Econ Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Econ - Essay Example In this system, balance of payments is important for financial experts to analyze the currency’s supply and demand. The basic principle is that sales and purchases must be equal. When the supply of the currency exceeds the demand, then there is a balance of payments deficit. When it is the other way, then there is a balance of payments surplus (ibid. 759). In the heyday of government intervention adhering to strict communist principles, the value of the Chinese currency was determined in impractical values in comparison to its western counterparts. In 1978, the Chinese government put in place a dual track currency system where its currency can only be used locally and foreigners must deal through forex certificates. The rules set in currency exchange was also too stringent that there was seen a growth in the black market exchanges. For some time from the mid 90’s till 2005, the yuan was pegged to the value of USD in answer to the 1998 Asian financial crisis. Then in 200 3, the United States had the problem the Chinese exports became extremely competitive when the yuan and the dollar simultaneously dropped. As a consequence, EU and the g& called for a thorough exchange rate evaluation (Poleg n.p.). Bibliography Baumol, William J. and Alan S. Blinder.

Should college athletes be paid Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Should college athletes be paid - Essay Example For quite some time, there has been an extensive debate over payment of athletes, with each party in the debate presenting valid opinions that cannot be overlooked. It is essential to consider both the pros and cons of paying the athletes in order to come up with an objective decision. It is no secret that athletes earn their relative institutions high amounts of revenue. College athletes generate millions of dollars for their colleges and are required to be content with scholarships they enjoy (Griffin 19). This beats the principle of equity, and the athletes are, therefore, entitled to the revenue they generated. Athletes are exposed to risks that pertain to health, arising from the setting and nature of games and sports they take part in. These athletes, all around the young age of 22 or so, end their college careers with injured bodies, muscles that have repeatedly been shot up with cortisone injections, conditions such as prediabetes and prehypertension, and - in the case of the linemen - waistlines of 45 to 50 inches. The average career for a NFL player is only a few years, depending on the position. Early injuries in the transition from college to professional are a substantial reason, given that they have often compromised their bodies and health just to reach the NFL in the first place. This presents a case to pay college athletes to compensate them for the risks they face and also so that they can be able to access best medical care as well as have a balanced diet (Griffin 43). To be successful in any athletic competition, considerable investment of time and effort is paramount. This forces athletes to sacrifice their time in college and ensure that they adequately train in order to enhance their talent and give them a competitive edge. They do so while ensuring that they do not neglect their academic work, at times creating study time tables so as to be at par with their classmates, which creates an extra strenuous

