Beer and Brandy essays

Beer and Brandy essays Parody is defined as a literary or musical work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule. The elements of parody are apparent throughout many of the episodes of The Simpsons. The episode that I thought showed the best elements of parody, when contrasted to a movie is the episode called, Bart of Darkness which parodies the Alfred Hitchcock movie Rear Window. The similarities I will examine are the setting, and the similarities of the female characters. I believe that though seen by many as a low humor cartoon, The Simpsons incorporates many aspects of high humor as well. This is achieved through the parodying of a classic film such as Rear Window. As the movie Rear Window begins it shows the thermostat, to give the impression that it is a incredibly hot summer day. Because of the heat, most of the people keep their windows and blinds up to help manage the hot temperatures, and this leaves everyones personal lives open for any voyeur to intrude upon. With nothing better to do within the small confinements of his one room apartment than sit around with a broken leg, Mr. Jefferies sits at his window and becomes familiar with his neighbors daily routines, and activities. The setting in The Simpsons episode is set up in a similar, but more humorous way. In the Simpsons episode the heat is established be scenes such as Homer in the kitchen with a tent built around the refrigerator to make a cooler area for him and Bart. Nonetheless it is depicted as an incredibly hot day. It is because of the heat, that the Simpsons get a pool, and the pool is responsible for Barts broken leg. After Bart breaks his leg, he is confined to a very sm all room, with nothing to do, but be nosey. Bart looks at everyone outside, from his window, in the very same manner that Mr. Jefferies does in his apartment. Bart, like Mr. Jefferies,...

Connotations of 35 Words for Funny People

Connotations of 35 Words for Funny People Connotations of 35 Words for Funny People Connotations of 35 Words for Funny People By Mark Nichol Fun and folly are endemic elements of human nature, and the English language abounds with words to label people who inspire laughter, whether light-hearted or lacerating and whether intentional or otherwise. Here are terms describing funny and/or foolish individuals or characters. 1. Antic: now mostly confined to refer in plural noun form to humorous or playful behavior, traditionally described a comic entertainer whose performance is ridiculously comic; also a rare adjective meaning â€Å"absurd† or â€Å"playful† 2. Buffo: an opera singer who performs comic roles; a little-known synonym for clown as well 3. Buffoon: derived from buffo; is also a synonym for clown, though used as well to refer to an ignorant, stupid person 4. Card: an amusing person; possibly derives from the playing card designating a joker 5. Clown: a venerable term derived from a word for a clumsy person; refers to the traditional gaudily attired and made-up circus performer, or more loosely to a humorous performer or a person who jokes or acts foolishly; also connotes a boorish or simple-minded person, or someone who unintentionally invites derision 6-7. Comedian/comedienne: generally refers to a professional teller of jokes; comedienne is the traditional feminine form, though the original form usually applies to people of both sexes, making the feminine form superfluous 8. Comic: a synonym for comedian; as an adjective, it refers to something humorous 9. Cutup: a boisterously amusing person 10. Droll: usually employed as an adjective to describe odd or whimsical behavior; also applies to a comedian or jester 11. Farceur: a witty person, or one who writes stories or scripts that involve plots with ridiculous and often satirical elements 12. Fool: a traditional entertainer for the nobility with a costume and props that inspired modern-day clowns; by extension, it also refers to one who exercises poor judgment or is the victim of a prank, or to a mentally ill person whose behavior is suggestive of a fool; it also applies to people enthusiastic about or obsessed with something (â€Å"She’s a dancing fool†); the verb form means â€Å"to joke or trick,† and fool can also be an adjective meaning â€Å"foolish† (â€Å"He went around shouting his fool head off†) 13. Funnyman: synonymous with comedian or humorist 14-15. Gagman/gagster: variants referring to someone paid to write jokes or humorous sketches or to comedians; gagster can also mean â€Å"a practical joker† 16. Gracioso: a buffoon in traditional Spanish comedy 17. Harlequin: the name of a stock character in traditional comic performance, distinguished by a mask and patchwork tights; the latter feature prompted the extended meanings of textiles or animal markings resembling a patchwork; harlequin is also a synonym for clown 18. Humorist: a professional writer (or teller) of jokes or humorous stories or essays 19. Jester: in addition to being a synonym for fool, simply a term for one who jokes 20-21. Joker/jokester: someone who tells jokes or acts comically, but joker is also a synonym for fellow or guy, though it’s rarely neutral and is often at least mildly insulting; also the name of a wild card in card decks, as well as a term for a word, phrase, or clause that complicates a document or a legislative bill, or a similarly obstructive element, or a reference to a figurative wild card 22. Madcap: although best known as an adjective referring to capricious, foolish, or reckless behavior, can also be applied as a noun denoting a person who exhibits one or more of these characteristics 23. Merry-andrew: a clownish personality 24. Mime: a specific variety of clown who uses gestures and mimicry to entertain and does not speak; it also refers to traditional entertainments that are not necessarily comic in tone 25. Mimic: synonymous with mime but also refers to someone with skillful at imitation, impersonation, or impression; it’s also a verb that refers to imitation or simulation 26. Motley: a synonym for jester that derives from that particular type of performer’s characteristically patched-together-looking costume; the word also refers to the patchwork costume or to a random mixture or a ragtag ensemble; in adjectival form, it applies to the last two senses 27. Mummer: an actor in a pantomime, which isn’t necessarily humorous; also has a humorous connotation of someone who wears a costume or a disguise in a festival or public event and may act comically 28. Pantaloon (or pantalone): a stock character in traditional comedy distinguished by his namesake attire; the word also refers to various types of trousers (pants is a truncated form) 29. Scaramouch(e): a boastful but cowardly clown or a stock character with that personality in traditional comedy; also describes a mischievous or unprincipled person 30. Second banana: a comic entertainer who supports a featured performer; in general usage, a subordinate 31. Stand-up: a comedian who performs in front of a live audience; also, an adjective describing such a performance (or referring in general to an upright position or person) 32. Top banana: a featured comic performer; in general informal usage, a leader 33. Wag: a clever person, especially someone who introduces a punning or otherwise playful expression 34. Wit: synonymous with wag, but also applies to people who easily come up with amusing comments 35. Zany: best known as an adjective synonymous with wacky, but also a noun denoting a person who acts foolishly to entertain others; in addition, was specific jargon for a acrobat or clown who spoofed the antics of the principal performer; also, in general usage, describes someone who is sycophantic or crazy Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Vocabulary category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:15 Terms for Those Who Tell the FutureSocial vs. Societal20 Ways to Cry

