House Republicans Move to Cut Federal Workforce

House Republicans Move to Cut Federal Workforce With their morale already about to bottom out, the nearly 3 million civilian employees of the federal government now face two Republican-backed bills that would eventually eliminate many of their jobs. Taking the Forced Attrition Approach First up to bat, Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming) introduced the Federal Workforce Reduction Through Attrition Act (H.R. 417), which Rep. Lummis says would reduce the federal workforce by 10% over the next 5 years â€Å"without forcing any current federal employees out of a job.† Instead, the bill would allow the federal agencies to hire only one employee for every three that retire or otherwise leave service, saving an estimated $35 billion over those 5 years, according to Lummis. Through attrition at that rate, the bill requires a net reduction of 10% or nearly 300,000 jobs from the federal civilian federal workforce by September 30, 2016.  The bill would not apply to Postal Service workers, who are not exactly government employees, anyway. â€Å"We’ve racked up over $18 trillion in debt simply because Washington has no idea when to stop spending,† said Rep. Lummis in a press release. â€Å"Attrition is a solution that requires the federal government to do what any business, state, or local government would do to cut costs limit new hires.† In addition, should even one agency fail to comply with the one-for-three attrition plan, the bill would slap that agency with an immediate total hiring freeze. â€Å"Instead of blindly filling empty desks, this bill forces agencies to take a step back, consider which positions are crucial, and make decisions based on necessity rather than luxury,† said Lummis, adding, â€Å"Real, productive job creation takes place on Main Street America, not in the bloated federal government.† Finally, concerned that the agencies would try to â€Å"backfill† their departing employees by simply hiring even more costly third-party contractors, Lummis’ bill requires the agencies to match their reductions in employees with cuts in their numbers of service contracts awarded. The last action on the  Federal Workforce Reduction Through Attrition Act  took place on Jan. 20, 2015, when it was sent to the  House Committee on Oversight and Government.   Defense Employees In the Crosshairs Meanwhile over at the Department of Defense (DOD), where morale is even lower, the almost 770,000 civilian employees will be watching the Rebalance for an Effective Defense Uniform and Civilian Employees (REDUCE) Act (H.R. 340), introduced by Rep. Ken Calvert (R-California). Rep. Calvert’s REDUCE Act would force the DOD to cuts its civilian workforce by a substantial 15% about 116,000 employees – by the year 2020 and keep it at or below that level until 2026. According to Rep. Calvert, the workforce cuts would essentially reverse the 15% growth of the civilian DOD workforce that has occurred since the 9/11 terror attacks. In his statement on the REDUCE Act, Rep. Calvert cites former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman as estimating that a 15% reduction in the DOD’s civilian workforce would save $82.5 billion over the first five years. â€Å"The continued growth in our civilian staff at the DOD comes at a time when we are reducing the number of active-duty military personnel something is clearly wrong with that equation,† Calvert said in a press release. â€Å"Simply put, if we fail to correct this trend our uniformed soldiers, not to mention American taxpayers, will suffer the consequences.† Perhaps even more menacing to DOD employees is that, unlike Rep. Lummis’ bill, which specifies attrition as the method, the REDUCE Act does not specify how the DOD is to cut its workforce.    Instead, the REDUCE Act requires only that the DOD find a way to â€Å"responsibly adjust† its number of civilian workers, leaving anything from attrition to â€Å"round them up and lay them off,† on the table. The bill would give the Secretary of Defense greater authority to consider job performance in personnel decisions and to use voluntary separation incentive payments and voluntary early retirement payments in order to achieve the required workforce cuts. â€Å"Our current and retired military leaders have widely acknowledged the need to establish a more efficient defense workforce in order to preserve our national security posture in the future,† said Rep. Calvert. â€Å"However, actions speak louder than words and I continue to believe Congress will ultimately have to force DOD’s hand to implement these necessary changes.† No further action on the REDUCE Act has taken place since Aug. 13, 2015, when it was referred to the House  Subcommittee on Readiness.   Federal Employee Unions Object Labor unions are designed to protect jobs, so as you might expect, federal-employee unions strongly oppose both of these bills. In a press release, American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) President J. David Cox said the size of the federal workforce as a percentage of the total U.S. workforce had already shrunk to a level unseen since the Eisenhower administration (1953 – 1961). Fearing the federal workforce will suffer a â€Å"death by a thousand cuts,† Cox said, â€Å"Federal employees protect Americans’ freedom to lead a decent private life without having to worry about basic necessities such as safe food and infrastructure.† â€Å"When anti-government lawmakers talk about cutting the already underfunded and understaffed federal workforce, it’s important to ask who they want to cut,† said Cox. â€Å"Do they want to get rid of employees who care for our veterans, inspect foods, keep air and water clean, forecast tornadoes, rescue victims of natural disasters, design safe roads and bridges, find a cure to deadly diseases, conduct research on energy efficiency, keep air travel safe, protect communities from criminals, analyze security and financial risks, advance science to drive further economic growth, protect people against discrimination in employment, ensure workplace safety and security, manage defense contracts worth billions of dollars, etc?†