Justice And Injustice In The State Of Nature Essay

Justice And Injustice In The State Of Nature Essay According to Hobbes, in the State of Nature there is no property and both justice and injustice are impossible, whereas for Locke both property and justice and injustice exist before the Social Contract. Explain how each philosopher reaches his conclusion. Then make an evaluation. Which philosopher has the better argument? Which philosopher has the better position? Hobbes claimed that there is no property, justice and injustice in the State of Nature. To formulate Hobbes argument, firstly, we have to grasp Hobbesian world of pre-society, the State of Nature. For Hobbes, the State of Nature is a state of war, in which everyone regards one another as ememies, opposing against each other. In such situation, there is no guarantee that one can keep his or her own possessions constantly; also, there is no justice and injustice because no law has been established. Hobbess arguments are as following. Firstly, Bobbes pointed out a biological observation that everyone naturally has nearly equal faculties of body and mind, as a fundamental fact in the State of Natue. Even though we may find some people who are seemed stronger or smarter than the others, Hobbes added that if we count all abilities that everyone have by nature, we will find that everyone has quite equal abilities on averge. Besides, some may argue that some outstanding people, such as top scientists, have more abilities than the vulgur. However, Hobbes said, they attain their achievements not because of their more abilities than the others but because of their hard working in a long time; thus we cannot take their stories as the disproof that people do not have equal abilities by nature. In addition, Hobbes indicated that people always regard themselves being better than the others and this belief also can be taken as the evidence of peoples equality in natural faculties. From equality of abilities, hope and diffidence arise at the same time. On the one hand, since everyone has equal abilities, people naturally think they have chance to gain what they desire, so they persuit what they want actively. However, when two people desire the same thing and they cannot share it together, they will regard each other as opponent and enemy. Once the opposite state continues, it will be gradually extended to wrose situation in which everyone wants to destroy one another for his or her own conservation or pleasure. Hobbes concluded that there are three causes of quarrels: competition for gaining thing, diffidence for own conservation, and glory for reputation. In short, Hobbes claimed that with equal faculties, everyone has even opportunities to get what they want. However, because living resources are limited, it results in avoidlessly intense competitions among mankind. With consciousness that the others may have chances to get things we desire, we are commonly in an uneasy mental state. Since there is no arranged order or reasonable distribution in the state of nature, the best way to ensure ones living is to make efforts to get things as many as one can. What one is capable of obtaining is ones, no matter with what kind of methods, and that is why Bobbes said that force and fraud are two crucial virtues in the State of Nature, not justice. In the State of Nature, there is neither yours and mine, nor right and wrong. People do not have their respective legal possessions as their property. Everyone has to fight constantly to overcome their diffidence and earn their living. There is no justice and injustice because there is no law in the State of Nature. Property, justice and injustice, if they do exist, they will exist in the agreements of the members of a civil society. When people find that they can live in a more stable and peaceful state by composing society, they decide to consult with each other, set some social contracts besed on their mutual profits and transfer their right to the ruler. In this way, people start a recognized game in society and everyone who joins the game has to obey the commom rules, i.e., the laws. Then, we will have property, justice, and injustice. Locke provided a different interpretation of the origin of property, justice and injustice from Hobbes. Locke pointed that there are property, justice and injustice in the State of Nature, which are all protected by the law of nature. The State of Nature is governed by the law of nature, which ensures that property, justice and injustice exist in the State of Nature. Compared with Hobbesian State of Nature, Lockeian State of Nature is much more comfortable. It is a state of freedom in which people can decide their actions and deal with their possessions. It is also a state of equalty in wich people have reciprocal power and can share the same advantage of nature and mutual love. We have freedom and equality by nature, and both are from God. We are made by God. Because God prefer his creature to last during his pleasure, God gives us the rights to preserve ourselves. Following Gods will, we also have to preserve the other people, it means, we cannot invade the others unless we are offended. The law of nature can ensure peoples basic right, such as properties, liberty and so on, and restraint people to use their freedom to harm the others, unless out of lawful punishment. In sum, in the State of Nature, property, justice and injustice are all ensured by the law of nature. We can work hard to get what we desire and claim that we possess those things as our property. We can also judge what is just or injust according for everyones own conservation. After examining the theories of Hobbes and Locke, I think they both have some weak points in their arguments. Hobbes premise based on too many psychological suppositions and Lockes was out of religious belief. Hobbes pointed out that mankind are equal in both physical and mental abilities and he said we can find the proof from the fact that people always regard themselves as the best one. I think that this was just his subjective viewpoint. As for Locke, if one does not believe in God, then, the whole argument will not be set up. I prefer Lockes position, because I think even though Hobbes argument is reasonable in some points about mankinds competition, in his argument, mankind has no reason and just like animals in the jungle. Lockes position, in which mankind is free and equal, is more consisting with reason and would be a more stable basis for modern society.

