance functionsas needed. The responsibility for teamdevelopment and leadership is shared. Thestrengths of each member are identified  andused. Morale Team members are enthusiastic about the work of  the team and each person feels pride in being a 16 ember of the team. Team spirit is high. To be asuccessful team, the group must have a  strongability to produce results and a  high degre e of  satisfaction in working with one  another. Working With Other TeamMembers Although we are like in many ways, we are dislikein a lot more ways. Humans have always tried toclassify things, including themselves. This sectionuses a popular categorizer by placing people intofour styles – Driver, Persuader, Analyzer,Organizer. (note that the names will vary widelydepending upon the creator of the chart). It  doesthis by charting them on two dimensions – tasksand emotions.People gets results on tasksbetween two extremes – expedience andprocesses. People use emotions in dealing withothers through two extremes – controlled orresponsive. In the chart below, the twodimensions are shown under the profile Character: Be a piece of the  rock †¢ Charisma: The first impression can seal the deal. †¢ Commitment: It seperates doers from  dreamers †¢ Communication: without it you travel alone †¢ Competence: if you build it they will come à ¢â‚¬ ¢ Courage: one person with courage is a  majority †¢ Discernment: put an end to  unsolved mysteries †¢Focus: the sharper it is, the sharper you are †¢ Generosity: your candle loses nothing when it lights another †¢ Initiative: you wont leave home without it †¢ Listening: to connect with their hearts use your ears 43 †¢ Passion: take this life and love it †¢ Positive attitude: if you believe you can, you can †¢ Problem solving: you cant let  your problems be a problem †¢ Relationships: if you get along they will go along †¢ Resposibility: if you wont carry the ball you wont lead theteam †¢ Security: competence never compensates for insecurity †¢ Self-discipline: the first person you lead is you †¢

WOMENS RIGHT TO VOTE essays

WOMENS RIGHT TO VOTE essays In the 1900s, there was a constant struggle for women in society. The right to vote had become a major issue in England and eventually migrated its way over to the United States. Women had to deal with difficult social condition in order to achieve their goal of obtaining the right to vote. The vote was more then simply what it states it is. To women, the vote represents a symbol, of citizenship, liberty, and freedom, a safeguard, of these liberties, and most of all an instrument which encourages the people for more than what the forefathers had gotten. At this time, women had a lot of strife to cope with, especially in regards to family life. Marriage was a influential issue in the argument over the right to vote. This act was said to be unjust and unequal and women believed that their right to vote could make it fair and wise. It has been said that marriage was made for women by men. Women believe that they should have a point of view which matters in the subject matter of marriage. If a woman was to be wed, she would have to give up her economic independence and employment for his security. The married man had last say in every aspect of life, even in the decision of the future for his child, including religion, education and everything in between. The wife has no legal voice, no claim on income and is forced to be content whether she is starving or not. The man decides how much food, shelter, money and clothes he provides her with. Also expanding on the same idea of inequality, after all the training women from schools, almost all posts and professorships are given to men. Women believed that the Parliamentary vote will eventually make life easier for women. Political equality is the key which is needed to unlock the door. Home is an important part of society in which everyone in the nation has. Home is a place where every child can be a happy and useful member of society and women feel like their contri...