Term paper Voting right Essays

Term paper Voting right Essays Term paper Voting right Essay Term paper Voting right Essay The theme of my collage was conflict. It was about the Hungarian War of 1956. When I started to work on the collage the theme was something wanted the viewer to understand as they looked at it. I did not want to give more details about this war. I wanted the viewer to see the collage and have curiously about the subject to research It. I wanted the viewer to wonder why 1956? As I progress through making my collage I want to go over the emphasis of the number 56 in red represents my theme, the lance of the images in the collage and color. Emphasizing the number fifty-six at the center of the collage was purposely done to show the theme of the collage. The Hungarian War of 1956 was a tragic war that I wanted to inform people out by doing a collage that included some of the events that happened. In the collage under the year 1956 you can see a tank with little green color. If you look closely at the tank you see it is made of dollar bills. This was to represent the war started because Stalin was taking over all the economy of the Hungarian people, which the people had enough. They were tired of not being able to control anything so they decided to fight back the Stalin government and get their land back. The Hungarian people were poor and not had much If any of actual weapons to win this war but they still fought and In the collage on the left side the big boy represents these actions of the Hungarian people. The balance of the collage was done for it to have more power on the left side than the right side. As you look at the collage on the left it is how the Hungarian War darted by people deciding to rebel, this was when people felt strong so it is the biggest image on the collage. The Hungarian people thought that if they rebel they could win against Stalins government. They did not think about all the power Stalin had because they were tired on the control they were under and their poverty. The collage was done in chronological order from the people deciding to rebel, to the Hungarian people fighting against Stalins people and ending with defeat and destruction. There are some Images that have color while others that do not. The color was one to show the power the Hungarian people had at the beginning of the war until the end of it. There is an image of skulls that is in color. This shows that there were some dead bodies at the beginning of the war but since Stalins government had left the Hungarian people alone in 1956 for three days-the Hungarian people thought they had won and had power. As the three days pass and you progress through the collage you see the tank in the middle which basically ends the Hungarian War. The end results as you look at the images in my project are people dying and total extraction of Hungary. At the right side of the collage in the top corner you see a woman that says Walt a minute That Is not right. This woman Is representing millions of the Hungarian that died because they did not have the sources of defenses that Stalins government had. There Is a clock next to her which Just represents the little time that the Hungarian people thought they had freedom from Stalins rule and how little did the is impacted by the image and decide to figure out what it symbolizes. This collage was to inform people about the Hungarian war of 1956 but also make people work for the info. I did not want to add too much detail because it be over whelming for the viewer and also it would lose the purpose of researching what happened that year. The images I used were key concepts of the Hungarian War that would help the viewer find information of what happened. I also, tried to make the shape of the collage as a semi-not perfect crown to symbolize Stalins ruling in Hungary before and after the war. His ruling was not perfect for the Hungary people but it still was their government even after their rebel.

Congress Members Who Voted Against the 2002 Iraq War

Congress Members Who Voted Against the 2002 Iraq War The directionless Iraq War has killed over 4,100 U.S. soldiers, wounded or maimed more than 200,000 more, and delivered a devastating blow to our countrys reputation and moral authority. Its time we honor the members of Congress who voted in 2002 to prevent the Bush administrations hasty rush into an unprovoked attack and occupation of Iraq. Voter Breakdown The dramatic, much-debated vote on Joint Resolution 114 was taken on Oct. 11, 2002. It passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23, and the House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133. In the end, 156 members of Congress from 36 states had enough information and personal insight and wisdom to make the correct decision for our nation and the world community. Six House Republicans and one Independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Representatives in voting NAY. In the Senate, 21 Democrats, one Republic, and one Independent courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq. These discerning, courageous leaders are exactly what our country needs to lead us out of the present abyss in Iraq under the Bush Administration. We can trust their judgment! Voting Record This convenient list is organized by state, and features all 156 members of Congress who voted NAY to the War in Iraq, including their political affiliations. State Congress Name Party Notes Alabama Rep Earl Hilliard D retired from office Arizona Rep Ed Pastor D Arkansas Rep Vic Snyder D California Sen Barbara Boxer D California Rep Joe Baca D California Rep Xavier Becerra D California Rep Lois Capps D California Rep Gary Condit D California Rep Susan Davis D California Rep Anna Eshoo D California Rep Sam Farr D California Rep Bob Filner D California Rep Mike Honda D California Rep Barbara Lee D California Rep Zoe Lofgren D California Rep Robert Matsui D deceased California Rep Juanita Millender-McDonald D California Rep George Miller D California Rep Grace Napolitano D California Rep Nancy Pelosi D California Rep Lucille Roybal-Allard D California Rep Loretta Sanchez D California Rep Hilda Solis D California Rep Pete Stark D California Rep Mike Thompson D California Rep Maxine Waters D California Rep Diane Watson D California Rep Lynn Woolsey D Colorado Rep Diana DeGette D Colorado Rep Mark Udall D Connecticut Rep Rosa DeLauro D Connecticut Rep John Larson D Connecticut Rep James Maloney D Florida Sen Bob Graham D Florida Rep Corrine Brown D Florida Rep Alice Hastings D Florida Rep Carrie Meek D retired from office Georgia Rep John Lewis D Georgia Rep Cynthia McKinney D Hawaii Sen Daniel Akaka D Hawaii Sen Daniel Inouye D Hawaii Rep Neil Abercrombie D Illinois Sen Dick Durbin D Illinois Sen Bobby Rush D Illinois Rep Jerry Costello D Illinois Rep Danny Davis D Illinois Rep Lane Evans D Illinois Rep Luis Gutierrez D Illinois Rep Jesse Jackson Jr. D Illinois Rep Bill Lipinski D retired from office Illinois Rep Jan Schakowsky D Indiana Rep Julia Carson D Indiana Rep John Hostettler R Indiana Rep Pete Visclosky D Iowa Rep Jim Leach R Maine Rep Tom Allen D Main Rep Baldacci D Maryland Sen Barbara Mikulski D Maryland Sen Paul Sarbanes D Maryland Rep Benjamin Cardin D Maryland Rep Elijah Cummings D Maryland Rep Connie Morella D Massachusetts Sen Ted Kennedy D Massachusetts Rep Michael Capuano D Massachusetts Rep Bill Delahunt D Massachusetts Rep Barney Frank D Massachusetts Rep Jim McGovern D Massachusetts Rep Richard Neal D Massachusetts Rep John Olver D Massachusetts Rep John Tierney D Michigan Sen Carl Levin D Michigan Sen Debbie Stabenow D Michigan Rep David Bonior D Michigan Rep John Conyers Jr. D Michigan Rep John Dingell D Michigan Rep Dale Kildee D Michigan Rep Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick D Michigan Rep Sandy Levin D Michigan Rep Lynn Rivers D Michigan Rep Bart Stupak D Minnesota Sen Mark Dayton D Minnesota Sen Paul Wellstone D deceased Minnesota Rep Betty McCollum D Minnesota Rep Jim Oberstar D Minnesota Rep Martin Olav Sabo D Mississippi Rep Bennie Thompson D Missouri Rep William Clay Jr. D MIssouri Rep Karen McCarthy D retired from office New Jersey Sen Jon Corzine D New Jersey Rep Rush Holt D New Jersey Rep Robert Menendez D New Jersey Rep Frank Pallone Jr D New Jersey Rep Donald Payne D New Mexico Sen Jeff Bingaman D New Mexico Rep Tom Udall D New York Rep Maurice Hinchey D New York Rep Amo Houghton R New York Rep John LaFalce D New York Rep Gregory Meeks D New York Rep Jerrold Nadler D New York Rep Major Owens D New York Rep Charles Rangel D New York Rep Jose Serrano D New York Rep Louise Slaughter D New York Rep Edolphus Towns D New York Rep Nydia Velazquez D North Carolina Rep Eva Clayton D retired from office North Carolina Rep David Price D North Carolina Rep Melvin Watt D North Dakota Sen Kent Conrad D Ohio Rep Sherrod Brown D Ohio Rep Stephanie Tubbs Jones D Ohio Rep Marcy Kaptur D Ohio Rep Dennis Kucinich D Ohio Rep Thomas Sawyer D Ohio Rep Ted Strickland D Oregon Sen Ron Wyden D Oregon Rep Earl Blumenauer D Oregon Rep Peter DeFazio D Oregon Rep Darlene Hooley D Oregon Rep David Wu D Pennsylvania Rep Robert Brady D Pennsylvania Rep William Coyne D retired from office Pennsylvania Rep Mike Doyle D Pennsylvania Rep Chaka Fattah D Rhode Island Sen Lincoln Chafee D Rhode Island Sen Jack Reed D Rhode Island Rep James Langevin D South Carolina Rep Gresham Barrett R South Carolina Rep James Clyburn D Tennessee Rep John Duncan Jr R Texas Rep Lloyd Doggett D Texas Rep Charles Gonzalez D Texas Rep Ruben Hinojosa D Texas Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee D Texas Rep Eddie Bernice Johnson D Texas Rep Ron Paul R Texas Rep Silvestre Reyes D Texas Rep Ciro Rodriguez D retired from office Vermont Sen Jim Jeffords D Vermont Sen Patrick Leahy D Vermont Rep Bernie Sanders I Virginia Rep Jim Moran D Virginia Rep Bobby Scott D Washington Sen Patty Murray D Washington Rep Jay Inslee D Washington Rep Rick Larsen D Washington Rep Jim McDermott D District of Columbia Rep Brian Baird D West Virginia Sen Robert Byrd D West Virginia Rep Alan Mollohan D West Virginia Rep Nick Rahall D Wisconsin Sen Russ Feingold D Wisconsin Rep Tammy Baldwin D Wisconsin Rep Jerry Kleczka D retired from office Wisconsin Rep David Obey D