College Admissions Essay: Making the Connections :: College Admissions Essays

Making the Connections    The human race is immortal.   There is nothing that forces us to decay into old age and die, this is merely our body destroying itself once our purpose ( reproduction ) is complete.   Evolution not only did not bother to select against genes that kill off people past 40, but to some degree selected for such genes: the faster we go through generations, the faster we evolve.   If the genes that cause the changes we associate with old age were suppressed in some chemical way, we would be capable of eternal life.   Another way to immortality would involve the building of a biomechanical body of some sort, something right out of a Terminator movie, that would support the brain with only the chemicals necessary to survival ( if we could determine which those are ) and thus avoid the effect of aging genes.   All of this genetic, biochemical and hydraulic research would be based on knowledge gained in college.   One other thing: we've all heard of cults that claim they have disco vered immortality in some way, which supposedly have members who've lived 200 years.   If there's even a shred of truth in any of that, my guess is that these 200 year veterans have managed to order their minds in some way ( through some arcane style of thinking perhaps ) that erased the biological clock.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   All in all, immortality is only one small thing that humans might be capable of.   The strange abilities seen in autistic people, like incredible number crunching speed, really are not unique to autistic people.   These abilities are buried deep in everyone's subconscious, and it is just a matter of our minds letting us use them or not.   In fact, I think that along with those mathematical abilities are buried many more abilities.   I feel sure that among them is perfect coordination, and there might be some really strange psychic or time-related abilities as well.   The subconscious is driven by its creator, evolution.   It is only concerned with reproduction.   Evolution has erected a barrier between ourselves and our potential, and lets ability seep through to those who have desirable traits and are intended to reproduce. College Admissions Essay: Making the Connections :: College Admissions Essays Making the Connections    The human race is immortal.   There is nothing that forces us to decay into old age and die, this is merely our body destroying itself once our purpose ( reproduction ) is complete.   Evolution not only did not bother to select against genes that kill off people past 40, but to some degree selected for such genes: the faster we go through generations, the faster we evolve.   If the genes that cause the changes we associate with old age were suppressed in some chemical way, we would be capable of eternal life.   Another way to immortality would involve the building of a biomechanical body of some sort, something right out of a Terminator movie, that would support the brain with only the chemicals necessary to survival ( if we could determine which those are ) and thus avoid the effect of aging genes.   All of this genetic, biochemical and hydraulic research would be based on knowledge gained in college.   One other thing: we've all heard of cults that claim they have disco vered immortality in some way, which supposedly have members who've lived 200 years.   If there's even a shred of truth in any of that, my guess is that these 200 year veterans have managed to order their minds in some way ( through some arcane style of thinking perhaps ) that erased the biological clock.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   All in all, immortality is only one small thing that humans might be capable of.   The strange abilities seen in autistic people, like incredible number crunching speed, really are not unique to autistic people.   These abilities are buried deep in everyone's subconscious, and it is just a matter of our minds letting us use them or not.   In fact, I think that along with those mathematical abilities are buried many more abilities.   I feel sure that among them is perfect coordination, and there might be some really strange psychic or time-related abilities as well.   The subconscious is driven by its creator, evolution.   It is only concerned with reproduction.   Evolution has erected a barrier between ourselves and our potential, and lets ability seep through to those who have desirable traits and are intended to reproduce.

Gone with the Wind Essay

Gone with the Wind is a film based on Margaret Mitchell’s book with the same title. Tagged as one of the most memorable love stories in American history, Gone with the Wind is not only a story of love between Scarlett O’ Hara and Rhett Butler but is also a story of a woman’s struggle to keep her family alive through years of war. Set against the American Civil War, the film is mainly influenced by the events of that time. We get a glimpse of the social structures of the 1800’s and of the roles expected of women at that time. B. MEDIA The film, despite its historical background, is more of a dramatic manifestation rather than a documentary of the events during the American Civil War. Done in Technicolor, the film features theatrical music with a touch of country to go well with the Atlanta and Jonesboro settings. The music was mostly passively used in the background, segued to indicate change of scenes. However, there were some scenes when music was an integral part, enhancing the emotions and actions depicted in the film. Being a really old film, Gone with the Wind does not have the special effects that movies nowadays have. It is, however, effective in recreating the Civil War and making the viewers feel what it would have been like to be in that situation. Explosions and gunfire were used to reestablish the film’s setting. Shots were very conventional, using wide shots to establish a scene and close-ups to enhance emotional integrity. Gone with the Wind, featuring mostly Southern characters, includes a plethora of characters speaking with a Southern drawl. The language was mostly contemporary, with a few slang usages here and there. Hats off to the well-known actors such as Clark Gable (Rhett Butler), Vivien Leigh (Scarlett O’Hara), Leslie Howard (Ashley Wilkes), and Olivia de Havilland (Melanie Hamilton) for pulling off the characters originally designed by Margaret Mitchell. They were excellent actors and they gave life to characters recreated in this screenplay by Sidney Howard, though the story was flavorful enough that it can be portrayed by anyone with good acting skills. Featuring well-known actors, though, helped promote the film and possibly helped in raking in big money for the producer David O. Selznick. C. CONTENT The film offered abundant source of memorable scenes. In one of the earlier scenes, we see Mammy helping Scarlett get ready for the Wilkes’s barbeque party. Instead of a grumpy, complaining slave, Mammy seem to be in high spirits and just happy helping out the O’ Hara sisters. Though this highlights the sad social structure existent at the time of the movie, Mammy’s strong hold on Scarlett and her â€Å"don’t give me nonsense† approach to Scarlett’s usually hard-to-resist charms show how – despite the racial structure of the times – African-Americans play an integral role in the American household. However, in another scene, African-Americans were depicted in a negative way. When Melanie Hamilton was about to give birth, Prissy lets it slip that she is knowledgeable in midwifery. At a crucial point of the childbirth though, Prissy panics and admits, â€Å"Lawzy, we got to have a doctor. I don’t know nothin’ ‘bout birthin’ babies. † This is eye-catching in the sense that is ‘glorifies’ one of the stereotypes associated to African-Americans. The way Scarlett O’ Hara acts is also often a point of contention in the movie. Though shown as a strong woman who was able to carry her family through bad times, Scarlett was also shown to be clingy and desperate in most scenes. This was most apparent during the Wilkes’s party, when she choreographed the whole afternoon to catch Ashley’s attention. In all the scenes mentioned, the main issue revolved around racial, social, and cultural boundaries. The scenes depicted how far along societal rules were during the setting of the movie. Though often criticized for being too leaning on stereotypical portrayals, Gone with the Wind still is very much a picture of the truth of that existed back then. D. BIAS Victor Fleming, the credited director of Gone with the Wind, was mostly an action film director and had his first hand at romantic drama with the film in discussion. One cannot say, though, that whatever biases the film had been his â€Å"fault†. Gone with the Wind is mostly producer-driven and Fleming may only have marginal influence on the film’s outcome. And since the film was highly-based on the novel, the â€Å"biases† can be attributed to what Margaret Mitchell wrote. (Myrick 126) E. EFFECTIVENESS / HISTORICAL CONTEXT Though very different from films that most of us are used to nowadays, Gone with the Wind was very effective in evoking the emotions it aimed for. The combination of the restructuring of the Civil War and the powerful acting accounts for the film’s effectiveness. The combination of both – plus its basis on a historical fact – also points to why the film was very profitable. Every American knows of the horrors that the Civil War brought us and the film’s effective depiction of this point in history made everyone love the film more. All in all, the film – with its combination of a moving plot, powerful cast, and good filming – was worth a watch. Though mostly dramatic than historical, anyone who wants to relive the Civil War can give this movie a shot. WORKS CITED Myrick, Susan. White Columns in Hollywood: Reports from the GWTW Sets. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1982.

