Property valuation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Property valuation - Essay Example Then there is valuation based on the type of property: whether commercial or residential. Generally, for a given location, the valuation of commercial property is much higher than residential property. The profession and income levels of the residents also influence the value of a property to a certain extent. "The Isle of Dogs now centres around Canary Wharf (Canary Wharf refers to the both the tower, the tube station, and the offices in its immediate vicinity). Canary Wharf is London's financial district. Businesses located in Canary Wharf include: Citibank, Credit Suisse, Barclays Bank and HSBC. Businesses from other industries, such as BP and Reuters, have also located in the area, but it is still dominated by the financial sector. This means that a significant proportion of the residents of E14 work in the financial sector, and earn high wages. It also means that the types of property here are predominantly new properties (built after the regeneration in 1981) designed for young executives rather than families."1 The above table shows the average estimated monthly rentals in different parts of London. Area 1covers localities like Kensington, Bloomsbury, St. John's Wood, Green Park, Westminster and other central areas. Being centrally located and having access to all amenities, this area is the highest valued one in terms of rentals. Area 2 covers the localities just adjoining Area 1. Kilburn, West Hampstead, Isle of Dogs, Elephant and Castle, Kennington, Dulwich, Brentford are the areas covered under this category. In the south, it extends till Raynes Park and Merton Park. In the north west, Woodford seems to be covered under this category, while surrounding areas do not belong to this category. Here, the rentals are slightly lower as compared to Area 1. Similarly, Area 3 is marked by the localities bordering localities under Area 2. Prominent among these are Kensel Garden, Strafford, Wallworth in the central area, Stanmore, Totteridge, Cockfosters in the north east and Strawberry Hill and Ki ngston in the south. There are a few areas like Surbiton, Bickley and Bromlay that stand out in the south among Area 4 and Area 5 categories. Area 4 consists of Bartnet, Endfield, Ponders End in the north and West Wickham and Ewell in the south. This category is spread out in all the four directions and can be bradly said to be on the periphery of the city. A few exceptions to this would be areas like Nunhead, Ladywell etc, that are located in almost central areas. Area 5 is almost on the outskirts of the city and thus lowest in terms of rent/yields. Recent Changes in Office Rentals Average office rents in the CBD (Central Business District) have recently fallen almost 38 % to $ 777.40 per sq. m, making it Europe's sixth most expensive business district. While London's Mayfair district is a premium business center and can be compared to Triangle d'Or area of Paris , rents have recently fallen in this area too. Even with a 45 % fall in its rental values, West End remains the most expensive office area in Europe till date with rental values to 961 euros per sq m.4 Conclusion Thus, while arriving at an agreement, an owner and tenant have to keep many factors in mind. While the importance of factors like location and amenities cannot be ruled out, market conditions will also have to be kept in mind. In the past one year, rentals have fallen by almost 50 % due to a plethora of reasons; changes in the sub prime lending rates and recession being the major ones. Even after the property has been let out for a certain period, there could be some market forces that might compel the owner to modify

What Is The Globalization Essay Example for Free

What Is The Globalization Essay Foreword    The Economist has called   ‘globalisation’   the most abused word of the 21st century. Ironically, its clichà © status does not contribute much to common understanding of the term. The more extensively it is used by both scientists and popular media, the more ambiguous it appears. That is why the first and foremost task of the current report is to consider the term’s definitions and the scope of phenomena it covers. Besides, I would like to focus on the main challenges globalisation presents to public policy-making, paying attention especially to   the ones which affect states’ sovereignty and at the same time cause a number of other issues. What is Globalisation? Definitions of Globalisation First, let us dwell upon some of the possible definitions of the word ‘globalisation’. â€Å"Globalization (or globalisation) in its literal sense is a social change, an increased connectivity among societies, and their elements due to transculturation, the explosive evolution of transport, and communication technologies to facilitate international cultural and economic exchange. The term is applied in various social, cultural, commercial and economic contexts. Globalization can mean 1)The formation of a global village- closer contact between different parts of the world, with increasing possibilities of personal exchange, mutual understanding and friendship between world citizens; 2) Economic globalization more freedom of trade and increasing relations among members of an industry in different parts of the world (globalization of an industry); 3) The negative effects of for-profit multinational corporations- the use of substantial and sophisticated legal and financial means to circumvent the bounds of local laws and standards, in order to leverage the labor and services of unequally-developed regions against each other. ( Globalization,2004 ) Thus, the notion is viewed predominantly from the social angle in its core meaning, and the scope of further implications is determined by the specific field or context of its concrete application. In   Globalization and Its Discontents   a few different definitions are provided.  Ã‚   â€Å"Globalization can be defined as the unfolding resolution of the contradiction between ever expanding capital and its national political and social formation†¦ Globalization can also be grasped as the triumph of capitalism, that is, as the ascendancy of economics over politics, of corporate demands over public policy, of the private over the public interest, of the TNC ( transnational corporations) over the national state †¦.Globalization can further be defined as the arrival of self-generating capital at the global level: that is, capital as capital, capital in the form of the TNC, free of national loyalties, controls, and interests†¦Ã¢â‚¬  ( McBride 2000, pp.8- 9). These definitions   are confined to one nucleus understanding that globalisation should be viewed   in terms of correlation between economy and politics. It is economy that takes over the purely national institutions in the course of globalisation. The two following phenomena are of special importance for the current report,   since   they generate the main challenges to public policy, which will be considered in the next part. 1) Increase in the share of the world economy controlled by multinational corporations 2) Erosion of national sovereignty through establishment of