The role of Multinational Corporations in Developing Economies Essay

The role of Multinational Corporations in Developing Economies - Essay Example On the other hand, Maheshwari (2006, p.53) generally postulates six characteristics of a multinational corporation: (1) operates and carries direct investment to several nation-states; (2) formulates and maintains an industrial organization; (3) widely functions on the basis of globally owned assets; (4) largely transfers capital, goods, and services from home to host countries; (5) transfers resources but does not trade such resources; and (6) manages not its local subsidiaries but the nationals or people from the host country. Maheshwari (2006, p.52) notably provides several examples of MNCs such as Goodyear, Pepsi, and Nestle Corporations. These multinational corporations function and operate in numerous nation-states -- particularly those so-called Third World nations such as Indonesia -- as their host countries. Many of the MNC’s home countries are highly industrialized nations of which the United States is highly prominent. Multinational corporation fundamentally originates from a humble beginning, so to speak: firms. When firms firmly decide to become multinational corporations, there are necessary factors that they systematically fill-up or comply to. Maheshwari (2006, p.53) strongly argues that the underlying reason why certain firms become multinational corporations is because of their desire for vertical expansion. It implies that these firms wanted to substantially expand their business enterprise from production towards distribution. In setting up subsidiaries in other nation-states, these firms -- which ultimately become multinational corporations -- greatly endeavor either to accumulate raw materials from the resources of their host countries or to acquire global markets for the distribution or sale of their capital, goods, and/or services (Maheshwari, 2006). First, firms pursue an expansion business in order to acquire raw materials from the countries whose natural resources are exceedingly abundant. Normally, these firms are

Movement and Positioning in Stroke Patients Essay

Movement and Positioning in Stroke Patients - Essay Example The effects of stroke can be divided into two categories: impairments and disabilities. Impairments are changes in the body structure and function. Disabilities, on the other hand, are limitations in the performance of the activities of daily living. These can be affected not just by the physical effects of the disease, but by psychological and social factors.Impairments and disabilities can worsen with time if no intervention is done. It may lead to further deterioration due to immobility or reduced activity, leading to complications such as thrombus formation, decubitus ulcers, and pulmonary embolism. Patients may also become more dependent on others and have decreased normal social interactions. All of these can have a profound effect on a person’s well-being. Backe, Larsson, and Fridlund (1996) investigated how patients conceived their life situation during the first week after the onset of stroke. They uncovered deep psychological trauma in the patients, wherein they had feelings of unreality, awareness of a changed role in life, feelings of a changed perception of the body, and feelings of being confused. Patients were also found to have a heightened sense of loss of capability and awareness of living in a confined space. Fortunately, some patients also developed an appreciation for the importance of support and encouragement and a will to look for new opportunities after the onset of stroke. One of the important debilitating effects of stroke is immobility. ... It also discusses the role of nurses in the management of stroke patients and in rehabilitation programs. It concludes with learnings from the literature review and critical appraisal and recommendations on how to apply these to nursing practice. The Importance of Movement and Positioning Stroke as a disease process can be progressive. Even though the cerebrovascular event that leads to the neurologic deficits is acute, its sequelae can continue to build on each other, leading to progressive deterioration of the patient. One important example of this is immobility. Due to neurologic deficits, a patient may have difficulty moving. This can lead to development of contractures, muscle atrophy, and nerve palsies (Summers et al., 2009). Current practice advocates early mobility for stroke patients. Summers et al. (2009), in their statements regarding the comprehensive care of the acute stroke patient, recommends that stroke patients may be initially kept on bed rest but should be mobilize d once hemodynamically stable. It has been found that early mobilization reduces the risk of atelectasis, pneumonia, DVT, and pulmonary embolism. Aside from early immobilization, a longer term rehabilitation program has also been found to be effective in stroke patients. Ernst (1990) reviewed the literature on rehabilitation and physiotherapy among stroke patients and found that it was associated with improvement in functional status and lower incidence of secondary complications such as pneumonia and ulcers. Furthermore, Gordon et al. (2004) found in their review of literature that aerobic exercise can enable activities of daily living to be performed