Cantonese Romanization System Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Cantonese Romanization System - Research Paper Example From the essay it is clear this is a form of Romanizing Cantonese proper nouns that is widely used by the Hong Kong government departments and non-governmental organizations in Hong Kong. This use of this method by the government has a long history dating back to the days of British rule and it has undergone a lot of metamorphosis through the two world wars. There are no strict guidelines laid on the method since it just established itself and since then it became a common practice. Due to the un-standardized nature of the method, this system got its critics to a point that other systems are recommended in teaching institutions for its place. As the research declares there are several drawbacks associated with Hong Kong government Romanization system. Firstly, Hong Kong government Romanization system not fully standardized as a system and thus posses a great challenge in spelling since many of the phonemes are similar to more than one letter combination or the other way round. Secondly, In Hong Kong government Romanization system, all tones and distinctions between unaspirated and aspirated stops are omitted and this leads to a great problem in spelling. Lastly, there is existence of inconsistencies throughout Hong Kong government Romanization system as a result of loss of distinctions historically. That is, a distinction between alveolar and palatal sounds making most consonants undistinguished in present-day speech, lacks tone marks, lacks diacritics and different spellings sometimes used for the similar phonemes.

Analysis and Action Plan for a Middle School Teacher of English Essay

Analysis and Action Plan for a Middle School Teacher of English Language Learners - Essay Example In this classroom, Mr. O’Malley tends to use the natural approach and English Language Development (ELD) in Maria’s case even though it was not successfully as she could not interact with others. The ELD strategy involves the use of systematic instructional strategy that is designed to enhance English acquisition by students to whom English is not the primary language (WIDA, 2012). In this case, the learners interact with each other. Mr. O’Malley made sure that Maria’s classmates assisted her and included her in every activity. The natural language acquisition process has the student developing basic communication skills first and focusses on fluency while speaking English in a social context. The heterogeneous grouping of the natural process was through ensuring that Maria got included in every activity. In the case of Mikhail, Mr. O’Malley used the strategy of connecting learning to previous knowledge; though it was unsuccessful as he could not write a good essay without grammatical issues. The strategy comprises providing the student with new topic connections or events from the learner’s background and making them give a connection between the vocabulary in their first language and English. Mikhail had been schooling in the United for two years; thus he does not have a problem communicating in class, but his main problem is in grammatical mistakes. Therefore, linking his knowledge of English learned in the college to his first language can help improve his grammar. After and before reading, students tend to respond to prompts that assist them in linking their experiences to the main theme and characters (Curtin, 2009). The instructional inputs that follow the prompts give oral language practice for the ELLs and assist in deepening the students’ comprehension conceptual framework. Researchers discovered that the instructional input increases comprehension for the ELLs and deepens their

Land Pollution Essay Example for Free

Land Pollution Essay Causes of Land Pollution 1. Degenerative Actions Degenerative Actions encompass a lot of human actions, including deforestation, overuse of pesticides and chemical fertilizers, desertification, mining, inefficient and / or inadequate waste treatment, landfill, litter, etc. 2. Misuse of Land Misuse of Land mainly refers to felling of trees to clear land for agriculture, as well as processes like desertification and land conversion. Desertification is when anthropogenic effects of human development or other actions convert a piece of (essentially) fertile land into desert-land or dry land. Land once converted to desert-land can never be reclaimed by any amount of corrective measures. This is also a serious issue because t does not only affect the land, but also the overall biodiversity of a place, especially when land is cleared for agriculture. A lot of indigenous flora and fauna is lost in the process. 3. Soil Pollution Soil Pollution is when the top-most soil layer of land is destroyed or polluted. Soil pollution is again another cause of land pollution that affects not only the land, but also a lot of other things such as forest cover of a region, productivity of land in terms of agriculture, grazing etc. Soil pollution is also caused by wrong agricultural practices, such as overuse of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. This causes non-biodegradable chemicals to enter and accumulate in the food-chain a process often referred to as biomagnification of a pollutant. 4. Land Conversion Land Conversion is the process whereby a piece of land is converted from its indigenous form to a form used for either agriculture or infrastructure. Land conversion is especially a growing problem that we possibly do not have a good or a good enough solution for. The best way to avoid land conversion is to make efficient use of the available land. Using a piece of land to its maximum potential is the key to eliminate many of the causes of land pollution. Effects of Land Pollution 1. Effects on Climate Land pollution can affect the general environment of the Earth. Land pollutions leads to loss in the forest cover of Earth. This is in turn going to affect the amount of rain. Less rains mean lesser vegetation. The effect of all different kinds of pollution will eventually lead to problems like acid rains, greenhouse effect, global warming. All of these problems have already initiated and need to be curbed before the situation runs out of control. 2. Extinction of Species One of the major causes of concern is the extinction of species. Species are pushed towards endangerment and extinction primarily by two processes. Habitat fragmentation is the fragmentation of the natural habitat of an organism; cause primarily by urban sprawl. Habitat destruction, on the other hand, is when land clearing adversely affects animals special such that their natural habitat is lost. Both the actions can cause some species to go extinct and others to become invasive. 3. Biomagnification Biomagnification is the process in which certain non-biodegradable substances go on accumulating in the food-chain (in one or more species). The most common example is of methylmercury in fish and mercury in eagles. Not only does biomagnification put the particular species at risk, it puts all the species above and below it at risk, and ultimately affects the food pyramid. 4. Effects on Biodiversity Species extinction and biomagnification is going to overthrow the balance of nature very significantly. The main reason for this is disturbance created in the food chain. To give you a very simple example on account of biomagnification of mercury in eagles, they might go extinct in the subsequent years. However, we know eagles prey on snakes. Less (or no) eagles will then result in more number of snakes! Ways to Reduce Land Pollution 1. Reduce toxic materials. Waste materials that are disposed of should have minimal toxic materials. This can be done by treating the waste materials with various chemicals to make them less toxic. Once the waste is treated, it can be disposed of using responsible methods. Harmful chemicals can also be replaced with less toxic, biodegradable materials. 2. Recycle waste materials. As explained by the Stanford Recycling Center, each American throws away 7 1/2 lbs. of garbage. Garbage requires landfills, which takes up large amounts of land. 3. Buy organics products, especially organic cleaners, pesticides, insecticides and fertilizers. The advantage of using organic products is that they are biodegradable and friendly to the environment. 4. Avoid littering. Excessive littering is one of most common reasons for land pollution. 5. Take initiative to inform others about the harmful effects of littering. Organic wastes must be disposed off in areas that are far from human or animal habitation. Waste like plastic, metals, glass and paper must be recycled and reused. 6. Improve fertility of the land by reforesting. Soils in forested lands are far more fertile than soil without trees, suggesting that trees have the ability to fertilize land.