transnational institutions, quasi governments. It is necessary to note, that these two phenomena are closely interrelated, transnational institutions forming a kind of legal basis for corporations’ power implementation. The increasing role of TNCs and transborder institutions naturally confront the status quo intra- and international relations. What challenges globalisation presents to states’ public policy and what new way of thinking and policy-making can evolve as a result of such confrontation is discussed in the next part. III. Globalisation and Public Policy The main trends of globalisation: which of them can present a challenge? In his article Democracy, globalization, and the problem of the state Michael Goodhart focuses on the trends of globalisation. I will try to make out , which problem the government faces to handle each of them. One of such trends consists in the so-called interpenetration of markets as a result of their expansion. The trend definitely puts policy-makers in front of a dilemma: how to keep the balance between fair competition of free market and the necessity to protect home industry Another one refers to the rapid development in information and communication technologies such as Internet and satellite communication.   This is definitely one of the main benefits of globalisation, though it can cause some problems as well, particularly the one of security, and, I am afraid, not only information security â€Å"Fragmentation or localization: the trend toward ethnic revivalism, reinvigorated nationalism, religious fundamentalism, and other local patterns of identification and organization† (Goodhart 2002) is a logical counteraction to unification and standardization globalisation can bring. This is a form of resistance, which can be abused by manipulators of public consciousness. The next two trends are of extreme importance for the current report, and they do challenge policy-makers around the globe. I will give an exact quotation from M. Goodhart’s research article:   The first of them is â€Å"expanding power of TNCs and other non-state institutions of governance: the growing prominence of TNCs both as economic entities eager to elude the direct control and regulation of states and as actors and agents in international governance. Many observers note the parallel expansion of other quasi-public and private institutions of governance† (Goodhart 2002) Another strong trend can be described as â€Å"declining policy and regulatory role of the state: the diminishing policy autonomy of states and their inability to remain effective actors in international political and economic affairs. The claim is that markets constrain or dictate state policy; rapid capital flows and speculation against currencies can destabilize and even wreck national economies.† (Goodhart 2002) Further on, I will give them consideration from a slightly different angle The Global World vs. Sovereignty.    â€Å"A more interesting and, from a policy perspective, more promising question is how states and governments might react to the phenomenon of globalization and any potential challenge to their sovereignty arising from it. Just how does globalization challenge a governments sovereignty?† (Reinicke 1998, p. 53) To answer this question a distinction between external an internal sovereignty should be drawn   . â€Å"Both are relational concepts. But whereas the former focuses on a states external environment and characterizes relations among states within the international system, the latter depicts a states setting within its own territory, characterizing, for example, relations between a government and its citizens, the economy, or other, more narrowly defined groups and institutions. From the perspective of this study, public policy is defined as the principal instrument by which governments operationalize internal sovereignty both in a constitutive and in an executive sense.   (Reinicke1998, pp.53-4) What is usually meant by public policy? What is the scope of policy-makers’ activity? This is a typical encyclopaedia definition: â€Å"Public policy is the study of policy making by governments. . A governments public policy is the set of policies (laws, plans, actions, behaviors) that it chooses. Birkland offers up these common traits of all definitions of public policy (p. 20): The policy is made in the publics name. Policy is generally made or initiated by government. Policy is interpreted and implemented by public and private actors. Policy is what the government intends to do. Policy is what the government chooses not to do† (Globalization,2004)   Traditionally, state policy is strictly divided into domestic and foreign, which becomes impossible in the global world. The distinction is blurred; political and economic management is thus challenged. The distinction between internal and external sovereignty is to facilitate a more profound understanding of the nature of this challenge and to give the answer to the question whether globalization violates states sovereignty. So, we can speak of internal and external instead of domestic and foreign, and in their turn these two dimensions are correlated with globalization and interdependence correspondingly.   The term   Ã¢â‚¬Ëœcomplex interdependence’   was first coined to describe a condition in which autonomous states are related by a growing number of channelspolitical, social, economic, cultural, and others. So interdependence, or mutual dependence â€Å"implies sensitivity or vulnerability to an external force. The units to be studied when examining and measuring interdependence are territorially bound, sovereign nation-states. International interdependence thus denotes a condition of mutual sensitivity and vulnerability among states in the international system. From the perspective of each state, the source of this sensitivity and vulnerability is external† (Reinicke1998, p.55) The main feature of economic interdependence is   an increased cross-border flow of goods , services and capitals . It defines the division of labour among national economies. All the factors form the framework of international finance and trade.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   â€Å"However, despite this expanded flow of goods, services, and capital across borders, national frameworks for policymaking under conditions of interdependence remain for the most part separate from the international arena. In other words, the increased interaction of national economies due to rising specialization leads to heightened interdependence, or, as is often argued, simply dependence, yet national governments remain the principal center of political and economic power as well as the locus of decision-making. Economic events in other countries do not have a direct and immediate impact on the domestic economy but are filtered through a set of policy boundaries, the effectiveness of which begins at, but does not reach beyond, the territory of the domestic economy.