EC Defense Essay Example for Free

EC Defense Essay Introduction Public security of Member States has long been on the agenda of the EC, which has culminated in the establishment of a European Defence Market to â€Å"support the Council and the Member States in their effort to improve the EUs defence capabilities in the area of crisis management and to further The European Security and Defence Policy.†[1] The EU also established a programme for countering illegal trafficking of arms.[2] However, national safety and defence has to do with nationalism and state sovereignty. It is doubtful whether a state can feel itself to be independent without being in control of its own defence. It has often been the case that regulations made by the European Community (EC or the Community) regarding trade and citizens’ movement within the territory have on occasion led to the discomfort of several Member States. The Treaty of Maastricht states that one of the major tasks of this supranational organisation is to establish a â€Å"common market† which promotes â€Å"convergence of economic performance†[3]. The Treaty objectives are largely realised through trade, and public procurement Directives, competition and Merger Regulations also exist to maintain the uniformity of trade on the European Common Market. Yet it might not be immediately obvious why documents governing trade, competition, and mergers would become a mechanism that regulates a country’s ability to defend itself. [4]   However, this has been an object of concern to EC Member States and has sparked a proliferation of legal literature discussing the extent to which this is (or has been) possible. An important part of national security and defence is to obtain up-to-date arms and other equipment necessary for the running of the military and constabulary forces as well as other departments responsible for State security. As no country produces all the products it needs for its defence, the balance must be acquired through trade with other countries. The purpose of this essay is therefore to explore the effect of the EU trade regulation of competition and mergers on the defence industries of Member States. It will assess these laws’ control over the means through which Member States are able to acquire the equipment necessary for national defence. Mergers, Trust, Subsidies, and Procurement Directives One of the duties of the European Commission is to stand as guardian of the Treaty that established the EC. Free trade on the common market is one of the major provisions of that Treaty, and competition within the EU is threatened in the presence of cartels or whenever mergers occur. These types of activities are subject to a substantive Competition Test, which gives the Commission the right to intervene wherever a merger occurs that is hostile to healthy competition as it regards trade on the European Common Market. All scenarios that follow mergers and that fail the test (including the existence of oligopolies) are subject to the scrutiny and handling of the European Commission and to possible escalation to the level of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).[5] Mergers have much to do with competition. When companies merge or have an understanding or trust they behave more and more like monopolies, oligopolies or cartels. Government subsidies and laws that regulate the purchases of nationals from a particular company often have the effect of behave like mergers and trusts. However, the government might, for defence purposes, see the need to make laws governing the nation’s spending in a certain market. It might also see the need to exclude other nationals or business from bidding on contracts if such bidding is deemed a threat to the nation’s security. Legislation by the Commission of the European Union disallows this kind of law-making on the part of the Member States. The Merger Regulation 4064/89 applies to these situations, and therefore might exercise a significant amount of control over defence. Public procurement is the process by which government bodies acquire equipment and services.[6] This represents about 14% of EU Member States gross domestic product.[7] Rules regarding this come from the EU in the form of Directives which are subsequently adopted by Member States. Public sector contracts, services and supplies are published across the EU, facilitating free trade in these areas as well. Breaches of these rules can be pointed out by the European Commission, and can incur legal action before the European Court of Justice.[8] The laws of the EC make it clear that competition should in no way be hindered, in the pursuit of the objective of good value for money[9]. Mergers and government subsidies are cases in which this might happen. However, there is evidence that where governments sanction mergers of companies that deal with military equipment, the effects of Merger Regulation 4064/89 might be escaped. The creation of Eurocopter and its encouragement by the French and German governments demonstrate this. Although the Commission granted that the merger was governed by the Regulation, it conceded that such a venture was â€Å"compatible with the Single European Market.†[10]   In addition, Article 21 and Court opinions formed as a result of the Aà ©ropatiale-Alenia-de Haviland case allow for Member States to take measures necessary to protect interests considered legitimate, and national security is admitted as part of that group. Therefore, though the EU Commission often does have a significant amount of control over defence industries, certain privileges are granted to the Member States for matters of national security. With soft defence materials the rules change slightly. In such cases, prohibitions of mergers by the Commission are final. If, however, the Commission chooses to allow such a merger, the Member State is at liberty to prohibit it. It has been found that exemption from the Merger Regulation all hard defence materials might be prudent, as mergers would help with competition against non-European countries such as the United States. As it stands, however, the Commission enjoys full control over soft defence (or dual purpose) goods, and tempered control over hard defence materials. With regard to the Directives governing public procurement of equipment and services, the European Commission demonstrates another way in which it can have an impact on Member States’ defence industry. One case finds the Commission applying to the European Court of Justice for a declaration that Belgium had failed to fulfil its directive obligations (with regard to 92/50/EEC), being in breach of the provisions Articles 11(3) and 15(2). Belgium had â€Å"issued a restricted invitation to tender† for the surveillance of its coastal regions by means of aerial photography, and did this without expressly notifying the European Communities via the Official Journal.[11] It is of note that this kind of coastal surveillance can have immense implications for national defence. However, the Commission faulted the Member State for neglecting to perform the necessary publishing measures before executing actions toward procurement of the contracts. The ECJ found it necessary to determine whether the action of the Belgian government was even governed by the Directive in question, considering that much of the contract regarded aerial photography and the Directive mainly deals with architectural, engineering, and landscaping services. The Court’s opinion was that it saw â€Å"no reason to call into question the Belgian Governments assessment that aerial photography accounts for the predominant value of the contract. Accordingly, the contract falls under Annex I B, with the result that the tendering procedure under Community law, under Titles III to VI of Directive 92/50, does not have to be followed.†[12] Here the Member state was granted autonomy in that sphere of defence. However, had the contracts involved a slightly different type of service, the Commission might have been awarded the case. Trade Laws and Defence Certain of the EC Articles, namely 30 (ex 36), 39(3) (ex 48), 58(1) (b) (ex 73d), (81)(1), 226, 296 (ex 223), and 297 (ex 224) deal explicitly with issues of trade and competition that concur with those of national security, and offer ways in which the Member States can attend to their national interest where they might conflict with the terms of the Treaty. However, some of the articles are equivocally worded such that they allow for sometimes opposing interpretations. These articles lead to uncertainty with regard to the provisions of Treaty as well as to how the European Court of Justice would rule in certain situations. Therefore, it is unclear exactly how Member-State sovereignty is affected by the Treaty, since certain controversies have arisen because to some extent the Treaty has touched the industries that deal in the trade of materials necessary for national defence. Articles 28 and 29 of the EC Treaty agreement ban restrictions on the quantities of goods that can be imported or exported by the Member States. However, article 30 states that such restriction â€Å"shall not preclude prohibitions or restrictions on imports, exports, or goods in transit justified on grounds of [†¦] public security.† This grants Member States the ability to derogate from the regular stipulations of the treaty should the goods in question pose a threat to public security. Clearly in this case, although the treaty is apt to regulate areas of the defence industry, the articles make way for the countries to be free from its influence in that regard. In fact, in June of 2003, the European Union adopted a Common Position requiring that Member States enact â€Å"ad hoc† legislation to regulate the activities of arms brokers.[13] However, the use of the word â€Å"require† indicates that the power to act in that way was conferred upon the state by an organisation in whose possession the power had rested before. It also implies that to some degree power still rests in the hands of that body. A closer look at EC Article 30 supports this idea. It reads: â€Å"Such prohibitions or restrictions shall not, however, constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.† This implies that any Member State that wishes to enact laws affecting the defence industry for the purpose of protecting their interests must do so for specific and justifiable reasons. Indeed, the use of the term ad hoc in the 2003 EU position on arms brokering indicates that the control that Member States are granted over their defence market laws is not a general one, but one that materialises only under extenuating circumstances. The Irish case involving Campus Oil is an interesting example. The Irish requirement that 35% of all oil and petroleum products be purchased from the national refinery constituted a case of according an unnatural advantage to a supplier on the Common Market. This was done to protect the Irish economy and to scaffold the company, but might be considered a matter of defence since such military equipment as tankers would require fuel from this national refinery in the event of a national emergency. It was therefore crucial for the refinery to stay in business. The Court saw this necessity, and allowed the national requirement to remain in place.