macbeth :: essays research papers

MACBETH In Shakespeare’s play Macbeth, there are power struggles that interfere with personal relationships. The love and honor of the state or the love and loyalty of family is brought up to question. State and family are very similar, as they are both very important. But which one is more is not an easy question. In the eye’ of Macbeth and Macduff, characters in Macbeth the answer is simple, state. Loyalty to state is more valued to Macbeth and Macduff.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macduff must not care for his family for he would not leave them all alone. â€Å"To leave his wife, to leave his babes, His mansion and his titles in a place from whence himself does fly? Act 4 Sc 2; these are the words of lady Macduff talking about her husband. If Macduff loves his family he would at lest tell his wife where he has run off to so she does not worry. It is easy to see that Macduff loves his country more than his family. â€Å"Wear thou thy wrongs; The title is affeered. Fare thee well, lord. I would not be the villain that thou think’st for the whole space that’s in the tyrant’s grasp and the rich East to boot.† Act 4 Sc3 this shows Macduff’s feelings about the situation of Macbeth being king. Macduff does not want to see the country of Scotland suffer, and he is showing his loyalty to king Duncan by going to his son Malcolm the person who should be king.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  As with Macbeth the title of king is of more importance than a friend who he has been in battle with and is as his right hand man. â€Å"My noble partner you greet with present grace and great prediction of noble having and of royal hope,†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Act 1 Sc 3 this is of Banquo talking about Macbeth as these are traveling along together. Banquo is as a loyal partner and friend to Macbeth. But because Macbeth thinks that he is a better leader he does not want Banquo and his sons to rule the country. â€Å"Your children should be kings† Act 1 Sc 3. Even with Banquo being a noble friend this prophecy scares Macbeth and is left with one choice to kill his friend. â€Å"With barefaced power sweep him from my sight.† Act 3 Sc. 1. All this for the kingdom. Macbeth’s insecurity led him to believe that Macduff was betraying him and ordered the killing of Macduff’s family.

