7 Ways to Close Out the Year with a Bang

7 Ways to Close Out the Year with a Bang At this point, 2016 is old news. It’s practically Christmas, which is practically New Year’s. But in the middle of all of the celebrating (or rushing to get projects done before your office is a ghost town for the holidays), there are some small (but mighty effective) things you can do to wind the year down in style. 1. Give your network some loveIf you had a mentor or colleague who helped you get through the year, now’s the time to let that person know how thankful you are. Nothing fancy required- a heartfelt note or a small token of your thanks is all you need to bolster your professional relationship with that person. I’m a fan of baking cookies for colleagues and friends this time of year- it’s a thoughtful, homemade way to say, â€Å"I’m thinking of you at the end of a great year.† (Of course, it’s good to know if this person has any special dietary issues if you go that route†¦ you don’t want to hand someone a plate of delicious peanut butter cookies if they have a major peanut allergy.)2. Set up your network for next yearThink about people you’d like to connect with in the new year to move your career forward. If you already know them and want to get to know them better, now’s the time to reach out with a simple holiday message that includes your hope to talk more in the new year. It’s best to try to set up a concrete date for coffee, lunch, or after-work drinks in January.3.  Take care of things on your pending listOnce you’re back in the office at the beginning of January, you won’t feel like going through and cleaning up loose ends from the year before. So do it now! Go through your inbox. If you have lingering to-dos that aren’t especially time-sensitive, now’s the time to put some time aside and check them off so that they’re not still haunting you later. While you’re poking around your inbox, take stock of any mailing lists you’re on. Which ones do you really need? Keep those, and unsubscribe from the rest.4. Clean your deskJust like your email inbox and your to-do list, you probably don’t want to come back to a messy desk. I know when I rush out the door and come back to a cluttered desk, it adds stress points before my day has even begun. Do â€Å"January You† a favor, and take some time to clean off your desk. Your pens don’t all have to be pointing in the same direction with your stapler at a perfect 90 degree angle (unless you’re into that, in which case have at it), but definitely get rid of any papers you don’t need anymore and toss outdated Post-It reminders you wrote to yourself back in May. If possible, do this as early in possible in December so that you’re not time-crunched and trying to get out of the office at the end of the month.5. Brush up your resumeDid you know that January and February are the most popular months for job change s or promotions? If you think you might be in the market for a new or upgraded gig soon, now is a great time to look at your resume and add any new skills or achievements that you’ve acquired  since you last updated it.Even if you’re not planning on changing jobs, this is still a great exercise to do annually. Be prepared! You never know when an opportunity will present itself- and wouldn’t it be great to say, â€Å"Oh, here’s a copy of my up-to-the-minute resume!†6. Revise your online profilesThis is an extension of updating your resume. What’s the point in getting your it in order if everything online still reflects the slightly outdated you? Make sure your LinkedIn profile- and any other online sites where you use your professional brand- is up-to-date and ready to go for the new year.7. Get ready to improve yourselfYou’re already fabulous, but who among us couldn’t use a few positive tweaks? Identify one or two areas wher e you could use some improvement, and come up with a game plan for 2017. Sign up for classes that start in January, or figure out where in your schedule you can take an hour or two per week to work on that skill area. Thinking about that now (and getting the ball rolling on any logistics) will make it easier to get started in January, before winter inertia settles in.So even though it may seem like 2016 is running short, you still have plenty of time for these small investments that could pay big dividends in the new year.

French Trains Vocabulary - Prendre le Train En France

French Trains Vocabulary - Prendre le Train En France Taking the train is a fast, often comfortable and relatively cheap way to travel in France. Yes, there are strikes, but not all the time, and all in all, taking the train is quite reliable. I will be writing several lessons on this subject: tips to feel prepared when you travel by train, easy learn French in context story with English/French side by side translations  and even a useful questions and answers lessons. So make sure you subscribe to my newsletter to get informed of new releases. Un voyageur – a travelerLa gare – the station (watch out for the pronunciation – gAr, not gayr which is â€Å"la guerre: war)Un billet – a ticketUn guichet – a boothUne salle d’attente – waiting areaUn panneau d’information – information displayLe dà ©part – departureL’arrivà ©e - arrivalsLa seconde classe, la premià ¨re classe – 2nd  and 1st  classUn aller simple – one wayUn aller-retour – round tripUne place (assise) – a seatUne place duo – 2 seats next to each otherUn carrà © – 4 seats, separated in 2 rows facing each otherUne rà ©servation – bookingVoyager dans le sens du train – to be facing towards where the train is goingUn billet remboursable – refundable ticketUn billet à ©changeable – exchangeable ticketUn train direct – direct trainUne correspondance – transferUn changement – transferLe quai †“ the platformLe passage souterrain – the underground passLe rail, la voie – the track (rail is pronounced like rye in English)La voiture, le wagon (v sound) – the carLe bar – the snack carUn contrà ´leur – a controller Follow these links for more of my taking the train in France related articles: -  Master Train Announcements in French-  Lets Take the Train Together - Bilingual French English Story