Can democracy be spread by force

Can democracy be spread by force Introduction Typically, democracy is a system of governance in which people choose their preferred government and rulers. This can be exercised through voting in a free and fair mannerism.1Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Can democracy be spread by force? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More It is instantiated by rights like freedom of expression and freedom of speech amongst others. Therefore, at its core, democracy signifies a fair and justifiable power distribution in any kind of society. This paper discerns whether democracy can be spread by force. Concurrently, it argues against the possibility of attaining democracy through forceful strategies. It also provides relevant countries and global instances (as examples) to certify this claim. This is a critical provision when considered comprehensively in the realms of democracy and its relevant benefits. In a democratic society, an individual has more power of governing his or her life as it would be appropriate (self choice of expression). Considerably, there are four main elements of democracy.2 Besides a political system where people choose and replace their government through elections (which are free and fair), people also participate actively as citizens in their civic life and politics. In addition, the rule of law which applies equally to every citizen should be used to protect the fundamental human rights of each and every citizen. Even though democracy is much embraced in most countries of the western world, it has failed in some continents such as Africa, Middle East regions, and to some extent, south Asia. Tribalism, which has its deep roots in these counties, is the major reason for this failure.Advertising Looking for essay on government? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Considerably, some attempts to attain democracy through force have worked in some countries includi ng Japan and Germany after the World War II. Nonetheless, some forceful efforts have failed significantly. Actually, the majority of people from these countries would prefer voting for a candidate who is a member of their tribe, religion, or sect rather than someone else who is a not a member even if that individual have got better governance ideologies. This is very evident in countries such as Zimbabwe and Iraq. The United States of America is at the forefront in spreading democracy.3 But why should they seek to spread democracy? And can democracy be achieved by force? Evidently, forced democracy might destroy a society during its establishment. Consequently, the society should be rebuilt after achieving the concerned democracy as it happened in the developed nations such as the Japan and Germany amongst others. Democracy can be spread by force To some extent this statement is true. For instance, the United States of America has launched an international war on terror, which invol ves strategies that embrace the regime change concepts. This creates new identities which are politically democratic and wins the hearts and minds of people. As an illustration, the involvement of the US in both Afghanistan and Iraq was premised on the view of eliminating terror and putting democracy in place. The United States has been successful in campaigning and spreading democracy through the use of military, politics, and psychology in almost each and every area that is involved around the world.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Can democracy be spread by force? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Definitely, this close connection has implied that the extent of influence by the United States around the globe has been expanded. In fact, they have exploited every globalization device like television broadcasting and internet to compound the extent of its influence. These have been very effective in spreading democra tic propaganda in most regions of the globe that are governed by dictatorships. In addition, they have created changes in the political awareness in support to democratizing. At the end of the Second World War, US took an active role to deepen and widen democracy in western parts of Europe. The European integration was encouraged by the United States in establishing and stabilizing the democracy. NATO was the fortification within which West Germany, Spain, Portugal, and Italy became democratic. The integrated Europe and the twin NATO institutions jointly formed powerful incentives for developing democracies of the East European countries to link with the multilateral institutions of Western Europe at the end of the cold war.4 This shows how democracy spread in the western countries. However, it is important to note that war is characterized by the destruction of economy and ruining of the whole society. The society is rebuilt after the achievement of democracy as it happened in the developed nations such as the Japan and Germany amongst others as indicated earlier. There are certain problems that plague political efforts; typically, creating an arrangement that is able to safeguard people’s interests without persecution threats. Different nations around the globe have struggled with power balance by either using imperial or even more idealistic schemes to concentrate power for governing the world.Advertising Looking for essay on government? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More There has been lots of debate domestically on how much right the executive should have. The strong executive supporters believe that the best way of preserving peace is through uncontrolled ability to discourage or anticipate an attack. However, the antagonists of such kind of a scheme distress that it is likely to allow the executives to start war very easily and would be particularly unstoppable if many nations adopt it. This dilemma was tried to be resolved by the administration of George W. Bush by creating the democratic empire concept.5 America is regarded as inalienable military power that is able to enforce a peaceful order in any part of the troubled world. In this way, America continues to keep unchallengeable military strengths. Thus, it is not necessary to destabilize weapon competitions of other eras and also restricts the contentions to trade as well as other peace pursuant. Actually, most people around the globe are uncomfortable with the policy of the United States w hich welcomes power in the provision and commitment to freedom.6 Their policy stresses that freedom commitment can and must create a common cause to counter the enemies of freedom. This a clear indication that if such policies are not available to safeguard the rights and freedoms of individuals in the society -their democracy- then most of the nations will not allow their people to exercise these rights. It is very likely that the democratic institutions of governments will not be able to thwart the abuse of power used in promoting democracy and the application of military power will instill democracy in these nations. The demonstrations and protests that swept the Middle East in the beginning of the year 2011 is a further illustration that indeed democracy can be spread by force. These protests resulted to the removal of Tunisian president Ben Ali and shook Hosni Mubarak’s government of Egypt. In these countries, it is not only the world superpowers like the United States t hat gave a more vocal support to the people who demanded democracy on the Cairo streets but also the people stood firm in calling for change of leadership in their country. Eventually, the kind of leadership that was characterized by dictatorship and the oppression of the poor and the disadvantaged in the society had to cede power, sending a strong message to the rest of the world that if a leader clings to power through corruption and denial of democracy, at long last he or she will have to face the consequences. This is one way in which democracy has been spread around the globe. There is also a lot of argument as to whether the use of force or military action is justifiable in promoting democracy. In some cases, the action of military may not only be essential in facilitating and restoring democracy but also in ending certain cruel kind of dictatorship. For instance, in Rwanda genocide of 1994 is a typical example. The military involvement was very justifiable to put an end to ge nocide and restore peace in Rwanda. Nonetheless, military intervention should be considered as a last resort since a lot of destruction of the society as well as economic degradation is associated with such forceful democracy. While considering other viable theories, democracy is a major contributor to fundamental human values and should be encouraged all over the world. It promotes values such as the rights of workers, freedom of speech and movement. It also establishes an environment that is secure and stable for citizens of a country. In addition to this, democracy is a value that ensures interests of all citizens and the country are taken care of and their rights are secured.7 Governments that promote democracy are the ones that enhance peace, avoid violence and wars, encourage development, and advocate for the rights of all humans. Democracy should be promoted in the modern world to assist in the achievement of stability and growth for humanity. Its development should also be p romoted to enable countries that are newly formed to adopt democratic principles. Countries that have not implemented principles of democracy should be denounced and encouraged to adopt them. Many countries in the world have adopted democracy and continue to promote human rights. There are others still in the process of implementing strategies that will ensure democracy.8 The growth of democracy has taken a long time and there are various methods that have been used to spread it. There have also been various barriers to the spread of the value and commercial barriers are among them. Some of the methods that have been used to spread democracy are through use of religion and education. However, there is the question of the effectiveness of coercion in spreading democracy. There are people who believe that force can be used in spreading democracy while others believe that it is not an