[14] What this case demonstrates is that the European Community law regimes on trade, competition, mergers and the like do have the power to regulate the laws that regard the defence industry. Though the EC laws cited do not relate specifically to defence, the surveillance of a coastline or the protection of a State’s leading energy company can have immense implications for national security. These laws were enacted to combat that effect, and the EC law was able to call that Member State law into question. It, however, did ultimately grant leave to the Member States because of the delicate nature of the situation. Competition and Defence The EC Treaty article that concerns the distortion of competition exists to prevent scenarios in which monopolies could arise in the marketing of certain military goods and/or to certain areas. Articles 85 and 86 regulate situations to ensure that a firm or other venture which has a comparative advantage in the market does not in any way use that advantage to disrupt competition. As far as the Articles allow derogation from this rule, it is not clear whether private companies are able to claim that the provisions of the Articles apply to their situations. However, for derogation to be possible, such benefits as economic progress for both companies and consumers must be proven, and neither indispensable restrictions nor the elimination of competition for the products involved should result from the mergers. One aspect of the GEC-Siemens v. Plessey case concerned whether a company licensed to distribute arms has a right to award sub-licences. The Commission’s opinion on the subject was that only Member States are allowed to invoke article 296b[15]. Therefore, as far as private undertakings concerning military products are involved in the market, competition and free trade are to be assumed to govern military defence equipment.[16] With regard to resolving whether dual-use goods fall under the jurisdiction of the Treaty, there exists a list drawn up by the European Community in 1958.[17] Yet though it has not been officially published, it is now in the public domain. On it is contained traditional types of military equipment, such as tankers and other types of typically defence-oriented products. If this list were considered as containing all the items that are to be excluded from the jurisdiction of the Commission, then it would be clearer how far the EU laws govern the defence industries of Member States. Because goods that can be used both civilly and militarily are not present on the list, it would become clear that dual-use goods should fall solely under the jurisdiction of the Treaty. Though the list has been considered outdated by many, upon close consideration it can be found that many of the newer military equipment can be covered by the broad terms used in the list[18]. If, therefore, the list is to be considered exhaustive, it leads to the conclusion that dual-use goods are not covered by Article 296 and are therefore under the jurisdiction of the Commission. In such cases where dual-use goods are being traded for military purposes, then, the Commission would have some amount of control over the defence industry of the Member State in question. Recently the European Commission has sent forth a Communication[19] on the issue of the interrelatedness of civil, market and defence policies. The purpose of the Communication document is to promote and enhance more efficient spending on defence, to maintain competition in the defence industry, as well as to uphold fairness and ethics in the trade of defence materials. Long has the issue of European defence hung in limbo because of the problematic nature of defence collaboration among Member States. Such situations usually have resulted in encroachment upon the sovereignty of each state. The aims of the Communication are set to be effected through the monitoring of industries related to defence. This activity by the Commission is supported by EC Treaty Art. 296. Through this measure, the EC proposes to regulate licensing, delivery, certification, and other things which have caused arms-trade problems at the borders within the European Community. Beyond this, the EC recognises the importance of competition to the creation of defence sector that does not harm the common market—a defence market that is as similar as possible to the market that exists for non-military goods.   Article 296 has been thought of as a prime obstacle to the European defence market integration, though the European Parliament believes that this article does allow for integration if the Member States cooperate.[20] This article gives states the right to take â€Å"such measures as it considers necessary† to protect its own security interests as far as these concern the procurement of arms and other military equipment. It further stipulates that any action implemented ought not to impair the functioning of the market as far as it concerns goods that are not explicitly military related. It is here that much confusion enters concerning the extent to which the European Community laws govern the defence industry, as demonstrated in the cases of Werner and Leifer.[21] Arrowsmith notes that the importance of the Treaty is largely manifest in actions that lie â€Å"below the thresholds† of the Member state legislation.[22] These states are, according to EC 296, clearly in charge of the trade of expressly military commodities. However, which body shall be in charge of regulating those goods that may be used for both civil and military purposes (dual-use goods) remains in question. Koutrakos reminds us that the Common Commercial Policy established in EC 113 grants exclusive competency to the Community itself. Without this competency in the hands of the EC, the Member States might be inclined to act in a way contrary to the intentions of the Community and create mistrust among the members.[23] In cases where the goods in question are military in nature and a Member State wishes to derogate from the terms of the Treaty, the effects of doing so are subject to a proportionality test. This test ascertains that â€Å"no other measure, less restrictive from the point of view of the free movement of goods, capable of achieving the same objective† could have been performed in its place. The measure must also achieve a maximum amount of good for the Member State with the most minimal of adverse effects on the Community as a whole.[24] Moreover, the provisions of Article 296 do not automatically apply to any country as it regards military security. This article has to be invoked by any party that perceives the necessity to curtail or otherwise regulate the trade of defence products. In that case, the state must also be prepared to offer reasons why such action is necessary, as the burden of proof lies on that state. The EC Court then has the right to intensely scrutinise the actions and motives of the Member state that chooses to derogate from the provision of the Treaty via Article 296. It also has the power to demand that it change its policy back to that of the EC if the motives prove unethical or the reasons inadequate. One such case is the Commission vs. Spain[25], in which the Spanish government had enacted laws exempting from the value-added tax (VAT) exports and transfers of military goods within the Community and to third countries. The argument by the Spanish government was that the measure was necessary for the health of the defence industry, and that such a measure was protected under the provisions of EC 296(1)(b). The Community itself invoked EC 226, which gives the Commission the right to give an opinion on any matter in which it considers that the state has not complied with the terms of the Treaty.[26] The Court ruled that any interpretation of Article 296 should be a limited one. So that where the wording of the article gives the apparent idea that all measures considered necessary by the Member States are viable, the Court emphasises that the states must be able to prove the necessity of those actions in order for them to go unchecked. In this way, Spain was forced to change its policy, and the EC law demonstrated a significant amount of control over the defence industry of Member States. Yet the Spanish derogation was a frivolous attempt, and represented what might be seen as a much lower level of scrutiny by the Court than other cases might. Other states with much more dire cases could conceivably be granted much more autonomy with regard to the regulation of their own portion of the defence market.   The Member States have usually interpreted this article (EC 296) to mean that the exemption of defence material from the terms of the Treaty occurred automatically. On the other hand, the Community has held that any derogation by Member States must be according to strict rules testable by the aforementioned proportionality test. This would therefore mean that it is not only in the case of Spain’s obviously opportunistic case, but in all cases that â€Å"the Treaty would in general apply to hard defence material and [†¦] the Community has jurisdiction over these products unless a Member State can prove the existence of a situation justifying derogation from the regime.†[27] Other complications stem from the second part of Article EC 296(1)(b). This reads, â€Å"Such measures shall not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the common market regarding products which are not intended for specifically military purposes.† In the case between the Republic of Portugal and the Commission,[28] it was held by the Portuguese government that during the privatisation of the company Cimpor-Cimentos, no buyer would be able to acquire rights amounting to more than 10% of the shares. This privilege was reserved only for the Portuguese government. The Commissioners brought this government to the Court because its actions had in their view breached the EC laws against interference with competition. The Commission did acknowledge, however, that had the Portuguese law been concerned with matters of national security, an exception would have been made for the case. However, even in a Portuguese appeal to the Court, the opinion given by Advocate General Tizzano was that the appeal be rejected on the grounds that the action of that government served to impede competition on the European market. Therefore, though this case demonstrates that the ECJ clearly has the authority to force the compliance of Member States on questions of competition, it does sometimes refrain from this if/when defence equipment is involved. The Italian case C-423/98, Alfredo Albore [2000] ECR I-5965 concerned the right of any EU citizen to purchase land in any Member State. The Italian government made it illegal for the German citizen to purchase land declared â€Å"of military importance† to the country. Though this land, not being an expressly military commodity, does for that reason fall under the jurisdiction of the Treaty, the Court decided to allow the Italians derogation through the invocation of Article 296 and the declaration of the land a matter of national defence. Conclusion Some goods that are used by civilians and that can also be used for military purposes are regulated by the Commission. In other situations where countries accord merger rights or subsidies to certain business for military purposes, the Commission has a right to intervene and in those situations can be seen as regulating the country’s defence industry. Goods and services that are considered of military importance to a country may not always be explicitly military or differentiable from goods/services designated for civilian use. In those cases where the Commission has jurisdiction, the right is theirs to allow or prohibit the actions of a Member State government. The Treaties, Procurement Directives, and Merger Regulations of the European Community function in such a way as to promote a healthy market economy in which no producer or country has an unfair advantage with regard to the manufacture or sale of its product. The nature of the defence industry dictates that its functions often come under the regulations of the European Community, and this often indicates the possibility of national security problems for Member States. Because of this, several of the articles in these treaties/regulations allow for derogation from their provisions. Yet, in many cases this allowance has proven equivocal to the point where the European Court of Justice has had to become involved. The European Commission works hard to devise a method of regulation that accounts for the security of the individual states while maintaining the freedom of the Common Market; but as yet, where competition and merger control concerns public procurement and trade of dual-use goods, the EC still exercises, to a significant extent, control over the defence industry of its Member States. References Anders, Holger. (2004). â€Å"Controlling arms brokering: next steps for EU Member States.