Strategic analysis and directions for Google Essay

Strategic analysis and directions for Google - Essay Example Figure 1: Comparison between Tata and Toyota by volume manufactured). In some categories, such as heavy buses and heavy commercial vehicles, Tata Motors even produces more vehicles (see Appendix 1 for full data). Going by revenue, the automotive industry, which develops, designs, manufactures, markets and sells motor vehicles a significant economic sector of the world. The industry, though very capital intensive, yet is marked by fierce competition and demand elasticity being plagued by a host of recent political, economic and social macroeconomic developments such as: credit crisis, fuel crisis and technological changes necessitated due to global climatic change. Economic developments: The automotive industry suffered significantly during the previous ensuing years as part of global financial meltdown, which affected the American, European and Asian automobile manufacturers. Canada too felt the heat due to the Automotive Products Trade Agreement. Geopolitical developments: Substanti al increase in fuel prices triggered by geopolitical developments resulted weak car demand, which further weakened the automotive industry. Sports utility vehicles, pick-up trucks and other high gasoline consuming vehicles were under pressure due to fuel hike and their sales decreased substantially. Many American manufacturers such as Ford, GM and Chrysler were forced to roll out more fuel efficient vehicles. Technological changes required due to global climatic changes: Due to impact of global climatic changes and the resultant stringent emission norms increased investments in technology significantly. The tell-tale situation of the industry is marred by negative growth leading into the automotive industry crisis of 2008-2010. Table 2: Percentage change in global car manufacturing during 2007 to 2010. Year Production Change Source 22007 73,266,061 5.80% (OICA, 2007) 22008 70,520,493 -3.70% (OICA, 2008) 22009 60,986,985 -13.50% (OICA, 2010) Figure 2: Percentage change in global car production year 2007 - 2010 As a result of these macroeconomic developments, the industry is currently undergoing radical changes and is moving towards consolidation by means of mergers and acquisitions and strategic tie-ups and partnerships for joint production, and marketing and selling. Chances are that more weaker and unprofitable companies will further be taken over and acquired and in the end will leave only those strong enough to sustain the downturn. Under these circumstances, Tata Motors need to maintain economy of scale and need to invest more on R&D and innovation, and also need to explore new products and markets. All these have to be undertaken simultaneously under the constraints of the emerging geopolitical

Deregulation Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Deregulation - Research Paper Example A good example of deregulation is the airline and the telecommunications industries in most countries including Europe and United States. Deregulation often arise from economic agents who identify failures and problems in their regulatory framework, add pressure to the norms shaking the existing rules of game through institutionalized and legitimized logics change. As mentioned by Collier and European University Institute (1998, p. 3), two forces that have been key in driving pressure for change in industries that have embraced deregulation are the rising concern about negative impacts of economic regulation particularly on industries’ competitiveness, this has resulted in the drive for deregulation that focuses on the liberalization of the industrial sectors and privatization of some of the state-owned firms. Emphasis has particularly been on breaking monopoly powers and enhancing competition, while this has been critical, it has also been important for governments to identif y the environmental implications of deregulation in sectors like energy where free market forces and competition influences technology as well as fuel prices. The other factor that has been key in driving deregulation has been the command-and-control measures of environment and their effectiveness that have been highly scrutinized. Government intervention with policies and standard has been viewed as insufficient and too lax and this has driven the need for deregulation. Deregulation of the airline industry Airline market was one of the heavily regulated public utilities in the past few decades. Regulatory reform has been central in most countries’ economic policy trend since mid-1970s, airline deregulation rose from the failures of countries to arrive at multi-lateral settlement on pricing, traffic rights, and capacity mainly in Geneva in 1947, and in Chicago in 1944 that mirrored the protectionist policies and rules that hindered entrepreneurial and competition activities ( Winston 1263). Regulation of the mentioned aspects therefore became central in bilateral negotiations held by governments and airlines, these negotiations have seen dramatic changes whereby traffic rights are settled by states’ bilateral agreements, control of frequencies and capacity became subject to bilateral state agreements or to inter-airline agreements, tariffs setting came to be done by the International Airline Transport Association (the IATA). Airline industry in Europe is one of such cases in the economic policy reforms. Deregulation began as essential economic decisions concerning traffic rights (entry), capacities as well as pricing were ruled by either suppliers (representatives) or the governments. U.K and U.S signed the 1946 Bermuda agreement that opened for future agreements increasing freedom rights and ending the frequency and capacity controls (Collier and European University Institute 13). Bermuda agreement did not explicitly indicate that tariffs setting were to be done by IATA, in 1978, U.S. signed the act on domestic airline deregulation and this put pressure to the international airline regulatory system resulting in various bilateral negotia

The Perfect Pizzeria Essay Example for Free

The Perfect Pizzeria Essay Please answer the following questions applying OB concepts and theories as appropriate. While the case primarily focuses on motivational approaches, you find that other OB concepts that we have covered are applicable. 1. Consider the situation where the manager changed the time period required to receive free food and drink from six to twelve hours of work. Apply the appropriate motivational approaches (theories) to explain what happened. 2. For the situation in which the manager worked beside the employees for a time and then later returned to his ofï ¬ ce, which motivational and/or learning approaches (you may refer to previous chapters) can be applied to explain what happened? 3. Establish and justify a motivational program based on one or a combination of motivation theories to more effectively deal with the situation as it exists at the end of the case.