†( Reinicke,1998, p.55) Reinicke also points out that it is not de jure legal sovereignty but de facto operational sovereignty which is challenged by interdependence. â€Å"In operational terms, internal sovereignty in todays modern democracy means the ability of a government to formulate, implement, and manage public policy t and society at large†¦A threat to a countrys operational internal sovereignty implies a threat to its ability to conduct public policy. With respect to the economy, the legal dimension of internal sovereignty becomes operational when governments collect taxes or regulate private sector activities, assuming that the boundaries that define the relationship between the public and the private sector are both stable and symmetric. †¦In contrast to internal sovereignty, external sovereignty implies the absence of a supreme authority and therefore the independence of states in the international system.† (Reinicke1998, p.57) The two concepts of sovereignty are closely interrelated, one giving basis or rational to the existence of another. It is quite clear that a state’s sovereignty cannot possibly be implemented through its external element because it is internal regularities and legal and public patterns   that hold a state together. According to what has been previously said about interdependence and challenges it presents to sovereignty, it is crucial to focus on the impact of globalisation. A few definitions of globalisation have already been given in previous parts of the current report. Another one is necessary within the given context. â€Å"According to one definition, globalization in its pure form is a process that subsumes and rearticulates national economies into the global economy through cross-national processes and transactions. These processes and transactions take on an autonomous role in a consolidated global marketplace for production, distribution, and consumption. According to this view, the global economy dominates national economies existing within it.† (Reinicke1998, p. 63) Hence, the attention should be drawn to the fact that while interdependence is, so to speak, cross- or transeconomical, being coherent element, connecting national economies,   globalisation is something that lies within the economy, i.e. it is intrinsic, inherent to them. â€Å"As national borders no longer encompass sufficient territory to function as self-contained markets for global companies, the spatial structure and dynamics that delineate the geography of private sector economic activities are becoming decoupled from the territorial structure and dynamics that define political geography, that is, the territorially bound nation-state and its power of decision-making within the economy†¦ Qualitatively, this disjuncture, or mismatch, between political and economic geography does not challenge the external sovereignty of states. It cannot. Rather, by altering the spatial relationship between the private and the public sector, global corporate networks challenge the internal sovereignty of states. Specifically, since the organizational logic of globalization induces corporations to seek the fusion of multiple, formerly segmented national markets into a single whole, it generates an economic geography that subsumes multiple political geographies. As a result, a government no longer has a monopoly of legitimate power over the territory within which corporations organize themselves. The greater the mismatch between political and economic geography, the more difficult it will be for national governments to act in an inclusive manner, allowing individuals to coexist and interact in a relatively predictable environment. This leads to the heightened perception of risk and insecurity widely observed in our societies† (Reinicke1998, p.64-65) Globalisation world is the world of information. The ability to conduct public policy properly depends on the governments’ access to information. The challenge is, their authorities spread only to a geographically national territories, not to the spheres of actual influence. To provide security, they need to obtain   operational information about economic actors, which do not necessarily perform their businesses within a   geographically restricted territory. Thus, the so-called information asymmetries arise. These asymmetries have always been the case in the modern world but the more globalised it gets, the more dramatic these gaps appear. The governments sometimes face the challenge of the most crucial information’s absence, which leads to not   at all unfounded anxiety of whether they are able to ensure national and global security. For example, it may present a huge difficulty for tax-assessing and collecting. But the information gaps may lie not only in the sphere of economy. A tragic evidence of traditional institutions’ inconsistency was September 11. â€Å"It needs to be recognised that globalisation is not just about increased flows between territorially distinct units, but also represents a more fundamental challenge to the spatial logic of international relations. The weapons systems of 11 September were launched from the eastern seaboard of the USA, not from across its borders. The perpetrators and their supporters were citizens of numerous countries. Most of the perpetrators had been educated in the USA and some were even US citizens. The target was not the military capacity of the USA but the symbols of its global hegemony. The fact that so many victims were non-American also reminds us that US power is embedded in transnational networks that transcend national boundaries. A new security politics needs to recognise the increasingly meaningless separation of the domestic and the international that informs so much conventional security thinking† (Beeson, Bellamy 2003 ). What happened is partially a result of the disjuncture between traditional governance, bounded spatially, and the global world following the new logics â€Å"Given the expansive nature of globalization, the spatial symmetry between the public and the private is disappearing†¦Like interdependence, globalization does not and cannot in any way challenge the legal internal sovereignty of a government. Globalization challenges internal operational sovereignty, and it is important for the subsequent discussion to keep this distinction in mind. Thus, just as states became increasingly sensitive and vulnerable to the actions of other states as increasing interdependence weakened their external operational sovereignty, so their internal operational sovereignty is being undermined by globalization, as territorially bounded governments can no longer project their power and policymaking capacity over the territory within which a global industry operates† (Reinicke1998, p.66) The problem does not only refer to global security and   global economy but to civil cociety and its citizens rights. â€Å"Although individuals may exercise their legal right to vote, the power or influence of that vote in shaping public policy has decreased with the decline in operational internal sovereignty and will continue to do so. Ultimately, a persistent weakness and failure of internal sovereignty, therefore, will lead to a questioning of the institutions and processes of democracy itself†Ã‚   (   Reinicke1998 , p.69) To sum up, â€Å"the globalization of industry presents a challenge to the capacity of governments to govern. But this challenge to their ability to conduct public policy is not an external challenge. It does not emanate from another state, as usually conceptualized in the standard approaches to the study of international relations, and in particular of international interdependence, which focuses on external sovereignty. Rather, the challenge comes from within each country, as economic networks (legal and illegal alike) increasingly operate in a nonterritorial functional space that defies individual territorialities and thus internal sovereignties† (Reinicke1998, p.69) Governments response In the light of the challenges,   which were considered above the question arises, in what way should governments react to globalisation and its consequences.   