effective method. The question to use force or not in spreading democracy can be answered using theori es of international relations. This section of paper will attempt to answer the question using realism and liberal theories. With respect to democracy, realism focuses on the motives leading to proper security, control and capital (Gilbert 58). On the other hand, liberalism proposes that the difference that exists between countries regarding principles of democracy is the main causes of wars. Realism first focuses on the main causes of wars. The theory also believes that the international structure and systems has an important role in international relations. The proponents of this theory further believe that the absence of authority from a central point leads to dilemma on matters of security. This therefore means that attempts by one country to seek security assurance are likely to make its adversaries feel insecure. These adversaries can them arm up and use other forms of interactions that are hostile by nature. The relative capabilities of countries thus play an important role i n international relations. Concurrently, the central authority plays important roles in the international relations and gives a reason for countries to relate in the international system.9 Groups based in various parts of the world are also important in international relations (according to the realists). Additionally, the behavior of the states is considered to be rational according to this theory. The reason for this belief among realists is that states use logic when making decisions and act in the interest of the nation. They do this so as to survive, be secure, be powerful and gain capital. The motives of the nation usually make analysts to manipulate how policy makers think and this has the effect of policy makers making laws that are in the interest of the nation.10 The realists also note that states respond to external factors. Thus, their actions are guided by what happens internationally. These can be used to explain how democracy can be spread using force. For example, Ir aq was a country led by a dictator. There were also extremists in Iraq and the rights of the citizen were not guaranteed. The United States, on the other hand, is a country that values democracy and protection of the rights of individuals. United States thus attempted to promote these values in Iraq forcefully. However, according to realists, there are other interests that the United States had apart from the promotion of democracy in Iraq. United States wanted to ensure that it is secure and its citizens are safe. The United States also wanted to avoid Iraq’s quest to develop weapons of mass destruction. If Iraq developed these weapons, then it would be a threat to United States and countries that are allied to it. In addition to these interests of the United States, the need to develop military bases in the Middle East was another reason for going to Iraq. The United States wanted to develop military bases in Iran and Syria so as to help Israel, which is an ally of Unites S tates. Another reason was the need to secure the supply of oil for the United States and the need to reduce complications that could result from energy shortage. This is a critical provision when scrutinized comprehensively. Finally, United States hardly ratified inspections UN executed in Iraq to determine whether there were weapons of mass destruction. These, according to realism theory of international relations, guided the policy decisions of the United States. It means that the United States checked the benefits that could result from invading Iraq and the costs of the invasion. It then made decision based on the findings with respect to democracy. Additionally, the United States was a central point of authority. It had the military might and is a super power.11 The foreign policies of the United States are also war preventive against countries considered to be rogue. The military might of United States also played an important part. According to the theory, the military streng th of a country is important. It determines how the country establishes, ratifies, and protects its foreign policies.12 Thus, US ensured that its military might was unmatched and if Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction, then it had to be dealt with. These informed one of the policies of Bush administration and this was to remove the Baathist regime in Iraq. It did not, however, attack other countries such as North Korea or Libya or Iran. This is because of the interests that it had. In the attack, democracy was to be achieved by force in Iraq. In other words, the foreign policy of the United States is democratic in nature. On the other hand, according to liberalism, decisions to ratify force (to initiate democracy) are made based on differences that exist between countries that are democratic and countries that are non-democratic. Thus it is the ideologies that exist in a country, the beliefs and the views to the world operations are the guiding factors on whether to go t o war or not. This is different from the realists who see financial, political and bureaucratic motives of the elites as the reasons for going to war. Liberalism theory believes that the spread of democratic principles can lead to peace in the whole world. They argue that countries that uphold democratic principles are usually peaceful compared to countries that are ruled by authoritarian regimes. In addition to this, the