Transplants and Diabetes :: essays research papers

Three Toronto scientists have developed an organ transplant procedure that could, among its many benefits, reverse diabetes. The procedure was developed by Bernard Leibel, Julio Martin and Walter Zingg at the University of Toronto and the Hospital for Sick Children. The story of their work began in 1978, when they delved into research which had never before been tried. They wanted to determine if the success rate of organ transplants would increase if the recipient was injected with minute amounts of organ tissue prior to the transplant. The intention was to adapt the recipient to the transplanted tissue and thereby raise the threshold of rejection. In the case of the diabetes experiment, this meant injecting rats with pancreatic tissue before transplanting islets of Langerhans, small clusters of cells scattered throughout the pancreas which produce insulin, glucagon, and somatostatin. In their first experiment, outbred Wistar rats were injected with increasing amounts of minced pancreas from unrelated donor rats for one year while a control group was left untreated. Then both the treated and control groups received injections of approximately 500-800 islets of Langerhans from unrelated donors. Of the five treated animals, two became clinically and biochemically permanently normal. Six months later, Martin examined the cured rats and found intact, functioning islets secreting all of their hormones, including insulin. None of the controls were cured. Encouraged by their first results, Leibel, Martin, and Zingg decided to repeat the experiment with rats with much stronger immune barriers (higher levels of rejection). Seven rats out of nine were cured. "We set up a protocol and worked patiently with small numbers," says Leibel, "but the results are indisputable." In addition to reversing diabetes, there are two other benefits to the pre-treatment procedure, according to the scientists. The first is that the pancreas produces all the other hormones of a normal pancreas, not just insulin. The second benefit is that the transplant recipient doesn't have to take immunosuppressive drugs, which are so toxic for diabetics. At present, diabetics who receive a transplanted pancreas must take such

Espionage Act and the First Amendment Essay

The Espionage Act of 1917 is a US federal law which was passed after the First World War under the administration of President Woodrow Wilson. The law puts it a crime against the state to leak information to outsiders under the intention of creating hindrances to the operation of the US armed forces. This was passed for the fear that oppositions at the middle of the war shall constitute a direct peril to the security of American victory. This crime shall render a maximum of twenty years in prison plus the fine to those who will be suspected to attempt â€Å"insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces of the United States. † (US Espionage Act) However, Espionage Act was extended later on by the Sedition Act of 1918. This law made it illegal to speak anything against the government (US Code Collection). Part of this law forbids individuals from â€Å"willfully communicating† to any person, who in return is also held prohibited to receive certain information that the government deems to post threat to the country’s national security (Vladeck 5). The US Espionage and Sedition Acts were utilized in some prosecutions although these were considered unconstitutional and violations of human rights. Albeit oppositions and cancellation of some parts of this law, until the present time, major portions of the Espionage Act is still part of the current United States law. On the other hand, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids federal legislatures that shall hinder free exercise of religion, laws that shall violate freedom of speech, infringe freedom of the press, limit right to peaceful assembly and limit the rights of the people to address the government with regards to their grievances (Collins). First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights. In an instant look, the connection between the Espionage Act and the First Amendment, would seem to be the case that the first violates the latter. Espionage Act violates freedom of speech of the Americans that is well constituted in the First Amendment to the US Constitution. † Though in contrast to the supposed protective purpose of the First Amendment, its constitution was efficiently manipulated by the Supreme Court in such a way that restriction for freedom of speech is permitted extensively. The Supreme Court instead of being protective to the rights of speech freedom has rather made restrictions on it and suggested that any form of speech or writing that endangers the state shall be subjected to punishment. However, there are no limitations or standards that would uniformly base a judgment on whether a particular speech will instigate threats to the state. Thus, the privilege to consider something a threat is being left in the hands of lawmakers, making it more dangerous and hazardous to civilians that are vocal to their opinion and ideas. The continuity of the Espionage Act and Sedition Law was further translated through the Smith Act, which on the other end was still protected under the First Amendment. The Smith Act made any means or attempt of overthrowing the American government by force or violence punishable. Ideally, it sounded as a form of protectionism for the government. But in reality, this was mainly used as a weapon to contain Communism during this era. And despite its questionable standing regarding the constitutionality of the Act, the Supreme Court made it possible to put its â€Å"advocacy of action† under protection through the tenets of the First Amendment. Thus making it possible to censor any form of speech that shall incite the overthrow of government, and in turn punish anyone that shall render this act. Thus, the Espionage Act works relatively in relation with the First Amendment. Though, Espionage Act is suppressive in nature, such that it limits, if not prohibits freedom of speech; the First Amendment has always been a protective shield for the would-be-violations of the Espionage Act. The First Amendment plays as a legalizing and legitimizing mechanism for the policies that are under the Espionage Act. On the other hand, the First Amendment, though ideally must support and encourage the freedom rights of civilians, journalists and even activists, it doesn’t serve its purpose but rather serves as sugar-coat for the continuing suppression of freedom of speech for most of the people. Consequently, the First Amendment has not been of any help for the protection of journalists because it always reasons out on the basis of â€Å"national security measures† which are at most times vague definitions (Vladeck 16). Thus the First Amendment only regulates the inflow of information, and in the process renders journalists the incapacity to deliver â€Å"good-faith† investigations that are of great public concern for it may be taken as something that shall threaten national security and harm national interests. Therefore, there exists a direct relationship between the two. Though ideally, First Amendment must take a part that is contrasting to the Espionage Act such that it shall serve as checks and balance to minimize violations of freedom rights, contrastingly though, the First Amendment serves as protection for the legality of the Espionage Act.