†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   GRIP p6. Arrowsmith, Sue. (1995). The application of the EC Treaty rules to public and utilities    procurement. Public Procurement Law Review. 6.255-280. Arrowsmith, Sue. (2002). The EC procurement directives, national procurement policies,   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   and better governance: the case for a new approach.† 27(1), 3-24. â€Å"Competition: Mergers (Overview).† Europa. Accessed 2 March, 2006.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/publications/special/3_merger.pdf   Ã¢â‚¬Å"Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (C-252/01).†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Official Journal of the European Union. (2003). C 289/3.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://europa.eu.int/eur-  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/c_289/c_28920031129en00030003.pdf â€Å"Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community.† (2002).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Official Journal of the European Communities. C 325/33. Eikenberg, Katharina. (2000) â€Å"Article 290 (ex. 223) and external trade in strategic   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   goods.† European Law Review. 25(2), 117-138. Georgopoulos, Aris. (2005). â€Å"Defence procurement and EU law.† European Law Review.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   30(4), 559-572. Georgopoulos, Aris. (2003). â€Å"Industrial and market issues in European defence: the   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Commission Communication of 2003 on harmonisation and liberalisation of   Ã‚  Ã‚   defence markets.† Public Procurement Law Review. 4.NA82-89. â€Å"Fourth Annual Report on the implementation of the EU Joint Action of 12  July 2002 on   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   the European Unions contribution to combating the   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   destabilising accumulation   Ã‚  Ã‚   and spread of small arms and light weapons (2002/589/CFSP).† (2005). Official   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Journal of the European Communities. C 109, vol. 48.P. 0001 – 0025.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   52005XG0504(01):EN:HTML Koutrakos, Panos. (1998). â€Å"Exports of dual-use goods under the law of the European   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Union.† European Law Review. 23(3) 235-251 O’Keeffe, D. Branton, J. (2006). â€Å"State Aid and Public Procurement: A Practical   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Guide.† Hammonds. http://www.hammonds.com/FileServer.aspx?oID=21843 â€Å"Portuguese Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-42/01).† CVRIA. (2004). http://curia.eu.int/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en Saggio, Antonio. (1999). â€Å"Association Église de Scientologie de Paris and Scientology International Reserves Trust versus the Republic of France.† Opinion of Advocate   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   General Saggio. CVRIA. http://curia.eu.int/jurisp/cgi-  Ã‚   bin/form.pl?lang=enSubmit=Submitalldocs=alldocsdocj=docjdocop=doco  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   pdocor=docordocjo=docjonumaff=datefs=datefe=nomusuel=domain  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   e=mots=military+arms+goodsresmax=100 Trybus, Martin. (2002). â€Å"The EC Treaty as an instrument of European defence   Ã‚   integration: judicial scrutiny   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   of defence and security exceptions.† Common   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Market Law Review. 39. 1347-1372. Trybus, Martin. (2005). â€Å"A fine balance: free movement and public security in the EC   Ã‚   Treaty.† European Union Law and Defence Integration. Hart: Oxford. Trybus, Martin. (0000). â€Å"European defence procurement: toward a comprehensive   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   approach.† European Public Law. Vol. 4(1). 111-133. Trybus, Martin. (2004). â€Å"The limits of European Community competence for defence.† European Foreign Affairs Review. 9, 189-217. Trybus, Martin. (2000). â€Å"On the application of the EC Treaty to armaments.† European Law Review. 25(6), 663-668. Trybus, Martin. (2002). â€Å"Procurement for the armed forces: balancing security and the    internal market.† European Law Review. 27(6), 692-713. Trybus, Martin. (2000). â€Å"The recent judgement in Commission vs. Spain and the   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   procurement of hard defence material.† Public Procurement Law Review. 4. NA   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   99-103. [1]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Georgopoulos, Aris. (2005). â€Å"Defence procurement and EU law.† European Law Review. 30(4), 559-572. [2]  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Fourth Annual Report on the implementation of the EU Joint Action of 12  July 2002. [3]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Article 2. â€Å"Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community.† (2002). Official Journal of the European Communities. C. 325/33. [4]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (2004). â€Å"The limits of European Community competence for defence.† European Foreign Affairs Review. 9, 189-217. [5]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"Competition: Mergers (Overview).† Europa. http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/publications/special/3_merger.pdf [6]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Arrowsmith, Sue. (2002). The EC procurement directives, national procurement policies, and better governance: the case for a new approach.† 27(1), 3-24. [7]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (2002). â€Å"Procurement for the armed forces: balancing security and the internal market.† European Law Review. 27(6), 692-713. [8]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   O’Keeffe, D. Branton, J. (2006). â€Å"State Aid and Public Procurement: A Practical Guide.† Hammonds. http://www.hammonds.com/FileServer.aspx?oID=21843 [9]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Arrowsmith, Sue. (2002). The EC procurement directives, national procurement policies, and better governance: the case for a new approach.† 27(1), 3-24. [10]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (0000). â€Å"European defence procurement: toward a comprehensive approach.† European Public Law. Vol. 4(1). 111-133. [11]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (C-252/01).† Official Journal of the European Union. (2003). C 289/3. [12]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Ibid. [13]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Anders, Holger. (2004). â€Å"Controlling arms brokering: next steps for EU member states.† GRIP p6. [14]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (2005). â€Å"A fine balance: free movement and public security in the EC Treaty.† European Union Law and Defence Integration. Hart: Oxford. [15]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"Any Member State may take such measures as it considers necessary for the protection of the essential interests of its security which are connected with the production of or trade in arms, munitions and war material; such measures shall not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the common market regarding products which are not intended for specifically military purposes.† . â€Å"Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community.† (2002). Official Journal of the European Communities. C. 325/33. [16]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (0000). â€Å"European defence procurement: toward a comprehensive approach.† European Public Law. Vol. 4(1). 111-133. [17]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Ibid. [18]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (2005). European Union Law and Defence Integration. Hart: Oxford. [19]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Georgopoulos, Aris. (2003). â€Å"Industrial and market issues in European defence: the Commission Communication of 2003 on harmonisation and liberalisation of defence markets.† Public Procurement Law Review. 4.NA82-89. [20]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Ibid. [21]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Eikenberg, Katharina. (2000) â€Å"Article 290 (ex. 223) and external trade in strategic goods.† European Law Review. 25(2), 117-138. [22]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Arrowsmith, Sue. (1995). The application of the EC Treaty rules to public and utilities procurement. Public Procurement Law Review. 6.255-280. [23]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Supra n.2 at 1364. Qtd. in Koutrakos, Panos. (1998). â€Å"Exports of dual-use goods under the law of the European Union.† European Law Review. 23(3) 235-251 [24]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. (2002). â€Å"The EC Treaty as an instrument of European defence integration: judicial scrutiny of defence and security exceptions.† Common Market Law Review. 39. 1347-1372. [25]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. â€Å"The recent judgement in Commission vs. Spain and the procurement of hard defence material.† 4. NA 99-103. [26]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community.† (2002). Official Journal of the European Communities. C. 325/33. [27]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trybus, Martin. â€Å"The recent judgement in Commission vs. Spain and the procurement of hard defence material.† 4. NA 99-103. [28]   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"Portuguese Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-42/01).† Cvria. (2004).