Abortion Persuasive Essay

Steve Glansburg English 123-33 Professor Orszulak October 18th, 2010 â€Å"To abort or to not abort; That is the question† Abortion is one of the most debated topics in the United States today. Many people form their opinions on their already religious beliefs and morals. Right now in the United States, it is legal everywhere to perform an abortion. Abortion can be done at many different stages of the pregnancy and most people’s opinion on abortion differs with their thoughts of when during the pregnancy should it be ok to abort.I believe that abortion should always be legal because no one person has the right to tell a woman that she must have a child, even if it was a mistake. Accidents happen whether it be the condom tears, the birth control does not work, or even the rare cases where a woman gets pregnant without actually having sex. We are human beings, we are not perfect in anyway shape or form, we are bound to make mistakes and I don’t believe that this ki nd of mistake should automatically change your life without giving you an option if it does.I can see where people could get upset from someone performing an abortion when you can actually see fetus, but I don’t see where they could get upset when the egg is just fertilized or is just a collection of cells. One human being has over 50 trillion cells in their body and you shouldn’t get mad if a woman decides to kill about 100 of them (Human Body). That is my viewpoint; women should be allowed to get an abortion before a certain time in the pregnancy. I don’t view a collection of cells that is not any type of developed organism yet to be a living person.There are also other circumstances that I believe make abortion a valid choice for a woman. Rape is a horrific event that no woman chooses to have done to her and I don’t believe they should also have to be pregnant from it too. If I was a woman and I was raped and became pregnant, but was not allowed to hav e an abortion, I would be furious. â€Å"I would feel that I did not choose for this to happen to me, it was violently forced upon me and I think that should be enough punishment. I also would not want to have a child that has the mixture of DNA from myself and the man who raped me and scared me for life. Also when a woman is not fit to become pregnant I don’t believe that they should be forced into maintaining the pregnancy if they made a mistake. If a woman is too young, is not financially stable, or has a drug problem are all valid reasons to not stay pregnant. Becoming pregnant at a young age can honestly ruin your life and make it so you can never go back to the way things were and fulfill your dreams that you once had.Not being financially stable to support a child is also a big problem because every child deserves to have a safe and healthy childhood. Having a drug addiction really is a problem because addicts will not stop during that nine months that they’re pregnant and that can severely compromise the health and wellbeing of the growing fetus. Abortion is a very debated topic because of all the moral and ethnic ties that come with it. Everyone has different belief systems and family upbringings that make it so their viewpoints are their very own.All I can argue is that not everyone chooses to become pregnant and that is why I don’t believe people should not have the choice to not stay pregnant, because in the end the woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body. Work Cited â€Å"Human Body. † Www. newworldencyclopedia. org. Ed. Frank Kaufmann. New World Encyclopedia, 10 July 2009. Web. 26 Oct. 2010. .