Miller comments Essay

During ‘The Crucible’ the acts which unfold able some characters to empower themselves: most notably Abigail Williams, Mary Warren and even John Proctor. Some characters begin with little or no power, then abuse the situations to gain power, whereas others begin with power and lose it, sometimes justly and other times unjustly. This could be seen as a moral message for the audiences of the play, warning of power abuse which could lead to devastating consequences. In the introductory comments, Miller comments before the events begin to unfold how â€Å"†¦the children were anything but thankful for being permitted to walk straight† which shows before the witchcraft trials and accusations had begun, children were powerless under the authority of the male dominated society -children had no power to roam freely. One of the people that gained power in the play is Mary Warren, who is a servant and so is one of the lowest ranks of the Puritan society- much like the children of Salem. At first she does not have any power at all as she is taught that she has to follow orders from the Proctors, who she works for. This is seen when she â€Å"lept† with â€Å"fright† upon Proctors entrance. Yet, she manages to turn from a â€Å"mouse† to a â€Å"daughter of a prince† as she suddenly gains power from working in the court, trying possible witches. Her increasing power is also shown from her defiance of Proctor when she refuses his order of not going to â€Å"court again†, and responds that she â€Å"must† and â€Å"will be gone everyday†. It also shown through stage directions, when Mary is â€Å"terrified† of Proctor but quickly becomes â€Å"erect†, which highlights her ability to overcome her fear of Proctor because of her growing confidence and power. Mary even manages to intimidate Proctor in this part of the play. When threatened with the â€Å"whip† from Proctor, she manages to threaten him further by responding â€Å"I would have you speak civilly to me, from this out. † Mary, filled with this newly found power, is able to threaten Procter to stop beating her or she will not speak so highly of his family next time. By using the phrase â€Å"from this out† shows that Mary doesn’t usually expect that kind of treatment from the Proctor, yet now she is able to demand it because of the power gain. Again, further on in the play Mary is also able to â€Å"numb† Proctor when she overthrows his â€Å"grip† on her to tell the truth about the accusations, and instead turns on him. When pressured by Abigail and the other girls, once they start accusing Mary to save themselves, she is not able to stand her ground – which highlights her feebleness and weakness which was seen at the very start of the play. This is seen as she even admits she has â€Å"no power†. This links to her inferior position in the society and even within her social group, she is not popular, and respected. This is shown when Abigail tells Mary to â€Å"shut it† and Mercy Lewis starts â€Å"pointing† and â€Å"looking† at Mary as if she were to blame. However, the fact that Mary was able to then accuse Proctor of being â€Å"devil’s man†, who is a highly respected in the village, shows that she does have more power than she started with. But she is abusing her power, to save herself and because of her lack of power on her social circle. So, this once ‘innocent’ girl who thought they â€Å"must tell the truth† took advantage of the situation so she and her friends would not be â€Å"whipped†. Overall, Mary arguably, has the most progressive power of all the girls and possibly all of the characters in ‘The Crucible’, but that’s not to say she has the most power overall. Another character like Mary Warren who gains power throughout the play is Abigail Williams. Once shunned and scorned by the inhabitants of the village because of her â€Å"blackened name†, Abigail becomes a domineering power, and is treated like a â€Å"saint†. A mere accusation from Abigail or one of her girls is enough to convict even a well-respected inhabitant of Salem like Rebecca Nurse who does â€Å"great charities†. Even though in present day we would associate â€Å"saint† with good Samaritans, which would seem absurd to see Abigail called this in present day, she was seen in this way because in puritan society if you went against god, you went against the law. So Abigail’s act of bringing Salem’s attention to the presence of the devil, and then through the court eradicating it was seen as an act of greatness. Abigail starts off as a scared young girl which is seen through Millers stage directions, as she â€Å"quavers† when being questioned by Parris about Betty’s mysterious illness. However, soon she is able to assert her power of the girls by â€Å"smashing† Betty round the face and threatening all the girls not to tell anyone about the events of the previous night, or she will â€Å"come† to them at the â€Å"black of one terrible night†. This implies they could be her prey, and if they make a wrong move she could pounce on them, which again puts her in a domineering position. This characteristic allows her to control within the group which creates more tension because Abigail also seems to be possessive which is seen when she says â€Å"Now look you. All of you†. The repetition of â€Å"you† makes the phrase quite aggressive and short commanding sentences have a strong impact, and make Abigail seem hostile but ultimately powerful. Her empowerment is also documented as the inhabitants of Salem think the â€Å"sea parts like Israel† for Abigail, so her sins are overlooked, as people take her word to be an expression of â€Å"God’s will. † This allowed Abigail to control and manipulate even the most powerful men in Salem, which is seen when Abigail threatens that Danforth- a high court official. So, Abigail Williams, who was once powerless in general society, is a perfect example of someone who became empowered by deciding the fate of other people and, by controlling and threatening people. Although, Abigail did have a powerful status among her social group from the outset and throughout which is shown when she starts â€Å"pointing with fear† and accusing Mary of â€Å"hurting her†, and quickly all the girls chime in with her. The third character who is subtly empowered is John Proctor. Despite his prideful ways, John Proctor describes himself as a â€Å"sinner. † His conversation with Elizabeth in act two where he exclaims for Elizabeth to â€Å"judge him not† demonstrated his internal conflict and his own unwillingness to forgive himself for his act of lechery. There are moments when his anger and disgust towards himself burst forth, such as when he exclaims to Judge Danforth: â€Å"I hear the boot of Lucifer, I see his filthy face! And it is my face, and yours. † So, although it is not clear from the outset that John Proctor has been empowered, he has. He is able for the first time to â€Å"see some shred of goodness† in himself- his relief from his constant guilt- when he decides to deny his confession. In conclusion, all three characters were empowered through the play, which led to the unjust killing of numerous inhabitants of Salem through the false allegations of witchcraft. So, Miller uses this to show the audience the consequence of abuse of power. Abigail is the best example because she falls from her position of high power, and resorts to boarding a â€Å"ship†, in order to escape.