Problems of Cross Border Listing and the Way Forward

Background Paper: Obstacles to cross-border listings and acquisitions in the financial sector A. Purpose of the paper In September 2004, the informal Ecofin Council in Scheveningen discussed the issue of lagging crossborder consolidation1 in the banking area. This low level of cross-border consolidation is not confined to banking, but is relevant for the whole financial sector, with some nuances. In the upcoming Financial Integration Monitor report, the Commission will dedicate a chapter on the quantitative aspects of crossborder restructuring, confirming the trends discussed in Scheveningen. Indeed, between 1999 and 2004, the report will show that cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) accounted for around 20% of the total value of M&As in the financial sector, whereas cross-border deals represented 45% of M&As in other sectors over the same period. 2 Finance Ministers asked the Commission to examine possible explanations for this low level of pan- European restructuring specific to the financial sector, by reviewing the obstacles to cross-border M&As, in order to identify possible internal market failures, gaps or shortcomings. It should be stressed that the role of the Commission is to ensure that existing EU law is enforced properly, as well as to propose growth-supportive actions, within the context of the overall EU competitiveness policy. It must be equally clear that the Commission does not intent to favour specific business models or to influence individual market decisions, as long as they are compatible with the Treaty rules and the EU secondary law. On that basis, it is the role of the Commission to analyse market functioning, in order to detect any unjustified obstacles that would hamper companies in making their own decisions regarding their business organisation in the Internal Market. The misuse of the supervisory powers to block cross-border mergers has been identified by Ministers of Finance as a possible obstacle to cross-border mergers and acquisitions. The Commission has already taken steps to improve and clarify the current provisions in the relevant directive, to avoid such situations. At the same time, there may be other factors explaining the lack of cross-border mergers in the financial services sector, when assessed against the domestic consolidation3 process. This paper tries to draw a first list of potential obstacles to cross-border mergers, i. e. obstacles that would make a cross-border merger less attractive, more expensive or more complex than a domestic merger. It covers the whole financial sector, trying to distinguish between market segments when relevant. Obstacles to consolidation in general (i. e. bstacles that impede domestic consolidation as well) are not covered. Obstacles to forms of integration other than cross-border M&As (such as direct cross-border provision of services) are also out of the scope of this paper, even though some obstacles might be relevant for different channels of integration. This list is aimed at providing all possible explaining factors, in order to serve at a later stage as a base for discussion on which of those obstacl es should, and could, be removed in order to achieve the objective of improving the functioning of the Internal Market for financial services. It is not a policy paper, but a first analysis of the explanations behind the facts discussed at the Scheveningen informal Ecofin Council. 1 Cross-border consolidation means in this paper consolidation involving entities located in different EU Member States. 2 The full study will be published in the â€Å"Financial Integration Monitor – 2005†, due in May 2005. 3 Domestic consolidation is to be understood as consolidation occurring within a single EU Member State. DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 2 In its present form, the paper does not distinguish between those obstacles that are key to explain lagging cross-border consolidation, and those of a more anecdotic nature. In addition, some obstacles mentioned here might be not relevant any more, but they may have influenced the situation of the past few years and could therefore provide part of the explanation for low cross-border consolidation up to now. However, we tried to mention the ongoing developments related to each obstacle identified. Introduction To Cross Border Listing The last two decades has witnessed acceleration in financial globalization represented by an increase in cross-country foreign assets. This has been the consequence of the international liberalization of capital flows as well as of the technological progress. These two phenomenons have lowered the barriers among individual national capital markets; however, geography has not become irrelevant. Obstacles to international capital flows (mainly the legal restrictions and costs associated with trading and acquiring information on firms listed abroad), i. e. the segmentation of markets, still exist. These barriers are creating incentives for corporate managers to adopt financial policies such as international cross-listing. For example, the US exchanges over the last few decades have attracted a sizeable share of the cross listed firms. Reasons for Cross border Quotation Cross border listings can help the company raise more capital by targeting new shareholders. However not all cross border listing are accompanied by share placements as this may affect liquidity and share price. Publicly-listed foreign corporations would therefore undertake to list on overseas exchanges for a variety of reasons: 1. To boost its status as a truly global player. 2. To raise Capital through debt or equity. 3. To increase trading volume. 4. To improve shareholder relations. 5. To enhance its visibility among overseas investors and consumers. 6. To tap into retail and institutional funds and benefit from changing global attitudes toward equity investing Challenges and recommendations of cross border listing There are challenges that happen to exist when considering cross-border listing for a company or country in general. First of all, potential investors located in the secondary market might be reticent, unwilling to trust and invest in a foreign firm on the market. In such a way, the company might lose prestige rather than gain more of it whilst entering a foreign xchange market. Secondly, barriers exist between countries; the real challenge might be the attitude regarding foreign firms entering a local market; this encompasses shareholder attitudes from an internal point of view of a company, as the latter might not be willing to go abroad in certain cases. Furthermore, political attitude of the secondary market’s country plays a great role in the presence of barriers. Restrictive political attitudes might give ri se to more barriers than usual to those wishing to enter the exchange market. This might also be the case the other way round, more precisely, regarding political stability; meaning that political instability in a country results in the market to be more risky and potentially unprofitable for the external firm. Another challenge is the element of uncertainty concerning policy factors such as taxation, accounting and financial standards and mechanisms but also the country’s economic and financial policies that might change, for example in the case of a change in political regiment. Such a change, if radical in some cases can become very challenging in terms of adaptation for the firm. . Methodology The paper tries to distinguish between three generic categories of obstacles: (i) Execution risks: those are obstacles that may pose a threat to a successful outcome of a bid, or may well result in the blocking of a deal. This category also covers obstacles because of which the expected result of a bid may not be what could be expected, even though the bid itself was successful. Obstacles in this category may not materialize and therefore may not have a direct cost, but their simple perception may deter potential bidders, or target entities and their shareholders, from initiating a merger process. (ii) One-off costs: those are specific costs that are caused by the execution of the cross-border deal, and would not exist in a domestic merger or acquisition deal. (iii)On-going costs: those are additional costs in the management of the merged entities, once the merger is achieved, which would not exist in the management of merged entities within the same domestic arket. Those costs can be direct (additional costs to manage the entities merged cross-border compared with the entities merged domestically) or indirect (lower synergies within the entities merged cross-border that within the entities merged domestically). The identified obstacles are also grouped according to their nature: legal barriers, tax barriers, implications of supervisory rules and requirement s, economic barriers and attitudinal barriers. A summary table is enclosed at the end. * * * C. Identified obstacles to cross-border mergers I. Legal Barriers a) Execution risks 1. Cross-border takeover bids are complex transactions that may involve the handling of a significant number of legal entities, listed or not, and which are often governed by local rules (company law, market regulations, self regulations). Not only a foreign bidder might be disadvantaged or impeded by a potential lack of information, but also some legal incompatibilities might appear in the merger process resulting in a deadlock, even though the bid would be â€Å"friendly†. This legal uncertainty may constitute a significant execution risk and act as a barrier to cross-border consolidation. The new Takeover Bids Directive (2004/25/EC), adopted on 21 April 2004, lays down common rules in order to ensure greater legal certainty for cross-border takeovers. The Directive has to be transposed by May 2006. DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 3 2. The financial sectors of some Member States include institutions with complex legal setup resulting in opaque decision making processes. An institution based in another Member State might only have a partial understanding of all the parameters at stake, some of them not formalized. Such a situation might constitute a significant failure risk, as a potential bidder might not have a clear understanding of who might approve or reject a merger or acquisition proposal. 3. In some cases, legal structures are not only complex but also prevent, de jure or de facto, some institutions to be taken over or even merge (in the context of a friendly bid) with institutions of a different type. Such restrictions are not specific to cross-border mergers, but could provide part of the explanation of the low level of cross-border M&As, since consolidation is possible within a group of similar institutions (at a domestic level) whereas it is not possible with other types of institutions (which makes any cross-border merger almost impossible). 4. In some Member States, the privatization of financial institutions has sometimes been accompanied by specific legal measures aimed at capping the total participation of non-resident shareholders in those companies or imposing prior agreement from the Administration (i. . â€Å"golden shares†). Some of such measures were clearly discriminatory against foreign institutions, when it came to consolidation. The European Court of Justice has indicated that such measures were not justified by general-interest reasons linked to strategic requirements and the need to ensure continuity in public services when applied to commercial entitie s operating in the traditional financial sector. See for instance cases C-367/98 (judgement of 4 June 2002) or C-463/00 (judgement of 13 May 2003). 5. In some Member States, company law allows the company boards to set up defence mechanisms, such as double voting rights and poison pills, to prevent any hostile bids. Such asymmetries in company law might distort the level playing field within the EU, and protect national markets, sometimes to the benefits of participants in these markets. The initial Commission’s proposal for the new Takeover Bids Directive (2004/25/EC), adopted on 21 April 2004, included the approval of shareholders before activating defence mechanisms to counter a takeover bid. This provision has been repelled by the European Parliament and the Council. In the adopted text, Member States may decide to forbid such arrangements (i. e. opt in). 6. Even if an acquisition is successful, there may exist impediments to effective control, i. e. there may be a risk that the acquiring company does not acquire proportionate influence in the decision making process within the acquired company – while being exposed to disproportionate financial risks. This can be explained notably by the existence of special voting rights, ineffective proxy voting or use of the Administrative office by a foreign acquirer. Also barriers (or restrictions) to sell shares could hamper the process. As mentioned in  §5, the Commission’s initial proposal for a new Takeover Bids Directive tackled some of these issues, but some provisions were taken out of the final version during the co-decision procedure. Also, as part of the Corporate Governance Action Plan, the Commission opened a consultation on the exercise of Shareholders’ rights which was closed in December 2004. 