W.Reinicke   suggests three possible ways to deal with the issue, namely defensive intervention, offensive intervention and global public policy. â€Å"Policymakers can intervene defensively or offensively in globalization. By maintaining or resurrecting barriers to globalization through protective economic measures such as tariff and nontariff barriers, capital controls, or other national regulatory measures in the domains of transport, communications, and information, defensive intervention would in principle return internal sovereignty to the national government. This, in turn, would force companies to reorganize along national lines, much as they did before they adopted global strategies†¦ An alternative strategy to defensive intervention is offensive intervention. Here countries themselves become global competitors, striving to provide the most attractive environment possible for the strategies of global companies within their own territorial boundaries, or to lobby other countries on behalf of their domestic corporations in support of their overseas strategies† (Reinicke1998, p. 83)   A number of measures can be of use   with the latter type   such as   cutting taxes to attract I capitals flow, subsidies, aggressive export promotion campaigns. Corruption , bribery are not   underestimated in this case. Finally, Reinicke suggests   in his opinion the most   effective strategy, that of a global public policy. â€Å"Global public policy differs from both interventionist strategies in that it reverses the adjustment path between the two geographies by realigning the political with the economic geography. Rather than trying to force the economic geography of globalization to adjust to the political geography of interdependence, global public policy alters the political geography in a way that can both accommodate economic globalization and at the same time allow countries to continue to exercise internal sovereignty. Under these circumstances, the reach and management of internal sovereignty are no longer defined by territoriality, but rather by the spatial extension of globalization, that is, on a functional or sectoral basis† (Reinicke1998, p.87). It is global public policy that need governance but does not need a global government. III. Conclusion In the modern world to ignore the phenomenon of globalisation   would not only be impossible but also dangerous. Elaboration of   the efficient strategies is necessary   to cope with the information gap, which is the main challenge to public policy conduction. Transnational corporations increasingly   take over the intranational legitimate organs and reduce the role of democracy and civil rights’ influence upon the course of events. Under these conditions a few approaches are possible, some of them presupposing artificial intervention and oppression to the current circumstances. The most productive way , however, is to eliminate the problematic disjuncture between political and economic geography is not by trying to update it but to create an entirely new system of governance, which can be called global public policy. Bibliography    Beeson, M.,Bellamy, A. 2003. ‘Globalisation, Security and International Order after 11 September’,The Australian Journal of Politics and History, vol. 49, no. 3, pp.339-340 Chanda, N. 2003, Coming Together: Globalisation means reconnecting the human community, Available at: http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/about/essay.jsp Ellwood, D.2002, ‘Americanisation or Globalisation? David Ellwood Argues That the Attempts of British Politicians to Copy an American Role Model Are Likely to Fail’,History Today, vol.52, no. 9 Globalization,2004, Available at: encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/globalization Goodhart, M.2002, ‘Democracy, Globalization and the Problem of the State’,Polity,vol.33,no.4, pp.527-528 Jhunjhunwala , B. 2004, ‘Alternative Globalization’, Addis Tribune, Available at:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=870 Kearney, A.T..2003, ‘Measuring Globalization: Whos Up, Whos Down’,Foreign Policy,60-61 McBride, S.(ed.).2000,Globalization and Its Discontents, Macmillan, Basingstoke Mittelman, J.2002, ‘Making Globalization Work for the Have Nots’,   International Journal on World Peace, vol. 19, no. 2, pp.3-4 Reinicke, W.1998,Global Public Policy: Governing without Government? The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC Shuja, S.2001, ‘Coping with Globalisation’,Contemporary Review, 279, no.1630, pp.257-258

A Satisfactory Alternative To Utilitarianism Proposals Philosophy Essay

A Satisfactory Alternative To Utilitarianism Proposals Philosophy Essay A Theory of Justice by John Rawls presents a vastly more viable, workable, systematic, and satisfactory alternative to Utilitarianism proposals as a moral theory. While Utilitarianism attempts to spread benefits and burdens across society with the goal of maximizing utility, A Theory of Justice establishes the two first principles which ensure that each member of society first have access to basic liberties and secondly allows for social and economic inequalities to exist provided society is structured so as to benefit those who are the least well off. Additionally, Rawls Original Position and veil of ignorance ensures that individuals will not set up society so as to give themselves a greater advantage, but rather will have an incentive to set up scheme of justice which treats all members of society fairly as they do not have the information through wich they could, with any degree of certainty, stack the deck in their favor. In contrast with utilitarianism Rawls assumes that justic e not utility is the overriding factor in creation of a good society. Additionally, Rawls principles are ones that free and rational persons would accept under the original position with a veil of ignorance limiting individuals from creating an unfair advantage from the outset. Social contract theory is superior to utilitarianism precisely because it affords each person equal rights to the most extensive basic liberty in alignment with others in society whereas utility as an aim boasts no such ability. FIRST PRINCIPLES The difference principle is the idea that actions taken in society should improve the expectations of the least advantaged members of society. However it shapes this in the lens of mutual advantage, or as I like to think of it, a tide raises all boats. Ultimately both persons are better off. Rawls states that Inequality in expectation is permissible only if lowering it would make