Ghazals, Short Lyrical Poems that Blend Arabic and American Cultures

Ghazals, Short Lyrical Poems that Blend Arabic and American Cultures Like  the pantoum, the ghazal arose in another language and has recently come to life in English despite the difficulties of technical translation. Ghazals originated in 8th century Arabic verse, came to the Indian subcontinent with Sufis in the 12th century, and flourished in the voices of the great Persian mystics, Rumi in the 13th century and Hafez in the 14th century. After Goethe became enamored of the form, ghazals became popular among 19th century German poets, as well as more recent generations like the Spanish poet and playwright Federico Garcà ­a Lorca. In the last 20 years, the ghazal has taken its place among the adopted poetic forms used by many contemporary poets writing in English. A ghazal is a short lyric poem composed of a series of about 5 to 15 couplets, each of which stands independently on its own as a poetic thought. The couplets are linked through a rhyme scheme established in both lines of the first couplet and continued in the 2nd line of each following pair of lines. (Some critics specify that this rhyme carried through the 2nd line of each couplet must actually, in strict ghazal form, be the same ending word.) The meter is not strictly determined, but the lines of the couplets must be of equal length. Themes usually are connected to love and longing, either romantic desire for a mortal beloved, or a spiritual longing for communion with a higher power. The closing signature couplet of a ghazal often includes the poet’s name or an allusion to it. Ghazals traditionally invoke universal themes like love, melancholy, desire and address metaphysical questions. Indian musicians like Ravi Shankar and Begum Akhtar made ghazals popular in the United States during the 1960s. Americans also discovered ghazals through the New Delhi poet Agha Shahid Ali, who blended Indo-Islamic traditions with American-style storytelling.