7. Differences in national reporting schemes, notably as regards accounting systems, may result in difficulties to assess the financial situation of a potential target. From January 2005, listed EU companies will be required to publish their consolidated accounts using International Accounting Standards, as endorsed by the Commission. Member States have the option of extending the requirements of the IAS Regulation (EC 1606/2002) to unlisted companies and all banks and insurance companies and to the production of non-consolidated accounts. DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 4 b) One-off costs 8. The national laws of some countries might include restrictions on the type of offers that can be executed (i. e. ash only vs. exchange of shares). Even though such measures are not in themselves discriminatory to cross-border mergers, they might constitute a barrier to cross-border consolidation, given that the different features of such mergers (notably in terms of size) could call for a specific type of offer. c) Ongoing costs 9. Differences in employment legislation across t he EU may also create barriers for efficient and flexible (re)organisation. In particular, the procedures to move staff within a pan-European group remain very complex (furthermore in some cases, prudential rules impose constraints on the location of staff – cf. n insurance art. 3 of Directive 95/26/EC). Those differences may also result in higher legal costs to deal with the different legal systems, as well as complex processes and different timelines when trying to introduce changes on a cross-border basis. 10. The different accounting systems across the EU have also required companies to set up adapted IT, specific personnel and reporting systems. This limits the scope of possible cost synergies when two institutions merge across the border, where as such synergies do exist when two institutions merge within the same Member States. ? See  §7. 11. The consumer protection rules are very different from one Member State to another. This heterogeneity translates into the nece ssity of country-customised financial products compliant with those rules, and therefore also specific IT systems that handle those products and consumer relationship. For instance, this has been evidenced in the mortgage credit sector in the report recently published by the mortgage credit forum group set up by the Commission. Furthermore, those different rules are often based on the â€Å"general good† provisions and consequently potential abuses aimed at protecting the national markets are difficult to challenge in court. A significant example is the case C-442/02 (CaixaBank vs. France), where the European Court ruled in October 2004 that France could not ban interest bearing current accounts in that it constitutes an obstacle to the freedom of establishment. 12. Differences in national implementations of the Directive on data protection may also interfere with an optimal organisation of businesses within merged companies. Indeed, it can have a strong impact on IT systems and limit back-office rationalisation. 13. More generally, differences of approaches in private law, sometimes explained by historical or cultural factors, may impose a country-by-country approach for some products or services (especially in the insurance sector), with the same results as differences in consumer protection rules. Those differences include notably liability and bankruptcy rules, with the implied difficulties of enforcing cross-border collateral arrangements, as well as differences in legal rules for securities. ? The Commission is working with researchers and stakeholders to develop a Common Frame of Reference for contract law as a form of handbook identifying best solutions in European contract law and giving guidance on the different approaches used, with a view to providing common definitions, principles and model rules for use in lawmaking (see COM 2004 (651) final: â€Å"European Contract Law and the revision of the acquis: the way forward†). DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 5 II. Tax barriers a) Execution risks 14. As mentioned earlier, mergers and acquisitions are complex processes. Despite some harmonised rules, taxation issues are mainly dealt with in national rules, and are not always fully clear or exhaustive to ascertain the tax impact of a cross-border merger or acquisition. This uncertainty on tax arrangements sometimes requires seeking for special agreements or arrangements from the tax authorities on an ad hoc basis, whereas in the case of a domestic deal the process is much more deterministic. The Merger Directive (90/434/EEC) provides for the deferred taxation of capital gains arising from cross-border corporate restructuring carried out in the form of mergers, divisions, transfers of assets or exchanges of shares. Taxation of the capital gain is deferred until a later disposal of the assets. In October 2003, the Commission put forward a proposal to improve the Mergers Directive (90/434/EEC), which aims at clarifying the scope of the Directive as well as ensuring it applies to European Companies and European Co-operative Societies. Political agreement by the Council was reached on 7 December 2004. 15. The uncertainty on VAT regime applicable to financial products and services may put at risk the business model or envisaged synergies. The EU's VAT legislation in this area is badly in need of modernisation and because of its inadequacies, there is an increasing tendency to resort to litigation. The outcome can often be uncertain and as a result tax implications may place a question mark over otherwise sound business strategies. In recent years, the number of significant ECJ cases on VAT and financial services has increased steadily. Individual judgement may indeed clarify the law in particular circumstances but often at the cost of consequences which may not always be compatible with overall Community policy objectives. To take just one example, case C-8/03, Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA vs. Belgian State, the ECJ arrived at a judgement on the VAT treatment of open-ended investment companies (SICAVs) which has the potential to create tension in achieving the objective of equality of treatment and sustaining a level playing field for operators across the EU. In the absence of legislative measures, it is inevitable that the Court will play an increasing role with uncertain consequences. The Commission has attempted to address the provisions of the 6th VAT Directive (77/388/EEC) dealing with financial services but without much success. DG Taxud is currently looking at the distortive effect of these provisions and intends to proceed with a process of modernisation which will better ensure their compatibility with the objectives of the Internal Market and give business greater certainty about the tax implications of business decisions. ) One-off costs 16. The principal relief from the Merger Directive (90/434/EEC) is the deferral of tax on the capital gains on the assets transferred in a transaction covered by the Directive. However, in some cases where the Directive does not apply, special corporate structures have to be put in place to avoid such an exit tax on capital gains. This is for instance the case when permanent establishments are transferred from one Member State to another, by a holding company located in a third Member State. It can also occur when a subsidiary is converted into a branch. See comment of  §14. Also related to this issue is the judgement published in March 2004 (case C-9/02 – de Lasteyrie du Saillant) by the European court which ruled that taxation on unrealised capital gains of a natural person moving to another Member State constitutes an obstacle to the freedom of establishment. c) Ongoing costs 17. The issue of transfer pricing is a complex one for a group operating in several countries. As was evidenced in the Commission’s Communication â€Å"Towards an Internal Market without tax obstacles – A strategy for providing companies with a consolidated corporate tax base for their EU-wide DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 6 activities† (COM(2001) 582), a lack of common approach to allocate profits may rise to numerous problems on the fiscal treatment of intra-group transfer pricing, notably in the form of high compliance cost and potential double taxation. The Commission set up a â€Å"EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum† with Member States and business representatives, meeting on a regular basis. Bringing together all parties concerned to discuss the issues at stake it helps to reach a better common understanding and allows to identify possible non-legislative improvements to the practical problems in order to reduce compliance cost and prevent disputes. 18. A group operating across several Member States may wish to centralize support functions to increase operating efficiency. But in many cases the result will include creating a VAT penalty on the inter group supply of services (e. . legal services or other back technical operations) to another Member State. Given that in the financial services sector VAT is at best only partially recoverable, this represents significant additional costs that penalised cost synergies to expect from a crossborder merger when compared to a national merger. This tax penalty on cross-border shared ser vice operations is in addition to the general bias towards vertical integration which is widely perceived as a barrier to efficiency in the existing VAT provisions. See comment of  §15. 19. The lack of a homogeneous system of loss compensation across the EU affects the profit taxation at the group level. A group with several subsidiaries in the same Member State may offset profits in some of them by losses in others, whereas it will be more difficult, if possible at all, with a group with subsidiaries in several Member States. Therefore groups may prefer intra-domestic consolidation to enjoy wider diversification effects as they may benefit from direct horizontal loss compensation instead of deferred and incomplete vertical compensation between subsequent fiscal years. ? In the pending case C-446/03 (Marks & Spencer), the European Court Justice has been asked whether it is contradictory to the EC treaty to prevent a company to reduce its taxable profits by setting off losses incurred in other Member States, while it is allowed to do so with losses incurred in subsidiaries established in the State of the parent company. 20. Specific domestic tax breaks may favour specifi c, non-harmonized products or services, with the result that every institution has to provide this service or product if it wants to remain competitive. In such a situation, a merger between two entities located in that domestic market may yield synergies of scale, whereas it will be more difficult to exploit comparable synergies for a foreign institution taking over a domestic one, while not being entitled to the tax break in their home state. 21. In some cases, there may be discriminatory tax treatments for foreign products or services, i. e. products or services provided from a Member State different from the one where it is sold. Therefore, a cross-border group will be disadvantaged when trying to centralise the â€Å"industrial functions† (e. g. asset management functions) over a domestic group since the latter may keep all its value chain within the country and still benefit from synergies. In the area of asset management, the Commission has opened a number of infringement cases to examine the tax treatments of dividends on foreign investment funds that could potentially be discriminatory (infringements 2000/5059 vs. DE, 2002/4714 vs. AT, 2003/2009 vs. FR, 1994/476 vs. EL, 2003/2010 vs. IT). 