liberals argue that economic interdependence among countries can promote peace too. This is because countries that are cooperating or depending on each other economically cannot go to war against each other because this would destroy both economically.13 According to liberals, states are the main actors in international matters and relations and not any other organization such as international corporations. According to liberals, the United States fear that Iraq could attack it and its allies because the ruler in Iraq was a dictator is one reason it attacked Iraq f irst. Secondly, it attacked Iraq because US’s security, security of other nations, and the rights of the Iraqis could only be derived through democracy. This means that the security for the whole world can be achieved when democracy is spread in the whole world. Security for the world can also be attained through trade and regulation of conflicts by international organizations. The liberals thus propose that force can be used to remove dictators from power and this will enable enhancement of freedom and thus democracy. In Iraq, this is what happened according to many people. A dictator, Saddam Hussein, was removed from power and the Iraqis gained democracy. Democracy cannot be achieved by force Even though most nations (especially in the western world) have been able to achieve forceful democracy, there are some regions where forced democracy has failed. Currently Americans have different opinions about the idea of promoting democracy.14 Even though most people believe that t he aim of the US foreign policy should be focused on endorsing democracy, there is unwillingness to make its promotion a key theme in their foreign policy as well as an opposition to the use of military force or threats to achieve democracy. Concurrently, the Americans believe they have a moral obligation of promoting democracy.15 There is a considerable support for cooperative approaches to promote democracy and involving the United Nations. There are people who would prefer to promote democracy in more friendly dictatorial countries regardless of whether it may result into unfriendly governments. Most people approve putting public and diplomatic pressure to respect the fundamental human rights. In 2005, the Americans resisted the recommendation of George w. Bush to make democracy promotion as the Central American policy. Evidently, Iraq and Iran have indicated unsuccessful instances where force was applied to establish democracy. Despite the US’s efforts to restore democrac y in the region, some instances of impartiality can be noticed within the region. The main purpose of democracy is creating reason and order in the society. However, when forced it could result into even more chaos, like in Israel and Palestine. Here the Israelites were given land (by the US), which the Palestinians claimed to be theirs. Consequently, there has been a constant war between the two countries. There are other countries which cannot keep democracy whether forceful or peaceful. Russia is a typical example where capital revolution rather than democracy has taken its deeper roots.16 In the majority of the undeveloped countries, democracy is difficult to sustain. In most cases, in smaller countries with already established set of cultures or government, when democracy is forced upon them it is more likely to backfire. In this case democracy will lead to tyranny17. Democracy has failed in America, majorly, because the government gets involved too much in the activities of bu sinesses like Microsoft. It imposes lots or restrictions which limit what can be done by the company thus hindering the value of democracy within these businesses. Even if democracy is forced on some countries, leaders still manipulate their way into dictatorship with impunity. Ngo Diem from the republic of Vietnam was a leader who never liked the public elections idea. When he was forced to establish and agree to the democracy of holding public elections, he organized it in a way that favored his victory. In this case, he sent soldiers in plainclothes into the districts of his opponents to make sure that he wins. This shows that democracy was still not yet exercised. The concerned election was not a free and fair. Precisely, the democratic society idea has changed and evolved over the past years to fit the country and its citizens. Even if not everybody is willing to accept a democratic government easily, there should be willingness of all parties involved. Democracy has succeeded in some countries simply because people have decided to exercise democracy rather than using force to impose it. Conclusion In conclusion, using force in spreading democracy is often necessary in most cases; however, it is not a vital success element. Democracy is changing regularly, not just for the citizens but also for the period it takes place. As evident earlier, democracy can be achieved through force in some cases; nonetheless, force never gives positive results in other instances. This is a critical provision when considered critically in the context of democracy and its promotional events. Every government should embrace democracy to give its citizens their necessary freedoms and rights. Bibliography Aron, R, Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations, Transactions Publishers, New Brunswick, 2003. Art, RJ K, Waltz. The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics, Rowman Littlefield, Lanham, 2003.. Barkawi, T M