Free sample - The US Government Should Not be Funding Arts.. translation missing

The US Government Should Not be Funding Arts.. The US Government Should Not be Funding Arts.Introduction First, what does "funding" refer to? Funding can be either direct or indirect. The US government was funding arts in this country before 1965 but that it took in-direct forms, including land grants, tax exemptions to educational and cultural institutions such as museums, and tax advantages for private donations of art to the public. This paper delves more onto direct state funding of the arts. The US arts system has no single control but instead, has a variety of public subsidies composing of roughly 13% of the nation’s total investment in nonprofit arts groups. The National Endowment for the Arts-NEA is the largest single funder of the arts across America, but the majority of direct public funding still flows from a combination of other federal, state, regional and local agencies. NEA in 2009 had a budget of US$155 million.   Even before the creation of the NEA in 1965, the issue of government in funding of the arts had been a contested one. Some justifications for governme nt arts funding are found, but it is noted that in embracing these justifications inappropriate consequences may be occur. Thus, in this paper it is urged that we refrain from government funding of the arts because the effects of such funding, would be deleterious to the art world. Much government funding is aimed at what might be thought of as the preservation of culture. It supports museums and repertory companies and is intent on keeping our culture intact. Other objectives of government funding target community art centers, regional theaters, and school programs. And funding may also be directed to professional artists for the purpose of enabling them to produce new works of art.    Whereas funding of museums looks to the past of our culture, funding professional artists is futuristic.   The preservation of culture, of course, is involved with education, which falls under the jurisdiction of the state . More to that, though not clearly, art preservation keeps us aware of who we have been, which informs our practical decisions about who we shall become. Support for the production of modern day art can also be defended as educational but, bluntly, contemporary art is not our heritage yet; nor is it clear how much of it will be or how far it will stand time.   If the aesthetic value of contemporary art would be used to justify prospective arts funding, it also will have unfortunate consequence in that it only warrants the funding of certain kinds of art, the art of the beautiful, the sublime, and that expressive of psychically balancing qualities. If no further justification can be found, the ill consequence of this is that the state can only fund a certain typ e of art. Artists pursuing certain non aesthetic aims cannot be funded by the state. If the government places large investments behind one type of art, the evolution of the art world will undoubtedly be affect ed. Whole avenues of artistic development will appear less viable than the production of aesthetic art. And from the contemporary art world's point of view, this kind of arts funding might be regarded as having a regressive effect overall.    Another justification used by proponents of arts funding is that it may function as an economic stimulant, promoting prosperity by, for example, attracting tourists. As far as this funding can be pegged to the state of the economy, it would appear to be a legitimate course of action, since functioning of economy is related to the state responsibilities. It is often difficult to imagine the way in which grants to individual artists for new works as opposed to city art centers can spur economic growth. An economic growth argument identifies the value of arts funding not with aesthetic or artistic value, but as an economic instrument. But despite this, the argument seems acceptable, although it can only be mobilized under certain constraints. Where   arts funding is employed to stimulate tourism or some other form of economic activity in a given area, the state must be convinced that there is no alternative form of intervention of comparable cost would yield greater prosperity in that area. More to that, where national rather than local economy is at issue, the state must supply some rationale why it is undertaking to stimulate tourism in one geographical region rather than another.      Another justification put forward is connecting arts funding to   employment. If state funding is not forthcoming, then many artists will be unemployed. Unemployment is a genuine matter of concern to the state. Massive unemployment is one of the great tragedies of our society, and we must demand that the state do something about it. Artists do not constitute a group that is comparable to unemployed youth. Justice and equal opportunity do not seem to bear on the issue of artistic unemployment. For instance, I may not be able to support my family as an unemployed poet; but that does not mean that I can't do it in another way, say, as a cook or a copywriter. It does not fall under the state's responsibilities in regard to the unemployed extend to guaranteeing that everyone have the job he or she most desires. The case of artistic unemployment involves people not able to pursue the line of work they most like, while youth unemployment at large involves people excluded from the work force altogether. Fairness can be used to ground government arts support. If a given government subsidizes the building of sports arenas, then, in all fairness, arts production should also be supported. If the government facilitates the pursuits of sports fans, then it should, as a matter of treating people equally, also facilitate the pursuits of arts fans, perhaps by means of supporting the creation of new art. But what, in such a context, justifies the subsidizing of sports? If nothing does, then perhaps what is required is that neither sports nor the arts be subsidized. Of course, a subsidy for a sport might be defended on the grounds that it stimulates the economy of an area; but then arts funding can, in principle, be similarly defended. Again, it does seem correct to say that if a majority, call them sports fans, demand sports funding in the face of opposition by a minority, call them arts lovers, then fairness urges that the leisure activity of the latter group also be supported, though perhap s not to the same extent. The deeper question, however, is whether any leisure activity should be supported. The advancement of the leisure professions may just not be an area the state should enter at all.    One of the earliest arguments in favor of government support of the arts is that the arts perform a moral function.   If art can function as a means of improving morality, then the state is justified in supporting it. Some art enables us to see the world from a different perspective, thus not only promoting the acquisition of a formal requirement of morality, but also enabling us to understand situations of different classes, races, creeds, and genders. Art, then, can foster greater tolerance within society and thereby bolster the moral order. If we argue from these grounds then state funding on moralizing grounds will be justified ,but   then only to that art which will increase moral sympathies. This will require some serious   research into the moral importance of different kinds of art. Art that afford no moral uplift cannot be funded. This raises problems like those encountered in an earlier discussion of the aesthetics value. If the state is funding only certain kinds of art and it enters the art world, putting its resources behind only moralizing kinds of art, then there is a danger that the development of the art world will be skewed in a certain direction. This violates our understanding   that   art should be pluralist and   independent of considerations of social utility.    Public arts funding primarily benefits the already advantaged. An artist is a person engaged in one or more of any of a broad spectrum of activities   related to creating art, practicing the arts and/or demonstrating an art(Wikipedia). Artist should be able to use their rare skills to improve their well being.    