22. The impact of taxation on dividends might influence the shareholders’ acceptance of a cross-border merger. Even though a seat transfer or a quotation in another stock market might be justified for economic reasons, groups of shareholders could be opposed to such an operation if it implies higher non-refundable withholding tax, and thus lower returns on their investments. See COM(2003) 810 for a presentation of the different tax schemes applying to dividends across the EU. In the cases C-315/02 (Lenz) and C-319/02 (Manninen), the European Court of Justice ruled in 2004 that taxation on DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 7 dividends should make no distinction between dividends originating from domestic companies and those originating from companies established in another Member State. In particular, tax credit mechanisms or reduced rates should apply equally to all dividends distributed by any company established in the EU. III. Implications of supervisory rules and requirements a) Execution risks 3. A cross-border merger may highlight gaps or imperfections in the regulatory framework which may make regulators feel uncertain how to proceed, leading to delay, the imposition of specific measures or a veto of the proposed merger. In the banking sector, for example, the emergence of large cross-border groups might raise local supervisors’ concerns regarding financial st ability (e. g. the ongoing discussions on deposit guarantee schemes). In other sectors such as exchanges which had traditionally operated within one national market, regulators may be unclear how to operate in a cross-border context. ? The Economic and Financial Council is examining the effects of increased integration of the financial sector on financial stability and crisis management. Several areas, among which deposit guarantee schemes, are being scrutinized to ensure that the regulatory and supervisory framework is adapted to cross-border consolidation. 24. The misuse of supervisory powers, notably regarding those related to the approval of changes in the shareholding, have also been indicated as raising obstacles to cross-border consolidation. Although it was confirmed by the Commission that such powers should only be used on prudential grounds (Champalinaud case), the current legislation offers significant leeway for supervisors to veto cross-border consolidation. Following the mandate given by the Economic and Finance Council at their Informal Scheveningen meeting (10 and 11 September 2004), the Commission is considering the relevant provision of the Codified banking Directive and has put a discussion paper to the Banking Advisory Committee on 24 November 2004. A similar discussion took place at the Insurance Committee on 1 December 2004. 25. The complexity of the numerous supervisory approval processes in the case of a cross-border merger can also pose a risk to the outcome of the transaction as some delays must be respected and adds to the overall uncertainty. In particular, in the case of a merger between two parent companies with subsidiaries in different countries, ‘indirect change of control’ regulations may require that all the national supervisors of all the subsidiaries must approve the merger. b) One-off costs c) Ongoing costs 26. Despite a common regulatory framework, there might be significant divergences in supervisory practices at the level of institutions. Such divergences might be explained by optionality in the harmonised rules, including provisions taken at national level that exceed the harmonised provisions (‘superequivalent’ measures), or lack of coherence in enforcement of common rules. The consequence is a limit on homogeneous approaches, and therefore synergies, of risk control and risk management within a cross-border group. The Lamfalussy approach has been extended to the areas of banking and insurance, which i. . provides for EU supervisory committees in charge of achieving greater convergence in supervisory practices. The new Capital Requirements Directive provides an enhanced framework for supervisory cooperation, as will the upcoming Solvency II Directive. 27. The multiple reporting requirements, in some cases combined with a lack of transparency in terms of requirements and d efinitions, may also impose a significant and costly administrative burden on DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 8 cross-border groups. Indeed, a cross-border merger might cause heavier reporting requirements compared to those imposed on the two entities that are being merged. Instead of creating cost synergies as in a domestic merger, a cross-border might even create additional costs. The Commission set up a forum group which set out several recommendations in a report published in June 2003. To follow-up on these recommendations and within the overall so-called â€Å"Pillar II† work, the Committee of European Banking Supervisors is investigating the technical solutions to enable a streamlined reporting regime in the field of banking. IV. Economic barriers a) Execution risks b) One-off costs 28. The fragmentation of the European equity markets may impose additional transaction cost on a cross-border merger. For instance, the exchange of share mechanism can be complex, and more expensive, when the two entities involved are listed on different stock exchanges. The additional costs might also influence the bidder on the type of deals (i. e. cash vs. exchange of shares). c) Ongoing costs 29. Independently of the legal frameworks or tax incentives (see  §13 and 20), some differences in product mix, are explained by habits, preferences or even history. This is especially true for the most common products, such as payment instruments. As a result, the potential for product rationalization resulting from a cross-border merger is more limited than for a domestic merger. 30. In cross-border groups, there are also more non-overlapping fixed costs, which cannot be spread over several countries. Indeed, even without legal, tax or prudential barriers, there would remain differences between Member States that would require a differentiated approach to be adapted to the local environment. This limits potential synergies. The most obvious example is language, and the implications in terms of customer services for instance. 31. The low level of cross-border consolidation might also be explained by a lack of potential targets, due to the lack of middle-size institutions. National consolidation of middle-size institutions resulted in the emergence of rather large and complex institutions. The few examples of cross-border mergers seem to indicate that it implies more often a big institution taking over a middle-size one. Taking over a big institution may perceived as too complex (and risky), whereas the takeover of a small one might not be sufficient to offset the induced costs. 32. The absence of critical size in some market segments (e. g. investment banking) may incite institutions to enter into a niche strategy, where the advantages of cross-border mergers that create large players is less evident from an economic point of view. Indeed, not only it would be difficult to find synergies between two niche players, but also absolute size would not necessarily be an advantage if an institution wants to maintain its competitive advantage in its niche market. 3. Domestic mergers can contribute to increase market power, and therefore increased profitability even without any cost synergies (i. e. raising the income while maintaining the costs at a constant level). Since most of the retail markets are still organized on a national basis, cross-border mergers yield very few, if any, increased market power. 34. Differences in economic cycles across the different Member States may also play a role, in that the economic environment has a strong effect on bank profitability. Different strategies might be DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 9 needed for different macroeconomic conditions, and therefore it might limit the scope of a potential pan-European strategy implemented at the level of a cross-border group, whereas domestic groups face a single economic environment. However, this could also be a driver for consolidation, as those differences in cycles can help to smooth the profitability by reducing risk and earnings volatility through geographical diversification. V. Attitudinal barriers ) Execution risks 35. Openly or not, some Member States may promote a â€Å"national industrial policy†, aiming at the creation of â€Å"national champions†. Among possible justifications, some may argue that such a policy may ensure adequate financing of the national economy. Political considerations may also play a role with recently privatised companies or institutions that have received public money. This political interference may block a cross-border merger, even though such this transaction is compatible with the existing rules. Such interference might not require formal powers or rules to materialize. Indeed, as evidenced in the previous sections, there are many obstacles to overcome to carry through a cross-border merger that it is realistic to think that no cross-border merger can be achieved if there is a strong political opposition. In addition, such a policy may lead to tolerance of high levels of concentration at a domestic level, allowing (or even encouraging) domestic consolidation over cross-border consolidation and making it even more difficult to accept a foreign takeover of a national institution with a significant market share. 36. Employees’ reluctance within the target company of a cross-border deal might also pose a threat to the successful outcome of the transaction. Indeed, employees may not accept to be managed from another country. A public opposition to the project may influence analysts’ assessment. Also employees may play a role if they have a participation in the company. 37. Cross-border mergers may imply a change in the place of quotation, or even in the currency of quotation. Shareholders’ acceptance of quotation changes may be limited, even all risks or tax impacts are eliminated. Indeed, the place of quotation may have an important symbolic value. 8. Given that cross-border mergers are complex and need to overcome a number of execution risks (as evidenced in this document), there might be an impact on shareholders’ and analysts’ apprehension of failure risk when it comes to cross-border mergers. b) One-off costs c) Ongoing costs 39. Interference with political considerations may also have consequences in the structures put in place after a cross-border merger. Such political concessions (e. g. guarantees of level of employment, no headquarter moves, protection of the local brand) may help in getting the merger through the ifferent obstacles, but constrain the resulting cross-border entity in realising the full potential of the merger as options may be severely limited. 40. Consumers may mistrust foreign entities, meaning that all parameters being equal, a local incumbent may have an advantage over a competitor identified as foreign. This explains why foreign institutions often prefer to keep a local brand, even though it might impede synergies across certain functions (e. g. marketing) or slow down the integration process (transition from one brand to another over a long period of time). DG Internal Market and Services – April 2005 IPM survey on obstacles to cross-border mergers and acquisitions 10 Summary I. Legal Barriers II. Tax barriers III. Implications of supervisory rules and requirements IV. Economic barriers V. Attitudinal barriers a) Execution risks 1. Legal uncertainty 2. Opaque decision making processes 3. Legal structures 4. Limits or controls on foreign participations 5. Defence mechanisms 6. Impediments to effective control 7. Difficulties to assess the financial situation 14. Uncertainty on tax arrangements 15. Uncertainty on VAT regime 23. Concerns regarding financial stability 24. Misuse of supervisory powers 25. Supervisory approval processes 35. Political interference 36. Employees’ reluctance 37. Shareholders’ acceptance of quotation changes 38. Shareholders’ and analysts’ apprehension of failure risk b) One-off costs 8. Restriction on offers 16. Exit tax on capital gains 28. Fragmentation of the European capital markets c) Ongoing costs 9. Employment legislation 10. Accounting systems 11. Divergent consumer protection rules 12. Data protection 13. Differences in private law 17. Transfer pricing 18. Inter-group VAT 19. No homogeneous loss compensation 20. Specific domestic tax breaks 21. Discriminatory tax treatments 22. Taxation on dividends 26. Divergences in supervisory practices 27. Multiple reporting requirements 29. Different product mixes 30. Non-overlapping fixed costs 31. Lack of middle-size institutions 32. Absence of critical size 33. Market power 34. Differences in economic cycles 39. Political concessions 40. Consumer mistrust in foreign Entities Conclusion: Whether benefits outweigh costs depends on whether total trading volume increases subsequent to listing abroad (Mittoo 1992). Although financial markets are becoming more integrated globally, geography still has a role to play. More precisely, regulations, technological variances, market barriers and legislation vary in different regions. Barriers still exist and stock exchange markets are trying to continuously bring those down by creating strategic alliances. Cross-listing provides several advantages to firms; they are able to reduce the cost of their equity capital as they can reduce the risk to investors. The company’s firms become more liquid and there is also better flow of information on the exchange markets. In such a way, cross-border listing becomes advantageous both for investors as well as the company itself