the working class even more worse off. With this in play, Greater expectations allowed to entrepreneurs encourages them to do things which raise the long term prospects of laboring class. The difference principle in effect takes a small aspect of utility and applies it, in a different way to the least well off. DISTINCTION BETWEEN PERSONS Perhaps Rawls greatest critique of Utilitarianism is in regards to the distinction of persons. Utilitarianism can only claim to protect individual rights in so much as the single paramount aim of utility achieves this through maximizes utility. As will be notes later, utility is a horrible tool for achieving this aim. A Theory of Justice  is Rawlss creation with the goal to create a philosophy of justice that provides more satisfaction in the quest for a system which aptly preserves justice and individual liberties. His first two principles achieve this and are as follows: The first is that each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. The second is that Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that: a) they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle). b) offices and positions must be open to everyone under conditions of  fair equality of opportunity From this ordering, equal liberty is first and foremost secured, folled by a more satisfactory social safety net that allows for economic advantage of some over others in so long as it benefits the least well off. Transitioning from this basis which respects the distinction of persons, Rawls begins his attacks on Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism in a misled effort, takes the logic that a single individual would rationally make to maximize the benefits and minimize burdens, and tries to apply them to society as a whole. You cannot apply the cost and benefit logic made by one person to the collective of persons society wide. Rawls contends that this lends itself to situations where there is neglect for the separateness of persons in favor adding up the total happiness and is prone to the violation of basic rights and liberties, which in his view are paramount. While it is perfectly logical for an individual to strive for maximum happiness for themselves, utilitarian theory is flawed in its attempts to apply these concepts to society as a whole. Social contract theory, in a vastly better way provides protection for individuals. Rawls uses examples such as Slavery and Suppression of free speech to show how, conceivably, the suppression of ones rights could be allowed under utilitarianism. For example, suppose a society was built of a strong majority of people, whos entire income was based upon the silence or labor of another class. Were this class of people to be given freedom of speech or rights to vote or freedom from forces labor, the entire society would collapse, resulting in a near complete depletion of utility for the whole. Under the principles of utilitarianism this liberation should not happen. In the quest to maximize   utility for all citizens other members of society must necessarily be denied any meaningful right or liberties to prop up the whole. Rawls sets up what he calls the the impartial  spectator to illustrate this. This individual feels the wants and needs of all in society. From this all knowing snap shot, this person determines the best way to maximize utility overall.  In doing this, the spectator may give certain groups higher priority over others due to the constraints of maximizing utility.  Thus Rawls argues that potentially very little care will go toward the individual whose rights and freedoms could conceivably be neglected because  they make up a minority or insignificant factor in the overarching goal to maximize societies utility. From here, he states that Utilitarianism does not  take seriously the distinction between persons..  Rawls asserts that his theory is an improvement from this since a theory of justice takes all person into account. The utilitarian response to this is of course that it is precisely by the focus upon achieving utility and would thereby argue that utility is best achieved when individual rights are protected. However, in contrast with Rawls second principle, the utilitarian idea does not particularly care what the spread of utility is across people. It may well be that utility is best served when all members of society are provided equal rights, but Rawls point is that there are compelling examples of where this could be completely untrue(e.g. Slavery). EQUILIBRIUM The concept of equilibrium also very important in Rawls overall theory and the sustenance of the original position. If a departure from this situation sets in motion tendencies which restore it, the equilibrium is stable. What he means by this is since the agreement is freely struck between individuals and it provides the best situation for all parties involved within this system, there is a built in check on any activity threatening the system. Since the system maximizes individual interests, provided they are consistent with the rights and freedom of others, the majority of individuals will be benefiting from the system and will work to maintain it. In a way this is reminiscent of utilitarianism. While utility is not being directly calculated, by everyone playing by the rules, it is of maximum benefit to all involved. Essentially, his failsafe measure to preserve the Original Position is everyones desire to maximize his or her own utility. Responsibility Another appeal for the theory of justice is its upholding of personal responsibility and that dynamic between society and individuals. While under his first principles, society is charged with ensuring liberties the flip side to this is that with this as a starting point, each individual is responsible for his or her life plan and choices as well as the consequences that emanate from them. A default on life plans, does not bring about legitimate grounds for compensation by society. Conversely, if a member succeeds well beyond those around them, this merit based achievement and wealth/happiness disparity is allowable, provided it benefit the least well off in society. In society owes the individual only to uphold the first principles, from there, unlike utilitarianism there is a sort of empowerment of the individual. VEIL Rawls states that for this system to work, all citizens must see themselves as   being behind a veil of ignorance.  Ã‚  By this he means that all deciding parties   in establishing the guidelines of justice (all citizens) must see themselves as   equal to everyone paying no mind to there economic situation or anything else   that they could keep in mind to negotiate a better situation to those qualities.  