Dealing with Transformation in The Metamorphosis Essay -- Papers

Dealing with Transformation in The Metamorphosis In The Metamorphosis Gregor Samsa is forced to deal with his transformation from a human being into an insect. After his transformation Gregor is no longer able to do everyday ordinary things. He now has to depend on someone to do these things for him. His younger sister, Grete, makes herself responsible for Gregor. She takes it upon herself to make sure that Gregor is fed and his room is cleaned. This leads to the question; why does she place such a huge responsibility on herself? An optimist like Gregor who only sees the good side of people would say it is because she is a loving and caring person. That her brother’s current condition makes her feel sorry for him and she wants to help him in any way possible. However a pessimist would see an ulterior motive to his sisters’ actions. Since the narrator of the story is Gregor the reader is introduced to Grete through the optimist’s point of view. Gregor portrays Grete as a nurturing and caring person who se actions are solely based on what is best for Gregor. However, what if the narrator was not Gregor but a neutral person who had no prior relationship to Grete? Would Grete’s motives for helping Gregor appear to be purely unselfish? There are many points in the story that the reader is left with the feeling that Grete might have ulterior motives. If the narrator were an impartial character Grete’s intentions would not appear to be so pure. Grete’s motives from the beginning of the story are questionable. Why does she make herself responsible for Gregor? Gregor believes that she â€Å"had perhaps taken on so difficult a task merely out of childish thoughtlessness† (100). However there is another .. ...ghout the novel. Gregor throughout the book constantly misreads his sister’s actions and misinterprets her motives. Since the story is told through Gregor’s point of view we perceive Grete through most of the novel as someone who is unselfish and helpful. However at the end we find ourselves wondering if Grete’s intentions are really as pure as Gregor thinks. Did Grete plan from the beginning to get rid of Gregor? The truth is once Gregor was out of the picture Grete became the needed and helpful child. Grete had a lot to gain and nothing to lose by getting rid of Gregor. Gregor is not impartial when it comes to his sister and he is unable to perceive her bad intentions because he thinks so highly of her. Therefore it can be said that if the narrator of the story was a detached character Grete would not appear to be so harmless and innocent.

Culture adaptation and survival Essay

With communication and transportation more readily available than before, the interpenetration of cultural facets between groups have become easier if not more frequent. However, this flow of data cannot be solely attributed to the presence of devices that allow information dissemination; people take an active part whether consciously or not, in spreading and reforming cultures by their global movements and actions. This paper will look into this event, focusing on how adopting cultural features from other groups can resemble biological adaptation in that they both can lead to higher survival rates in a given environment. Historical and relevant situations gathered from related literature will be used to develop and provide grounds for this statement. Jia, Lu and Heisey posit that â€Å"globalization is not only penetrating the economic sphere but also threatening the cultural boundaries of many nations†¦ † (Jia, Lu & Heisey, 2002, p. 155). A part of the globalization trend is the influx of different peoples to different countries. Due to exposure to new environments and possibly new cultural practices, the sense of stability of the migrating peoples is compromised. According to Kim, in order to once more achieve internal equilibrium and reduce the stress the situation has affected upon them, â€Å"a person adapts by altering his or her internal conditions† (as cited in Liu, 2001, p. 14). During the nineteenth century, strong sentiments of Anglo-conformity pervaded the Americas as new immigrants came in droves. There was a strong notion that the formation of the American peoples and identity had ended and there was doubt whether the newcomers can be assimilated (Dicker, 2003, p. 44). The assumption that the immigrants had a strong desire for assimilation was not completely true. Though they did have a strong desire to acquire English and several traits of mainstream America, this is mostly to open paths to reach their goals and not for total incorporation (Dicker, p. 39). This partial cultural assimilation can be likened to temporary biological adaptations such as acclimatization; here the body’s biological functions work hard to tolerate the current environmental condition. This process is not immediate, requiring time for the body to adjust itself to the climate; such as for a climber to survive high altitude conditions, it is recommended for them to climb slowly, resting a few times (Backer, et al. , 2005, p. 223). These adaptations may be partial and temporary but they allow people moving in that environment to function and achieve their goals. Environments, whether social or natural, hold a certain amount of resources and if these are limited the existing groups compete to gain access to these. In the case of the Spanish settlers in the Americas, a tri-racial society- the Spaniards, the natives and those that were borne out of relations between the two- was created and â€Å"access to power and prestige depended on a person’s degree of acculturation† (Dicker, 2003, p. 48). According to Daniels: â€Å"An individual who spoke Spanish, wore European clothes, and ate European style food was considered, if not Spanish, not any longer Indian† (as cited in Dicker, p. 48). People had to adhere to the standards that the Spanish had set in order to gain access to resources and survive, for those that are no longer Indian were set to help manage the state (Daniels as cited in Dicker, p. 48). Grasping the basic ideas of survival of the fittest, those that are able to adjust to some current norms of the society are able to survive, have access to resources and thus achieve more reproductive success than those ostracized, cut off and with limited offspring. Kim’s theory (as cited in Liu, 2001, p. 14) assumes that â€Å"stress and growth are inseparable and that both are necessary for successful adaptation†. A culture or a species must be able to grow and adapt to surrounding cultural facets to lessen the stress that is affecting them. According to Cohen (1974, p. 3) â€Å"A population’s adaptation is its relationship to its habitat†. The population adapts when it changes key factors in itself so that the environment can be a more fitting place for them to live, such as adapting the language of the place, the standards set by those that control the resources etc. Adopting cultural features from other groups allow the people to be integrated, whether partially or completely, into that community and lessen the stress that limit them from surviving. Biological evolution is similar to this as success in here is measured by how a population manages to reproduce generations and provide for them. Backer, H. D. , Bowman, W. D. , Paton, B. C. , Steele, P. Thygerson, A. L. & Gulli, B. (2005). Wilderness first aid: emergency care for remote locations (2nd ed. ). Massachusetts, USA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Cohen, Y. A. (1974). Man in adaptation: the cultural present (2nd ed. ). Chicago, USA: Aldine Transaction. Dicker, S. J. (2003) Languages in America: a pluralist view (2nd ed. ). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Jia, W. Lu, X. & Heisey, D. R. (2002). Chinese communication theory and research: reflections, new frontiers, and new directions. Connecticut. USA: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002 Liu, J. (2001). Asian students’ classroom communication patterns in U. S. universities: an emic perspective. Connecticut, USA: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Ge Matrix Essay