Laffey. Democracy, Liberalism, and War: R ethinking the Democratic Peace Debate, Lynne Rienner Publ, Boulder, 2001. Benjamin, P, The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Dont Get, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2006. Botscher, J, Neorealist Assessment of Indias Look East Policy, Grin Verlag, London, 2011. Bulliet, R, The Earth and Its People: A Global History, Cengage Wadsworth, Boston, 2011. Bundu, A, Democracy by Force?: (a Study of International Military Intervention in the Civil War in Sierra Leone from 1991-2000, Universal Publication, Parkland, 2001. Carter, A, Direct Action and Democracy Today, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2004. DAnieri, PJ, International Politics: Power and Purpose in Global Affairs, Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Boston, 2012. Fortmann, MT JJ, Wirtz, Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2004. Gilbert, A, Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy?: Great-power Realism, Democratic Peace, and Democratic Internationali sm, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1999. Hobson, J, Imperialism: A Study, Cosimo, New York, 2005. Lambert, A, Democratic Civilian Control of Armed Forces in the Post-Cold War Era, LIT, Münster, 2008. Rousseau, DL, Identifying Threats and Threatening Identities: The Social Construction of Realism and Liberalism, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2006. Traub, J, The Freedom Agenda: Why America Must Spread Democracy (just Not the Way George Bush Did), Straus and Giroux, New York, 2009. Varas, A, Democracy Under Siege, Greenwood, Westport, 1989. Footnotes 1 A Bundu, Democracy by Force?: (a Study of International Military Intervention in the Civil War in Sierra Leone from 1991-2000, Universal Publication, Parkland, 2001, p. 65. 2 T Barkawi M Laffey. Democracy, Liberalism, and War: Rethinking the Democratic Peace Debate, Lynne Rienner Publ, Boulder, 2001, p. 73. 3 P Benjamin, The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Dont Get, Univ. of Chicago Pres s, Chicago, 2006, p. 23. 4 A Veras, Democracy Under Siege, Greenwood, Westport, 1989, p. 45. 5 PJ DAnieri, International Politics: Power and Purpose in Global Affairs, Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Boston, 2012, p. 86. 6 J Botscher, Neorealist Assessment of Indias Look East Policy, Grin Verlag, London, 2011, p. 36. 7 R Bulliet, The Earth and Its People: A Global History, Cengage Wadsworth, Boston, 2011, p. 67. 8 R Art K Waltz, The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics, Rowman Littlefield, Lanham, 2003, p. 25. 9 J Traub,The Freedom Agenda: Why America Must Spread Democracy (just Not the Way George Bush Did), Straus and Giroux, New York, 2009, p. 50. 10 A Gilbert, Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy?: Great-power Realism, Democratic Peace, and Democratic Internationalism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1999, p. 97. 11 MT Fortmann JJ Wirtz, Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2004, p. 64. 12 A Carter , Direct Action and Democracy Today, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2004, p. 60. 13 A Gilbert, Must Global Politics Constrain Democracy?: Great-power Realism, Democratic Peace, and Democratic Internationalism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1999. 14 DL Rousseau, Identifying Threats and Threatening Identities: The Social Construction of Realism and Liberalism, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2006. 15 A Lambert, Democratic Civilian Control of Armed Forces in the Post-Cold War Era, LIT, Münster, 2008, P. 467. 16 J Hobson, Imperialism: A Study, Cosimo, New York, 2005. 17 R Aron, Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations, Transactions Publishers, New Brunswick, 2003, p. 25.

Minimize vs. Reduce

Minimize vs. Reduce Minimize vs. Reduce Minimize vs. Reduce By Maeve Maddox A reader feels there’s a difference between the words minimize and reduce: Writers often use minimize to mean reduce. To minimize something is to reduce it to the smallest amount or degree. To reduce something is simply to make it smaller. He offers two examples of perceived misuse of the word minimize and draws a distinction: This tactic could minimize in-study deaths and, if ineffective, clear the path for more rapid investigation of other interventions. (NY Times).† â€Å"[Y]ou can actually boost your returns while at the same time minimize your risk by incorporating some simple option strategies. (NASDAQ site.)† In each example, the recommendation reduces a negative consequence, but it doesnt necessarily minimize it, because other negative consequences might exist. This may seem like a nuanced distinction, but it makes a degree of difference! My two main dictionaries give these definitions: OED minimize verb: To reduce (especially, something unwanted or unpleasant) to the smallest possible amount, extent, or degree. reduce verb: to make smaller, diminish. Merriam-Webster minimize verb: to reduce to the smallest possible number, degree, or extent. reduce verb: to diminish in size, amount, extent, or number; make smaller. In certain contexts, such as losing weight, lowering a price, or bringing a liquid to a smaller volume, reduce is the only choice. In other contexts, however, minimize and reduce are synonymous. The Oxford American Writer’s Thesaurus lists reduce among synonyms for minimize and minimize among those for reduce. The use of both words is tracked from 1800 on the Ngram Viewer, but minimize is rare until the beginning of the twentieth century. Reduce remains the more common word on the Viewer and in a Google search. Here are some other words and phrases that express degrees of diminishment: bring down contract [kon-TRACT] curtail cut, cut back decrease diminish keep down keep to a minimum lower make smaller narrow prune shrink shorten slim, slim down trim 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 Misused Words category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Passed vs PastThe Letter "Z" Will Be Removed from the English AlphabetCharles's Pen and Jesus' Name