History and Culture Essay

Too long the country has been deprived of its national pride and independence. By 1911-1912, the foreigners were everywhere. The best way was to use them as sponsors for our changes, and let them call me â€Å"a dictator [corrupt and †¦ brutal] surrounding himself as soon as’ he could with some of the most despicable Chinese agents of the old regime; favoured [†¦] by foreign financiers [in the lust for] money and power and the means of extravagance and debauchery. † This year, the things are really disastrous. China’s foreign debt reaches 900 million taels. The dynasty has gone bankrupt undertaking expensive reforms of the governmental administration, military and educational system. The new regime followed the West in the enchantment with democratic elements of constitution, representative assemblies, separation of governmental powers, and political parties. On my side, I was more interested to pacify gentry and to centralize state power having been dissolved after foreign intrusions and imperialistic affairs. For me as President, therefore, the prior task is to obtain the loan from the Four Group Powers in order to keep a strong and obedient military resource to establish the right type of government. My fame played to the benefit of the task. I do remember how Dr. Morrison, the then political adviser to the Chinese Government, was trading with Mr. Crisp, the head of the firm of C. B. Crisp & Co, about the loan to pay for our administration needs this year, in 1912. We needed it badly in order not to depend so greatly on the Four Power Group, not to speak about Russia and Japan with their greed in regard to concessions. Then, the last persuasion for the â€Å"hard nut† Crisp to lend us ? 10,000,000 was delivered by Morrison in the words about my dictatorial position being the â€Å"benefit† of China. I am afraid, though, that we will have to owe the Four Group Allies ? 500,000,000, at the rate of ? 100,000,000 a year, not to forget about Japan and Russia trying to cut the fattest pieces of our cake in terms of territory, commerce and politics. Now I shall speak about my plans for the future. I really want to establish a â€Å"no-squeeze policy. † I believe that the modern Chinese state and nation should be centralised. The first step to do is to preserve the capital, thus, the centre of administrative authority, in Peking for the whole period of my office of President. Second, as I have never been a republican, I think about establishing a sort of a military dictatorship. I was often called the â€Å"strong man,† â€Å"a reputed reactionary,† and â€Å"arbitrary, tyrannical and self-indulgent† by my contemporaries, and, no doubt, I will be labelled like this by later researchers. My political opponents from the Kuomintang went even further referencing to me as nothing more than â€Å"[t]he fat bewhiskered general†. But even they can not deny that it was I who could build a strong army and placating fighting camps. That is why, in my opinion, there is no need to let those wordy democrats to spend time, effort and money on elections and the qualifications of voters. Let me stay â€Å"the strong dispenser of law and order† identifying the course of state policy by myself. Consequently, I plan to get rid of those tries to establish â€Å"popular sovereignty in the form of political parties and representative assemblies. † I watch them reorganising Sun Yat-sen’s Revolutionary Alliance into the Guomindang, or Nationalist Party, to dominate National Assembly after its election in December, 1912. I know that the trifle show with democratic elections for National/provincial/county assemblies could jeopardise the institute of centralised power I am planning to introduce. Later on, I will force the National Assembly to elect me as president for a long term, better for five years. Then, I will kick the Guomindang from the parliament because they are likely to assume too much political weight. The best solution will be also to dissolve all the assemblies that resemble a boiling pot, so â€Å"risky and messy† they are. Finally, I will do my best to consolidate all the state power in the hands of one person, and that person would be I. The best form to centralise power is monarchy, how ever discredited it has become. How about the British or Japanese constitutional model of the Emperor co-existing with the parliament? Lately, the title of â€Å"Grand Constitutional Emperor† has occurred to my mind as the best definition of the political system I want to achieve. Reanimating Confucianism as a state religion, there would be a chance to resurrect also the ideology of monarchism and to get back to traditional values, seeing also to the better economic and education opportunities to provide the nation with wealth and development. Bibliography Bowman, John S. , ed. Columbia Chronologies of Asian History and Culture. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000. Cantlie, James, and C. Sheridan Jones. Sun Yat Sen and the Awakening of China. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1912. Croly, Herbert. Willard Straight. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1924. Eastman, Lloyd E. â€Å"The May Fourth Movement as a Historical Turning Point: Ecological Exhaustion, Militarization, and Other Causes of China’s Modern Crisis. † In Perspectives on Modern China: Four Anniversaries, edited by Thomas P. Bernstein et al. Armonk, NY: An East Gate Book, 1991, 123-138. Hyndman, H. M. The Awakening of Asia. New York: Boni and Liveright, 1919. Leang-Li, T’Ang. China in Revolt: How a Civilization Became a Nation. London: N. Douglas, 1927.

malcolm x essays

malcolm x essays Malcolm Xs experience without the white people as he was growing up brought him to what he believed of white people in his earlier years. He was able to overcome many traumatic experiences in order to keep on going with his beliefs. His message in his earlier years was somewhat harsh on the white population, but in his later years he was carrying a good message towards them. Malcolm X overcame many tough obstacles in his life to become one of Americas most influential black leader of his time. Malcolm X, or Malcolm Little as he was known in his childhood years, had a very traumatic childhood. Encarta states that since his father was a Baptist at a black church the Ku Klux Klan harassed his family often. This would have been very scary for a child of Malcolms age at the time. This is probably one of the reasons why he had a grudge against whites for the better part of his early years. After Malcolms family broke up he lived with many different foster homes until living with his sister in Boston (Schooling 2). As a kid it would be hard traveling all over the country living with different parents every few months. It takes a really emotionally strong person to put up with this type of change so often. His childhood was pretty rough and one of the ways he delt with it was to resort to Malcolm X got involved with all types of illegal activity with some really dangerous people. He was narcotics, gambling, and pimping. He picked up the name Detroit Red when he was involved with illegal activity in Detroit (Schooling 2). He had nowhere else to go or do but be involved with illegal businesses. He formed his own house robbing gang, and he was caught and sentenced to ten years in prison (Arnold and Gutierrez 15). This was in the long run probably the best thing that happened to Malcolms whole life. Going to prison not only stopped him from doing more ille...

Spence v. Washington (1974)