Gg General Electric screen matrix (the General Electric (GE) business screen) The GE screen matrix is essentially a derivation of the Boston Consulting Group’s Boston growth matrix. It was developed by McKinsey and Co. for General Electric as it had been recognized that the Boston Consulting Group matrix was not flexible enough to take broader issues into account. The GE matrix cross-references market attractiveness and business position using three criteria for each – high, medium and low. The market attractiveness considers variables relating to the market itself, including the rate of market growth, market size, potential barriers to entering the market, the number and size of competitors, the actual profit margins currently enjoyed, and the technological implications of involvement in the market. The business position criteria look at the business’s strengths and weaknesses in a variety of fields. These include its position in relation to its competitors, and the business’s ability to handle product research, development and ultimate production. It also considers how well placed the management is to deploy these resources. The matrix differs in its complexity compared with the Boston Consulting Group matrix. Superimposed on the basic diagram are a number of circles. These circles are of variable size (see Figure 22). The size of each represents the size of each market. Within each circle is a clearly defined segment which represents the business’s market share within that market. The larger the circle, the larger the market, and the larger the segment, the larger the market share. General environment The term ‘general environment’ refers to the broad macro-environment in which a business operates. Broadly speaking, it can be identified as having four key elements, as outlined in Table 10. 98 Key Concepts in Strategic Management Business position High Invest heavily for growth High Medium Invest selectively and build Low Develop for income Market attractiveness Medium Invest selectively and build Develop selectively for income Harvest or divest Figure 22 Low Develop selectively and build on strengths Harvest Divest The General Electric (GE) matrix Table 10 Elements of the general environment Political/legal Potential/actual changes in regulations/legislation Foreign trade regulations Environmental protection Changes in government (local/regional/national) Technological New development inside and outside the industry New product development Technological projects in the industry Industry (and government) spending on research and development G Economic GNP growth Finance/market trends Inflation Interest rates Money upply Employment/unemployment Energy issues Socio-cultural Population trends Age distribution Regional movement of population Demographics of the family Lifestyle Consumerism Geographical structure 99 The most rapid of these trends in the general environment are technological and political/legal. The slowest moving are the economic and the socio-cultural. Geographical structure The organizational structure of a major business could be based purely on geographical regions . This could reflect the following possibilities: †¢ †¢ †¢ that the market is sufficiently remote to warrant a replication of the organizational structure in its geographical region; that the factors of production are sufficiently attractive to set up a geographically-based structure; that the market requires specific support that can only be delivered in the geographical region and not from the remote central headquarters of the organization. Global area structure A global area structure configures the organization along the main areas (geographically) in which it operates. Typically, the globe would be split up into a series of general areas such that the business can assume that all functions can be carried out by a centralized headquarters within each region. The configuration may take the form depicted in Figure 23. Corporate HQ (in home country and serving home country Northern Europe Southern Europe and Near East Pacific region G Figure 23 A global area structure Global learning Global learning is a process by which a multinational organization ensures that skills and knowledge flow freely between the different parts of the business across the world, regardless of national boundaries. Global learning can take the following routes: 100 Key Concepts in Strategic Management †¢ †¢ †¢ from the home country to an overseas division or subsidiary; from an overseas division or subsidiary to another overseas division or subsidiary; from an overseas division or subsidiary to the home country. Global matrix structure A global matrix structure is essentially a horizontal differentiation along product divisions and geographical divisions. In other words, to visualize the organization structure, product groups are placed on a vertical axis and the foreign divisions are placed on a horizontal axis. It allows businesses to reduce costs by increasing efficiency, and to differentiate their activities with innovation and responsiveness. The feature of the global matrix structure is that there is dual decisionmaking responsibility, as there is both a divisional and an area hierarchy. The system is not without its problems, as many organizations consider this form of structure to be rather clumsy and bureaucratic. There is also the question of slow decision making and a lack of flexibility. Several international businesses have sought to overcome the problems by basing their organizational structure on wide networks with a shared culture and vision, and stressing that the informal structures are more important than the formal structure itself. These forms of organizational structure are known as flexible matrix structures. Egelhoff, W. G. , ‘Strategy and Structure in Multinational Corporations: a Revision of the Stopford and Wells Model’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 9 (1988), pp. 1–14. Global product group structure A global product group structure is a variant organizational structure which has product groups along a vertical axis and foreign (overseas) divisions, or business units, on a horizontal axis. The primary purpose of the product group structure is: G †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ to to to to to educe costs through increased efficiency; differentiate the organization’s areas of activity; utilize any innovations or technologies; improve customer service; increase the speed of responses. Typically, the structure would appear in the format shown in Figure 24. Global strategic alliances A global strategic alliance is usually formed by two or more organiza- Global strategic planning 101 Corporate HQ Product division A Product division B International div ision Japan India Brazil Figure 24 A global product group structure ions from different countries. Typically, this involves the allocation of resources from these businesses based in different countries, to a new project or venture which they seek to undertake, using cooperative methods and the pooling of expertise and experience. The purpose of global strategic alliances is to: †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ create synergy; accomplish more than could be achieved had the businesses been operating independently; coordinate effort; gain and share technologies; gain entry into an overseas market. Major multinational businesses routinely enter into global strategic alliances as an integral part of their corporate strategy and the practice has become widespread in recent years. See also green-field investment. G Global strategic planning Global strategic planning aims to maximize global economies of scale and economies of scope, while at the same time incorporating the advantages of local responsiveness to customers in the countries in which the organization operates. 102 Key Concepts in Strategic Management There are three main steps towards achieving global strategic planning: †¢ †¢ The development of a core business strategy – which forms the basis of attempts to create a sustainable competitive advantage (a replica of what has been achieved in the home market). The internationalization of this core strategy – the adaptation of the core strategy to overseas markets, along with expansion as necessary. The globalization of the international core strateg y – which seeks to integrate the strategy in all of the countries in which the business operates. Yip, G. S. , Total Global Strategy: Managing for Worldwide Competitive Advantage. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002. Global strategy A global strategy is often adopted by an international business in order to increase its profitability by taking advantage not only of cost reductions that come from experience curve effects, but also of economies based on the location of parts of its operations. Typically a global strategy will consider the best alternative areas in which to concentrate research and development, marketing or production, choosing the most beneficial location for each of these key operations. In essence a global strategy can be called a multi-domestic strategy, in as much as the international business seeks to maximize its worldwide performance through maximizing any local competitive advantages, revenues or profits it can achieve. Equally, global strategies seek to maximize performance through integration and a sharing of resources. Stonehouse, George, Hamill, Jim, Campbell, David and Purdie, Tony, Global and Transnational Business: Strategy and Management. New York: John Wiley, 2004. G Global web