David la chapelle photographic series jesus is my homeboy Essay

David la chapelle photographic series jesus is my homeboy - Essay Example Furthermore, such individuals would have been Jesus’ closest companions and most truthful group of disciples. The product of his imagination or speculation saw the creation of a set of six photos labeled, as â€Å"Jesus is my Homeboy.† In 2003, the album was published in British magazine i-D. After the publication, the album was displayed in London and Moritz, Switzerland in 2008 (Jaeger, 85). On an analytical and literary note, La Chapelle’s photos were a series of illustrations that freed from fundamentalists. Such philosophers and theorists viewed Jesus’ teachings as a judgmental and condemning platform that could not uplift the lives of other people in the society (LaChapelle, Mercurio, Torres & Belvedere, 91). Unlike many pieces of artwork of Jesus during modernism, La Chapelle makes it clear that his photographs are not implied to be ironic, shocking or blasphemous in any way. Instead, La Chapelle uses the photographs to express a beautiful sensation and the genuineness of his own belief in Jesus Christ. On the contrary, most observers of La Chapelle’s â€Å"Jesus is my Homeboy† photos say they illustrate the exact opposite. A majority of observers to describe the album â€Å"Jesus is my Homeboy† (Jaeger, 93) has used literary features, such as humor, sarcasm and symbolism. The subjects surrounding Jesus implied that the society is not supposed to cast out or retract from such individuals. Instead, the society should invite and embrace these individuals into the normal system while still making an effort to show similar tenderness and compassion Jesus portrays (LaChapelle, Mercurio, Torres & Belvedere, 164). According to La Chapelle, the leading objective of this set of photographs was to assist in dismissing the judgmentalism from fundamentalists (Jaeger, 221). Therefore, La Chapelle believed he could accomplish this be presenting Jesus in the contemporary society surrounded by the outcasts of the current community. Similar to biblical references, Jesus was surrounded by societal outcasts such as lepers, Samaritans and demon-posses people. The subjects on photos in the set â€Å"Jesus is my Homeboy† have put on modern fashion statements such as do-rags and sweats, tattoos and piercings. These garments and adornments are affiliated with a group of contemporary society in need of mental and social help. In other words, the degenerated or rebellious group of society has been placed closest to a religious deity. Even though La Chapelle’s implication was not of a criminal nature, multi-ethnicity amongst the youths is an accomplishment well defined by the photographs. Apparently, all youths posing as subjects in the photographs are of rap and hip-hop culture. The rap and hip-hop culture constitutes of a group that is regularly stigmatizes by their appearance, fashion and interaction. In the United States, many people not belonging or affiliated with such a culture would fear interacting with individuals embracing such a culture because of the fear conjured up by their character. Ironically, Jesus can see beyond typecasts and invites all such individuals into his companionship (La Chapelle, Mercurio, Torres & Belvedere, 104). Aside from irony, humor develops from the traditional image that Jesus retains in the photos. Despite being in the twenty-first century, Jesus’ image retains the historic characteristic that has been

Event Study for Efficient Market Hypothesis- Ex dividend Data Dissertation

Event Study for Efficient Market Hypothesis- Ex dividend Data - Dissertation Example Anomalies in the expression of the standard, tax centric theory of stock performances have been noted and described. While a tax centric hypothesis has explanatory power, this study examines evidence that there are additional forces of corporate governance, ownership concentration, and market capitalization that can adjust the performance of dividends independent of taxation. This study is a meta-analysis describing the Western standard for market forces pertaining to dividend taxation, on the assumption that stock prices must be adjusted to less than the amount of the dividend in order to compensate for taxation. Yet comparison with Asian markets introduces exceptions to that premise. Ultimately, more data is needed in order to falsify the tax centric hypothesis, however this principle is a subject to modification and interference by other market forces that influence the behaviors of investors and the performance of stocks. EVENT STUDY FOR EFFICIENT MARKET HYPOTHESIS – EX DI VIDEND DATA Table of Contents Abstract †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. p. 2 Introduction †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. p. 4 Methodology †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. p. 7 Chapter 1: Literature Review †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. p. 8 Chapter 2: Korean Markets †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. p. ... 