There is also an argument that public funding is necessary to promote innovation and dialogue among diverse points of view, so that groups that want to use the fine arts to challenge the status quo and advocate their unpopular world views and lifestyles can have a forum. However, while the common good requires tolerating the expression of unpopular points of view, the fact that most people do not share them suggests that the common good may not be served by supporting their expression. Even if it is, the government has no more business providing subsidies for such purposes. Indeed, many unpopular world views and lifestyles are at odds with traditional theism, and subsidizing them while not subsidizing theism would give the former an unfair advantage. People who think the expression of an unpopular viewpoint desirable should be fund it themselves just as religious believers should support their churches and missionary activities. The argument that public funding is necessary because some people have great and rare gifts that, due to lack of a market, otherwise will be lost. That might be true but the common good of political society is limited. It is not the proper role of the U.S. government to pursue all human goods in every possible way, and therefore not its business to subsidize every gift that otherwise will be fruitless. Some argue that subsidizing what initially appeals only to a few are necessary to foster a wide variety of creative initiatives that will elevate popular taste and tomorrow serve the multitude. Whether the funded work elevates anyone’s taste is arguable, but even supposing it does, can this indirect contribution to the common good justify the subsidy? Moreover, while some creative efforts that initially appeal to few eventually serve the masses, most do not, and it is hardly possible to show that public funding of some portion of art work is necessary for future cultural development. There are other needs calling for public funding, and some, plainly more pressing than this- for example, better basic education for the very poor- will surely put it to fruitful uses. One cannot justify spending for a dim and uncertain result when there are many urgent and promising alternatives. A recent argument draws a distinction between to view points of culture, Culture provides the particular paintings, performances, and novels, designs, sports and thrillers that we value and take delight in; but it also provides the structural frame that makes aesthetic values of that sort possible and makes them values for us. This structural frame includes a wealth of associations, references, images, and contrasts, which, like language, supply us with the tools with which we forge and map our common life. It insists that it is better for people to have a complex and multifarious cultural framework and that we owe future generations at least as rich a cultural framework as the one we inherited. Both these values can be achieved by promoting the creation of innovative art. Government support in this area is necessary because it "helps protect the fragile structure of our culture. This argument to endorse indirect rather than direct arts support by the government. But he does countena nce situations in which government support could be direct. At least two problems, however, beset this approach. First, there is the assumption that the structure of culture is fragile. When we look at the structure of culture, we note that it comprises many ingredients beside art-social dances, children's games, fashion, sports, religion, indeed the whole gamut of our symbolizing activities. These images become part and parcel of our ways of thinking; they are the very weave of our common culture. But it seems dubious to consider them to be fit beneficiaries of public funding. Yet if art deserves public funding because of its contribution to our cultural framework, so does anything else that similarly contributes, including, potentially, every sort of symbolizing activity, and notably some outlandish ones: hoopla-hoops, comic books, Billy Graham, the Watergate break-in, and so on. Government funding of anything involves government control. Proponents of arts funding are unaware of this peril when they praise the role of the national endowments as an seal of approval on artists and arts groups. This could lead to politicization of arts. Another claim used to justify public funding of arts is equal arts participation.   Participation in arts can not only be attributed to state funding and subsidy but may also be attributed to two other possible factors, that is; Groups that are inclined to participate even without state funding especially those with high income and highly educated may be attending in higher numbers; or, groups that formerly attended in lower rates for example, low income and education and certain ethnic groups may also be participating more given the rise in public support. Accordingly, If state art support truly makes the arts more available and accessible, then   it would be expected that an even more evenly distributed scenario of participation in states that provide more funding would be witnessed. Unequal participation in arts appears on several levels; in education, income, race, and geographic location. People will always participate in the arts at unequal levels, and statistical evidence confirms that participation in arts differs by various populace groups. Although income alone may not accurately predict participation at the individual level, a more complete picture is seen when economic   theory of choice is combined with other social and individual background characteristics that help determine preferences such as education level, racial alignment, income, and location. Therefore, participation inequalities occur not only because of variations of individual tastes, but also because of other social and cultural influences on the choice and ability to participate in arts.   The cultural equity argument for government support, depends on the problem of unequal access. The depends on the fact that factors beyond individuals’ immediate control prevent them from taking part in opportunities availed by participation in arts. Equal access can be categorized into three concepts: equality of opportunity, rights, opportunity, and of participation. Use of state funding to correct for unequal access is a form of redistribution. Redistribution through arts funding is skewed, since it favors those to whom art and the aesthetic are more important over those to whom it is less important. So, the best form of redistribution of state resources would be direct transfers to the less fortunate. Proponents of state funding will also argue that by funding arts the state is safeguarding the welfare of the citizens. But welfare, as it applies to as a state role, refers to assistance to individuals in need of the basic commodities that comprise a living. Is it practical to suppose that arts funding provides some such a commodity?   An analogy would be to say that someone needs Y is to say that they lack it, they will suffer injury, sickness, madness, hunger, or avoidable death. Does the production of contemporary artworks assist individuals in needful situations such as these? The answer is no. Some proponents of public funding will attempt to connect state arts support to the state's welfare function by   introducing a concept of aesthetic welfare. Aesthetic welfare is defined as all the aesthetic levels of the experience of members of the society at a given time. It is then suggested that there is a prima facie government duty to preserve the aesthetic wealth of society wh ere that wealth-pictures, plays, and so forth-is what gives rise to aesthetic welfare. It is not certain, however, that this particular notion of aesthetic welfare helps the case for prospective arts funding since it may be that, if there were such a prima facie duty, retrospective arts funding might suffice to discharge it. Also, one must question whether the connection between "aesthetic welfare" and the concept of welfare relevant to government activity is really unequivocal. First, "aesthetic welfare" doesn't correlate with de-finable needs, especially basic needs; nor does being below the poverty line imply being aesthetically disadvantaged. And clearly promoting individuals' aesthetic welfare will not raise them over the poverty line. More-over, the state's welfare responsibility under this conception of aesthetic welfare doesn't seem to be directly connected to individuals but is a matter of ensuring that there will be a large number of aesthetic objects around so that people can have aesthetic experiences if they want them. The state is to ensure the permanent possibility of high levels of what is called aesthetic welfare but might better be called aesthetic well-being. This well-being is to be secured for society at large, construed additively, whereas the state's welfare responsibilities are discharged toward particular per-sons, viz., anyone in need. Thus the notion of aesthetic welfare" appears not to refer to welfare of the kind that defines the state's proper domain of activity; it is merely a homonymous term that, though sounding like the concept employed in the discussion of the state's welfare responsibilities, is actually quite separate. Lastly, the idea that art will disappear if the government does not support it, and if the state does not fund new art, no one else will. Of course, this is a false claim, and a dubious one at that. The arts flourished in democratic societies before the coming of direct public funding; there is no reason to suppose that they will disappear without the direct government funding of new arts. Where people are interested in art, there will still be an audience to support new work. Were there no audience whatsoever, it would be difficult to determine on what basis the government would justify funding new art. SUMMARY In conclusion, there do appear to be some theoretical justifications for possible government funding of art. The two important   justifications seem to be those concerning the aesthetic environment and the moralizing effects of the arts.   For they endorse the funding of only certain types of art. Government support for only certain types of art may indeed disturb the structure of artistic production and perhaps destroy the art world as we know it.