Three Mile Island essays

Three Mile Island essays 1979 Three Mile Island Nuclear Reactor Incident Three Mile Island is a nuclear power station located in Middletown, Pennsylvania, along the Susquehanna River, just ten miles south of the Pennsylvania state capital Harrisburg, and is also the site of the worst commercial nuclear disaster in United States history that took place on March 28, 1979 (Nuclear Disaster, 1997). The pilot-operated relief valve (PORV) on the reactor cooling system opened like it was supposed to and then about ten seconds later it should have closed but it remained open, leaking very important reactor coolant water to the reactor coolant drain tank. The operators believed the PORV had shut because instruments showed them that a signal was sent to the valve but they did not have an instrument indicating the valve's actual position. High-pressure injection pumps automatically pushed replacement water into the reactor system (Three Mile Island, 2001). As water and steam escaped through the relief valve, cooling water surged into the pressuriser, raising the water level in it. Operators responded by reducing the flow of replacement water. Their training told them that the pressuriser water level was the only dependable indication of the amount of cooling water in the system. Because the pressuriser level was increasing, they thought the reactor system was too full of water. Their training told them to do all they could to keep the pressuriser from filling with water. If it filled, they could not control pressure in the cooling system and it might rupture (Three Mile Island, 2001). Steam then formed in the reactor cooling system. Pumping a mixture of steam and water caused the reactor cooling pumps to vibrate. Because the severe vibrations could have damaged the pumps and made them unusable, operators shut down the pumps. This ended forced cooling of the reactor. However, as reactor coolant water boiled away, the reactor's fuel core was uncovered and became ev...

When to use on and when to use in

When to use on and when to use in When to use on and when to use in When to use on and when to use in By Maeve Maddox Nate asks: What are the proper usages of the words in and on in a sentence? I often confuse the two. Here are some examples: The boat is in/on the water, We are in/on the planet, Were going to the concert in/on July 1st. The use of prepositions in English is frequently idiomatic. General guidelines exist, but be prepared to learn individual expressions in which the preposition does not adhere to the guidelines. In the case of the prepositions in and on, here are the most usual uses. In in mainly denotes rest at: PLACE: He lives in the country. He lives in Chicago. (BUT, He lives at 2300 Wabash Ave.) TIME: Ill be there in an hour. MANNER: The child ran down the steps in tears. REFERENCE: In my opinion we need a referendum. They are happy in their marriage. On on indicates proximity and position above or outside: PLACE: He sat on the fence. TIME: He was not thinking well on that occasion. REFERENCE: He asked my opinion on the matter. CONDITION: Well hire him on your recommendation. The examples given in the question: We are on the planet. We are going to the concert on July 1. But We are going to the concert in July. As for the example about the boat, either is correct, according to what is meant: The boat is in the water. (As opposed to being on dry land for the winter) The boat is on the water. (Look at all those boats out there on the water!) However, it would be unidiomatic to say The ship is in the ocean or in the sea, unless you mean that it has sunk. The ship is on the sea. Related to the question of when to use in is that of when to use into. While in denotes the state of being at rest in a place, or at least being (in a sense) surrounded by something, into denotes motion towards: The dog jumped into the water. The children (who were already in the water) jumped in the water. When deciding whether to use in or into, ask yourself if the person or thing you are talking about is moving from one place to another. If so, use into. More about prepositions in later posts. Stay tuned! Video Recap Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Grammar category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Masters Degree or Master's Degree?"Gratitude" or "Gratefulness"?Comma Before Too?

Discrimination and Prejudice to Control and Protect Interest Assignment

Discrimination and Prejudice to Control and Protect Interest - Assignment Example Social difference and socialization exist, these are passed from parents to children. Fear and ignorance are the two greatest concepts of prejudice. Some are concerned with a loss of power and control and therefore prejudice and discriminate the certain group of people (Whitley & Kite, 2010). Â  I encountered racial discrimination when I was the young adult. This was at a time when I went to an office to inquire about a license to hold a convention in a communal place. This was during political campaigns and I was campaigning for a local office. I wanted to hold a small rally on the local ground but I had to have a license for the same. The local police told me that I had to pay more money for the license because I was not white skin. They added that they would offer me the license at their mercy but not because I needed it. I felt so embarrassed but I did not give up with holding the rally. Â  The police officers told me that I could not hold the rally at the ground because I was not supposed to hold a public rally at the ground. They told me that that place was a reserve for the right members but not me. This was pure prejudice and discrimination. They discriminated me because I was not white and showed prejudice to me because I did not belong to their social class. They thought that I was competing with them for the support of the local people to be elected as a local office holder. This was very hurtful and offensive as well. While it is true I offered my candidature for the local office, my aim was not to offer competition but to improve the life of the local people by bringing services to them. This was discrimination and prejudice. Â  The police used their power and control to prejudice and discriminate me.