Spence v. Washington (1974) Should the government be able to prevent people from attaching symbols, words, or pictures to American flags in public? That was the question before the Supreme Court in Spence v. Washington, a case where a college student was prosecuted for publicly displaying an American flag to which he had attached large peace symbols. The Court found that Spence had a constitutional right to use the American flag to communicate his intended message, even if the government disagreed with him. Fast Facts: Spence v. Washington Case Argued: January 9, 1974Decision Issued:  June 25, 1974Petitioner: Harold Omond SpenceRespondent: State of WashingtonKey Question: Was a Washington State law criminalizing the display of a modified American flag in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments?Majority Decision: Justices Douglas, Stewart, Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, and PowellDissenting: Justices Burger, White, and RehnquistRuling: The right to modify the flag was an expression of freedom of speech, and as applied, the Washington State statute was in violation of the First Amendment.   Spence v. Washington: Background In Seattle, Washington, a college student named Spence hung an American flag outside the window of his private apartment - upside down and with peace symbols attached to both sides. He was protesting violent acts by the American government, for example in Cambodia and the fatal shootings of college students at Kent State University. He wanted to associate the flag more closely with peace than war: I felt there had been so much killing and that this was not what America stood for. I felt that the flag stood for America and I wanted people to know that I thought America stood for peace. Three police officers saw the flag, entered the apartment with Spence’s permission, seized the flag, and arrested him. Although Washington state had a law banning desecration of the American flag, Spence was charged under a law banning â€Å"improper use† of the American flag, denying people the right to: Place or cause to be placed any word, figure, mark, picture, design, drawing or advertisement of any nature upon any flag, standard, color, ensign or shield of the United States or of this state ... orExpose to public view any such flag, standard, color, ensign or shield upon which shall have been printed, painted or otherwise produced, or to which shall have been attached, appended, affixed or annexed any such word, figure, mark, picture, design, drawing or advertisement... Spence was convicted after the judge told the jury that merely displaying the flag with an attached peace symbol was sufficient grounds for conviction. He was fined $75 and sentenced to 10 days in jail (suspended). The Washington Court of Appeals reversed this, declaring that the law overbroad. The Washington Supreme Court reinstated the conviction and Spence appealed to the Supreme Court. Spence v. Washington: Decision In an unsigned, per curiam decision, the Supreme Court said the Washington law â€Å"impermissibly infringed a form of protected expression.† Several factors were cited: the flag was private property, it was displayed on private property, the display did not risk any breach of peace, and finally even the state admitted that Spence was â€Å"engaged in a form of communication.† As to whether the state has an interest in preserving the flag as â€Å"an unalloyed symbol of our country,† the decision states: Presumably, this interest might be seen as an effort to prevent the appropriation of a revered national symbol by an individual, interest group, or enterprise where there was a risk that association of the symbol with a particular product or viewpoint might be taken erroneously as evidence of governmental endorsement. Alternatively, it might be argued that the interest asserted by the state court is based on the uniquely universal character of the national flag as a symbol.For the great majority of us, the flag is a symbol of patriotism, of pride in the history of our country, and of the service, sacrifice, and valor of the millions of Americans who in peace and war have joined together to build and to defend a Nation in which self-government and personal liberty endure. It evidences both the unity and diversity which are America. For others, the flag carries in varying degrees a different message. â€Å"A person gets from a symbol the meaning he puts into it, and what is one manâ⠂¬â„¢s comfort and inspiration is another’s jest and scorn.† None of this mattered, though. Even accepting a state interest here, the law was still unconstitutional because Spence was using the flag to express ideas which viewers would be able to understand. Given the protected character of his expression and in light of the fact that no interest the State may have in preserving the physical integrity of a privately owned flag was significantly impaired on these facts, the conviction must be invalidated. There was no risk that people would think the government was endorsing Spence’s message and the flag carries so many different meanings to people that the state cannot proscribe the use of the flag to express certain political views. Spence v. Washington: Significance This decision avoided dealing with whether people have a right to display flags they have permanently altered to make a statement. Spence’s alteration was deliberately temporary, and the justices appear to have thought this relevant. However, at least a free speech right to at least temporarily â€Å"deface† the American flag was established. The Supreme Court’s decision in Spence v. Washington was not unanimous. Three justices - Burger, Rehnquist, and White - disagreed with the majority’s conclusion that individuals have a free speech right to alter, even temporarily, an American flag in order to communicate some message. They agreed that Spence was indeed engaged in communicating a message, but they disagreed that Spence should be allowed to alter the flag to do so. Writing a dissent joined by Justice White, Justice Rehnquist stated: The true nature of the State’s interest in this case is not only one of preserving â€Å"the physical integrity of the flag,† but also one of preserving the flag as â€Å"an important symbol of nationhood and unity.† ... It is the character, not the cloth, of the flag which the State seeks to protect. [...]The fact that the State has a valid interest in preserving the character of the flag does not mean, of course, that it can employ all conceivable means to enforce it. It certainly could not require all citizens to own the flag or compel citizens to salute one. ... It presumably cannot punish criticism of the flag, or the principles for which it stands, any more than it could punish criticism of this country’s policies or ideas. But the statute in this case demands no such allegiance.Its operation does not depend upon whether the flag is used for communicative or noncommunicative purposes; upon whether a particular message is deemed commercial or politica l; upon whether the use of the flag is respectful or contemptuous; or upon whether any particular segment of the State’s citizenry might applaud or oppose the intended message. It simply withdraws a unique national symbol from the roster of materials that may be used as a background for communications. [emphasis added] It should be noted that Rehnquist and Burger dissented from the Court’s decision in Smith v. Goguen for substantially the same reasons. In that case, a teenager was convicted for wearing a small American flag on the seat of his pants. Although White voted with the majority, in that case, he attached a concurring opinion where he stated that he would not â€Å"find it beyond congressional power, or that of state legislatures, to forbid attaching to or putting on the flag any words, symbols, or advertisements.† Just two months after the Smith case was argued, this one appeared before the court - though that case was decided first. As was true with the Smith v. Goguen case, the dissent here simply misses the point. Even if we accept Rehnquist’s assertion that the state has an interest in preserving the flag as â€Å"an important symbol of nationhood and unity,† this does not automatically entail that the state the authority to fulfill this interest by prohibiting people from treating a privately own flag as they see fit or by criminalizing certain uses of the flag to communicate political messages. There is a missing step here - or more likely several missing steps - which Rehnquist, White, Burger and other supporters of bans on flag â€Å"desecration† never manage to include in their arguments. It’s likely that Rehnquist recognized this. He acknowledges, after all, that there are limits to what the state may do in pursuit of this interest and cites several examples of extreme government behavior which would cross the line for him. But where, exactly, is that line and why does he draw it in the place he does? Upon what basis does he allow some things but not others? Rehnquist never says and, for this reason, the effectiveness of his dissent completely fails. One more important thing should be noted about Rehnquist’s dissent: he makes it explicit that criminalizing the certain uses of the flag to communicate messages must apply to respectful as well as contemptuous messages. Thus, the words â€Å"America is Great† would be just as prohibited as the words â€Å"America Sucks.† Rehnquist is at least consistent here, and that’s good - but how many supporters of bans on flag desecration would accept this particular consequence of their position? Rehnquist’s dissent suggests very strongly that if the government has the authority to criminalize burning an American flag, it can criminalize waving an American flag as well.

The context in which health and social care managers operate is as Outline

The context in which health and social care managers operate is as important as the decisions they make. Discuss this in relatio - Outline Example The case has provided supporting literature regarding social worker’s key concerns. Social worker Social workers are the people who have the obligation to assist people in adjusting to complications and problems in their lives like illness, child abuse, job hunt, mental illness, handicaps and any sort of anti-social behavior.  The main duty and responsibility of the social workers is to help people in their problems, provide counseling and linking their problem with the rules and policies of the state. The most important concern for the social worker is to provide a healthy and safe environment to the children as they are the future prospect of the state (Firestone, 2002). Baby P case There are a number of cases where social and health mangers have not delivered their duties properly and the victims of social crime had to suffer a lot. One of such cases is of â€Å"Baby P case†, which is also known as â€Å"Baby Peter case†. The case revolves around a 17 months old boy, who was killed due to the negligence of a social worker. The summary of this case is that baby Peter was abused and beaten to death by his step-father. Although, his stepfather and mother were arrested a number of times, in the mean time Peter was kept in care by a health care provider, but was later given back to the parents. Just a few days before Peter’s death, the social worker missed the injuries on his face and hands. The boy was found dead in his cot with his spine broken and severe bruises all over the body. Peter’s mother and his step father were jailed for several years. Moreover, the social worker and 3 mangers from Haringey council and a doctor were dismissed because of neglecting their due responsibility (Fresco, 2008). Contextual Factors The underlying factors that led to Peter’s death were: (1) The irresponsibility and negligence of his mother as she left Peter unattended while staying busy in pornography; (2) The social workers who came by to check on the baby, as they had left him with his mother with a belief that his mother seems very caring; this was neglect on their behalf; (3) The doctor who, due to his negligence, while examining Peter, was unable to find the broken ribs and spine. So, everyone on their behalf neglected the poor baby, all of which led to his death. Management theories Management basically is aligning people to achieve organizational goals. The management theories help establishing a road map and linking principles and concepts for a specific purpose. The main and recent theories are Systems Approach, Contingency theory, Chaos theory, and Team Building theory. (1)System approach: It emphasizes the fact that an organization is interrelated, that its actions and decisions taken in one organizational department will affect other departments as well. (2)Contingency theory: An approach that says that every organization is different from others; it faces different situations and requires different ways for managing the situation. (3): Chaos theory: It says that some situations are uncontrollable, at times the organization gets complex and it becomes hard to maintain stability. (4)Team Building theory: The approach emphasizes building teams, maintaining quality and reducing the level of hierarchy (Robbins & Coulter 2008, pp. 35-36). Interrelationship between Management theories and social worker’s practices In Baby Peter case, the social worker’s and doctor’s conduct had an effect on the respective social service provider and the