For example, someone who will become wealthy would not be made aware of this due to the veil, and therefore would not attempt to set up the tax code so as to benefit him over others. The individual has an incentive to do this as he or she may end up with the bad end of the deal when all the cards are laid on the table. This sets up a vastly more fair system than utilitarianism can provide. With utilitarianism, a majority could very easily take a look at the way this will play out, and shift them to be in their favor, and this would be allowed should it maximize the total utility. Another weak area for utilitarianism is in regards to what Rawls asserts in his statement that even where laws and institutions are unjust, it is often better that they should be consistently applied. In this way those subject tot them at least know what is demanded and they can try to protect themselves accordingly. Expectations are critical. It is important that even if the law is unjust, that it is consistent and clear. The situation that arises out of an unjust and inconsistent law, is that you have a populace unable to shield themselves or judge what their behavior should be to avoid punishment. Utilitarianism, by its very nature offers no such similar consistency since its goal is not justice, but rather utility. It is possible that randomly, one act or another could be made illegal or taxed with the known result that it will increase utility. Of course the counter claim to this is that maximizing utility leads to justice, but again there are countless examples where this would be untrue. I find in solidarity with Rawls in that justice is better served in the contractarian system over the utilitarian system. If the utilitarian system aims to simply have the most happiness spread to the most people possible, where is the justice for those who fall between the cracks of this system and are sacrificed as a necessary evil to the happiness of the many? Additionally, the idea that one injustice will compensate for the other, which on the surface, seems to be what utilitarianism promotes I find no basis in human reasoning. Under the veil of ignorance this would never be allowed. His concept of democratic equality is an alternative to utilitarianism which is vastly more appealing. He goes on to claim that the reason for the predominance of utilitarianism is due to the vast amount of well refined and impressive writings on the subject. He notes that the great writers for this system were social theorists and economists first and foremost and secondly worked to hash out theories in their writings with which to support and fine turn their beliefs. Throughout the 19th and 20th century there was near monopoly of thought from the major philosophical theorist in support of utilitarianism. I tend to agree with Rawls in his assertion that these theories received a very secluded amount of scrutiny toward Utilitarianisms weak points. While the positives of the system were well distributed and known, the skeptical voices were given a less widespread audience. I also agree with Rawls in his belief that their must be an alternative option available to people and that pointing out the flaws of utilitarians isnt enough. A choice must be given and is given in A Theory of Justice.. It is never enough to simply sit back and point the finger in a critique. Rather, an alternative must and is provided by Rawls. Rawls also defeats utilitarianism in the battle for a balance between liberty and equality. Under his first principles, liberty is adequately served in that he understands that there will always arises a disparity of wealth within society, but then with his second principle he establishes a check upon the trampling of the lowest in society. In Rawls view, this is fair due to the veil and essential aspect is the securing of basic liberties for all as in his first principle. In contrast however, when utility becomes the be all end all to be achieved in a society, you end up in a system that will result in the complete disregard for individual differences and desires. CONCLUSION Despite the huge differences between utilitarianism and the social contract system which Rawls supports, both theories have the same aims. Both attempt to put its actors onto an even playing field, but go about different ways in trying to achieve this. It seems clear that A Theory of Justice gives us a vastly more satisfactory alternative to Utilitarianism. A Theory of Justice establishes the two first principles which provide for basic liberties and secondly allows for individual success in society and inequalities to exist provided the and increase in inequality would benefit those who are the least well off. The veil of ignorance also lays out an incentive for fairness. In essence, Rawls appears to have better grasp upon the basic motivation and nature of human beings. He shows this in his emphasis on individual differences within society and his acceptance of the values of justice, not utility as the measure of a good society.

EMF Radiation: Serious Health Hazard for People Essay -- Technology, E

Technology changes everything in this world. Our life has become more convenient and more efficiency which benefits by these new technology. But during this time, some people have considered about some risks of these technologies. EMF radiation is one of them. People have argued for a long time that whether EMF radiation really poses health hazard or not. I insist that EMF radiation is harmful for people’s health and particularly to young children. This opinion can be well proved by all the information I have searched and more people should know about this. First, it’s important to know what EMF radiation is. The full name of EMF is Electromagnetic fields. It’s a kind of area that we may be involved into every time we watching TV, using cell phone, turning on a light switch or using an electric appliance. EMF is a generic term of force generated by magnetic fields or electrical charges. Sometimes, EMF can be considered as a kind of radiation when release energy. When we use some electric appliances, the electromagnetic waves of these appliances will change periodically and produce enough energy to cause ionization. As we all known, ionization can dislodge orbiting electrons from atoms or break bonds which hold molecules together and then producing ions or charged particles. During this process, the production of ions or ionization in our tissues may cause direct damage to cells and cause other health risks. So EMF radiation is also called ionizing radiation. (DCMNR, 2005) This conception maybe a little bit confusing, but i t’s easy to find out that EMF really produces some extra electrons or magnetic field which we have never seen before. So scientists began to do some experiments to figure out that whether EMF has health hazar... ... kind of radiation does mobile phone product. The World Health Organization (WHO) definite the EMF radiation standard as a kind of limitation from electronic devices or of human exposure time from all kind of devices. (WHO, 2006) The exposure standard is basic standard of personal protection in maximum levels. So the EMF can be variety and uncertain. No matter the opponents aware or not, just provide for a rainy day. Technology is a double-edged sword. It can provide us convenient while it may affect our health at the same time. Fortunately, some kind of technology such like EMF radiation has been proved to be harmful and people can prevent it from now on. From my study I am sure that EMF radiation can poses a health hazard for people especially for children and teenagers. All people who really care about their health and their children should know this fact.