InTERNATIONAL STUDIES IN BUSINESS Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

InTERNATIONAL STUDIES IN BUSINESS - Assignment Example Conventional theory argues that liberation in trade should benefit the developing countries more than it benefitted the developed countries because globalisation is supposed to assist the countrys joining the bigger economies have access to their markets. On the contrary, it is the developed countries which have been gaining instead. On April 10, 2006, immediately after the director general had announced that they were planning to implement the Doha strategy some countries like U.S started demanding benefits for its own economy in case they provide aid to LDCs. I agree; WTO is meant to improve comprative advantage and hence increase international trade. WTO has made progressive in balancing trade between developed countries and developing countries, however, for globalization to be achieved, WTO will have to lower export tarrrifs for LCDs. Also developed countries should provide a good political

ECONOMICS Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

ECONOMICS - Essay Example So, for example, when Americans receive more income from their overseas investments than foreigners receive from their investments in the United States, American GNP will be somewhat larger than GDP in that year. If Americans receive less income from their overseas investments than foreigners receive from their US investments, on the other hand, American GNP will be somewhat smaller than GDP (http://www.context.org/PEOPLE/celeste/gnpp.htm). Equivalent estimates of GNP (or GDP) produced in a given year may theoretically be arrived at through at least three different accounting approaches, depending upon whether the transactions that determine the prices of final goods and services are looked at and tallied up by focussing on the buying or by focussing on the proceeds from selling or by focussing on the nature of the products themselves. Using the expenditure approach, you can estimate total GNP as the sum of estimates of the amounts of money that are spent on final goods and services by households (Consumption), by business firms (Investment), by government (Government Purchases), and by the world outside the country (Net Exports). Using the incomes approach, you can estimate total GNP by summing up estimates of the different kinds of earnings people receive from producing these same final goods and services: (Plus certain adjustments to account for wear and tear on productive assets like plant and machinery -- depreciation -- and what are called indirect business taxes). Using the product or output approach, you can estimate GNP by summing up the output of all the various organizations producing goods and services in the country, subtracting out the costs of their raw materials to avoid double counting and making suitable adjustments for depreciation and for the value of imports and exports. (Butt 2002, Kopecky 1995) (In theory, all three