Electoral college Essay

Who’s voting for the president? Not you. We live in a society where your vote doesn’t directly count during a presidential election. This is due to an antiquated system called the electoral college. The electoral college (EC) was founded in 1787. The founding fathers set up the system so that the president is chosen indirectly. This was done so that â€Å"popular passion,† wouldn’t factor in as much. Basically they didn’t want presidential campaigns to become purely advertisement campaigns. (third party times) But there are a few serious flaws in the electoral college that need to be dealt with. For example, the well known Democratic motto â€Å"one man, one vote,† (which means every vote counts) doesn’t apply to presidential elections because of the EC. The electoral college makes it possible for a candidate who wins the popular vote of the people to lose the presidency. (electoral college) This has happened exactly 3 times in the pas t. Once in 1876, and once in 1888, and most recently during the 2000 elections. President Bush lost the popular vote to candidate Al Gore by over 500,000 votes. Bush still won the presidency because Florida (a key state in elections) had a last minute change in the electoral votes. This threw the entire state into a republican vote. â€Å"On two other occasions (1800 and 1824), the House of Representatives 2 picked the president when nobody won an electoral-college majority. Thomas Jefferson once described this circumstance as ‘the most dangerous blot on our Constitution.’ † (electoral college) Lawrence P. Longley and Neal R. Pierce, two experts on the electoral college and Harvard teachers, agree wholeheartedly with Jefferson’s statement. They know full well the weaknesses of the EC. They did some calculations to illustrate this point further. Californians have over two times as much voting power as do people in Montana because of the population differences. Even worse than that is, if even a few votes change in some key states it can change the whole outcome of an election. e.g. the 2000 Florida elections. There have been 22 razor close elections in our history one of which was † the 1960 race between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon–if 8,971 votes in Illinois and Missouri had switched from Kennedy to Nixon that year, the result would have been an electoral college deadlock.† (electoral college) Longley and Peirce argue that â€Å"it’s only a matter of time before it breaks down completely. The President of the United States is elected indirectly by the electoral college — an archaic and quirky system that threatens every four years to overturn popular will.† (electoral college) To top it all off, the people we choose to vote for the president aren’t even required to keep their pledges. â€Å"In 24 states and the district of Columbia, electors are 3 not bound by any state law or regulation that they vote for the states popular vote winner.† (civic values) For example in 1988 an elector pledged to Michael Dukakis changed his pledge to Lloyd Bentsen. Also it happened in 1976 when an elector pledged to Gerald Ford voted for Ronald Reagan instead. These are just a few of the instances involving â€Å"faithless electors† a term used for electors who change their pledge. The question is what do we do about these problems? The answer is simple, we change the EC. (civic values) There are three basic plans for changing the way the EC works. The first is called the proportional method. This particular option hasn’t been researched as much as the others. Basically if a candidate receives 58 percent of the popular vote then they also receive 58 percent of the electoral vote. This reflects popular will and lets the electors keep their jobs. The problem with this method is that it would require support from every state. (election reform) The second is the plan to abolish the electoral college completely. This is a very simple plan which is becoming increasingly popular. If you were to eliminate the EC it would better reflect th e popular vote, get rid of the possibility of â€Å"faithless electors,† and it might increase voter turnout. (election reform) In order to get rid of the EC entirely you would need two thirds of the house of Representatives and the Senate and 38 states to agree that it needs to be changed. 4 and though abolishing the EC is fast becoming a popular idea (especially since the 2000 elections) there is still not enough support for the idea. The harsh reality is that there probably will never be enough support. This is because the very people who’s jobs depend on the existence of the electoral college are the ones making a substantial amount of the decision whether or not to keep it. (civic values) Luckily there’s a solution. Instead of getting rid of the electoral college just alter it a little bit. The third plan is called the District Method. This could be a good option, because instead of having the entire state swing towards one political party for the electoral vote, now a state could be divided into smaller parts . This would better represent the popular vote and therefore the people. Another reason that the District Method may work is that you don’t need a constitutional amendment. Even if only a few states adopted this method it would be effective. Also it’s a good compromise . The electoral college is still in play, so supporters of it wouldn’t protest. In addition the people would have more of a say in who their president is . And that’s what really matters. (election reform) Now you can see that the popular vote, which our country was founded on as a democracy , can be thwarted to fit the whims of the electoral college. Our basic rights of choosing the people who govern us do not apply in the case of presidential elections which are the most important elections. This cannot stand. When our forefathers wrote the constitution, the United States was much 5 smaller and the people were better represented because they were in smaller groups. That isn’t the case today. Things have changed and we as a society must change with the times. If not, any self appointed dictator could pay or persuade him or herself into power with potentially detrimental results. Make your vote count. Petition to change the electoral college. 6 Work Cited Page â€Å"Electoral College.† Web News: Product reviews. 11/9/2003. Harvard Electoral College Experts. Dec. 2000 http://www.webdesk.com/electoral-college/ Third Party Times. The Electoral College System. 1992, League of Womens Voters of California Education fund. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu./case/3pt/electoral.html Electionreform.org. 2001. Election Reform. http://www.electionreform.org.ERMain/priorities/ec/reform.htm Civic-Values State Lawmakers Mull Electoral College. Nov.2000. http://civic.net/civic-values.archive/200011/msg00181.html

Project Management Email Individual Paper Essay

With the available information from the previous email regarding the projects of Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer, I feel it is in the company’s best interest to go with the Palomino project moving forward. The reason for not selecting the other two options is because Juniper carries too low of a risk for completion. Stargazer is not worth the high risk of completion and the unfamiliarity of how the final product will be with the customer. The method applied for making this decision was by utilizing the feasibility study. The main purpose of this is because using this project would have to make sense to the company as a whole. Answering all of the questions on Return On Investment (ROI), length of project, risk and overall benefit to Piper Industries. Using the feasibility study for the Juniper and Stargazer projects, it was a basic understanding that previously mentioned material would not be present as with the Palomino model. There are five different phases in project management that involve the  Palomino project and those are (Jacobs & Chase 2011): †¢Project conception and initiation: The main focus of this phase is to ensure the project being presented is realistic and will benefit the company. †¢Project definition and planning: The scope of the project will need an outline so the work which needs to be performed is available. Prioritizing, budgets and timelines are in this phase as well. †¢Project launch or execution: Tasks are assigned and each team is made aware of their responsibilities. †¢Project performance and control: The status and progress will be checked against the actual plan to ensure everything is running smoothly. The project manager will make adjustments as need to keep the original project on target. †¢Project close: Once all tasks are complete and the customer is content with the final product, a lesson learn plan will need to be established†¦ Content: Project Management Recommendation Name: Institution: Date: Dear Ray I duly received your email and we reviewed the three projects with my team. After critical analysis the board felt that the second project on your email (Palomino) was the best project for investment. The risk for completion is average; therefore, it does not put the company at a high risk of losing Dear Mr. Gritsch, Our team wants to thank Piper Industries Corporate vice-president, Wendell Deirelein, for choosing our team to analyze the projects. In the attached document you will find our analysis and recommendation of the Project Proposal that benefits your company. Thank you, Project Manager Project Management Recommendation Project to be Implemented Piper Industries needs a completed project and for it to be generating review within 12 month’s of the Project Management Office’s (PMO) review (University of Phoenix, 2012). The project that fits the company’s  requirements is the Stargazer project. The Stargazer project is efficient and the expectation of the project being completed on time is high. The research and development has already started on the widgets (University of Phoenix, 2012). According to the project descriptions, $450,000 has been spent on the product and they average a total of $575,000 being spent in order to bring the product to the market (University of Phoenix, 2012). Even though the dollar amount spent in this project is high, the return on investment for this project is high; by the third year the product is forecasted to have a return of investments of $750,000 (University of Phoenix, 2012). The product life of this project is forecasted to be 7 years (University of Phoenix, 2012). This product is still not being used, meaning Piper Industries will be the first company to launch the product to the market. By bringing such an innovative product into the marketplace, it can make Piper Industries the leader in the industry (University of Phoenix, 2012). Five Phases According to Stricker (2013), â€Å"Whether a project is large or small, the stages of a project are ultimately the same. Initiate the project, and then move into planning, followed by execution†¦. Project Management Recommendation Piper Industries Corp. wants to make a decision on the appropriate project to invest in based on three recommendations. First, Juniper is an enhancement of a current widget being offered by the company, while Palomino is a new line of widget products including enhancements using existing technology, and Stargazer is a production of completely new widgets, which research and development have already started on. The company assigned our team to analyze the three projects and make recommendations on which project the company should invest in. The recommendation must include our description of the five phases of the project and the key deliverables (project completion date and cost) for each project (University of Phoenix, 2013). The Project Recommendation Based on the break-even analysis for the Juniper project it basically shows the company will not, or barely break-even, during the life cycle of the production of these widgets due to technology advancements causing this product line to become obsolete after three years? It has a cost of $325,000 and Return on Investment only producing $250,000 for the two to three years of production with the third year being the end of life for this product. If the company chooses the Palomino project it will also have a hard time breaking-even and producing revenue streams over the life-time of the production with a 5% margin of error with the seventh year being the end of life for the product. The strength of the economy plays a large determining factor in this forecast due to 5% differential in the life cycle of this product. Palomino will cost $655,000 with the Return of Investment being $450,000 over a five year period with that 5%, plus or minus, margin of error. Profit would then start to be recognized in the sixth and seventh year of the life cy†¦ Thank you for choosing our team to analyze the three projects your company has proposed. After meeting with my team and analyzing the data of the three projects, we have to come to an agreement that the project your company should invest in is the Juniper project. Since your company is currently somewhat familiar with the product involved in this project, it will be more efficient and cost effective to continue the enhancement of this product. There are five phases of the project that must take place in order for the project to be a success. The first phase is the planning phase which includes a product approval and launch of the actual product development process. This also includes a mission statement that includes the target market of the product, business goals, key assumptions and constraints. The second phase is concept development. This phase is focused more on the needs of the target market, alternative product concepts which will need further testing and development. The concept is key in this phase because it describes the form, function and features of the product that are accompanied by a set of specifications and an economic justification for the project (Jacobs, pg. 74). The third phase is design detail which entails the specific parts of the product and all standard parts that are needed  from the supplier. This process also includes drawings and computer files that describe the geometry of each tool, purchased parts and process plans. The fourth phase is testing and refinement. This phase is includes construction and evaluation of multiple versions of the preproduction of the product. This is the time when we would be prototypes in order to determine if the product satisfies customer needs. The final phase is the production ramp-up. The product is made of intended production system. The purpose of the ramp-up is to get the workforce trained and to work out a remaining issues that may arise during the process such as†¦ Dear Mr. Gritsch: In continuation of your email dated February 10, 2014, I have completed analysis of three projects: Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer. The risk levels in Juniper, Palomino, and Stargazer are low, medium, and high respectively. It is in the best interest of Piper Industries Corporation to move forward with the Stargazer project. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. In continuation of your email dated February 10, 2014, I have completed analysis of three projects: Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer. The risk levels in Juniper, Palomino, and Stargazer are low, medium, and high respectively. It is in the best interest of Piper Industries Corporation to move forward with the Stargazer project. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. In continuation of your email dated February 10, 2014, I have completed analysis of three projects: Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer. The risk levels in Juniper, Palomino, and Stargazer are low, medium, and high respectively. It is in the best interest of Piper Industries Corporation to move forward with the Stargazer project. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. My feasibility study focused on Return on Investment (ROI), length of project, risk level and overall benefit to Piper Industries. See below for the results. Juniper: Return on Investment (ROI): 77% or $250,000 for a period of 2 to 3 years Length of project: Uncertain Risk of completion on time: Low Overall benefit: Enhancement of current product, increased product demand Palomino: Return on Investment (ROI): 69% or $450,000 for a period of 5 years Length of project: 7 Years Risk of completion on time: Medium Overall benefit: New product, use of existing technology, custom part, constant demand Stargazer: Return on Investment (ROI): 278% or $1,600,000 for a period of 3 years Length of project: 7 Years Risk of completion on time: High Overall benefit: Research & Development of a new product, market leader, project recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has Reference Jacobs, F. R. & Chase, R. (2011). Operations and Supply Chain Management (13th ed.) Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.