31 Introduction Since the advent of tradable stocks on the national and international markets there has been a great deal of calculation and speculation in regards to the relationship between stock returns and dividend yields, both in the informal imagination of financial advisors, as well as in the formalized literature therein. Decades ago, popularize models of tax effects created the presumption that higher risk investments were necessary to compensate for returns that incurred greater taxes. Returns on investments should be risk adjusted with respect to stocks. This would compensate the investor for higher rates of taxation through higher dividend yields. This is necessary due to higher levels of taxation of dividend income as compared with capital gains income. (Brennan, 1970 p.417-427) To be specific, dividend income refers to profits yielded by a publicly traded corporation. In which case of course, the profits can be turned back into the business, to invest in facility enhanc ements, or possibly salaries – in which case they qualify as retained earnings. Or they can be distributed to shareholders who provided initial investments that contributed to the company's initial success. All in respect to the initial contribution based upon the value and number of shares purchased by a particular investor. (Sullivan and Sheffrin, 2003) these may take a variety of forms, such as currency cash dividends, Stock/scrip dividends that constitute additional shares of the Corporation, or property dividends, which can take a variety of forms including shares of another corporation or other assets or services. (Sullivan and Sheffrin, 2003) In many cases, taxation rates are higher for dividend income compared with capital gains. To be specific, we are referring to capital

Nonprofit Evaluation Questions Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Nonprofit Evaluation Questions - Assignment Example Triangulation however eliminates effect of chance observations while evaluation of rival opinions develops credibility of a researcher’s findings (Montello and Sutton, 2006; Woodside, 2008). Some of the areas of evaluation that requires honesty and integrity are identification of the nature of relationship between variables, determination of the best model of fit and identification of possible variations from the best model. Both honesty and integrity influences an evaluator’s decision on whether to communicate exact observations or exercise bias in the areas of evaluation. Exercising honesty and integrity however ensures communication of the exact relationship between the variables, accurate determination, and implementation of the model of best fit as well as accurate communication of identified noise and noise factors. These initiatives facilitate validity and reliability of research results and conclusions (Montello and Sutton, 2006). An example of an abstract concept of evaluation, in my organization’s environment, is low staff morale with respect to staffs’ faculty. Staff morale refers to the level of confidence or motivation among employees and can be evaluated using qualitative research methods (Montello and Sutton, 2006). The best sampling approach when a researcher has access to the entire population is stratified random sampling. The approach considers differences in characteristics among groups of the population to reflect strata features in results and conclusions besides reducing unit costs in data collection. â€Å"Non probability convenience sampling† however, is the most appropriate in cases where the subjects are hard to find as the technique is guided by the research questions (Biber, 2010, p. 50). The best approach to collecting sensitive data is through developing the participant’s trust. This is because winning the participants’ confidence that the

Business Project Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Business Project - Coursework Example Moreover, for maintaining its competitive advantages, the company has focused on satisfaction of its customers, employees and business partners such as its dealers, investors and suppliers among others. The vision and mission of Vauxhall Motors is to expand its business operation around the world with considering its core values of honesty, integrity as well as professionalism. In this regard, it is identified that the company exports a larger proportion of vehicles (80% out overall production) in the global market (General Motors UK Limited, 2014). In the recent years, Vauxhall Motors has been trying to develop new heavy motorcycle in the market place, with the aim of capturing the two wheelers nationally and internationally. The company has identified that two-wheeler market is one of the emerging markets across the globe over the last decade. The two-wheeler industry has witnessed positive volume of growth during the last few years. Simultaneously, the company has identified that the demand of motor cycle has been positively increasing among the consumers in the recent years. At the same time, the company has also recognised that due to high market demand, several existing motor cycle manufacturers are concentrated on the total quality management system with the aim of enhancing the performance and excellence of the motor bikes. Thus, Vauxhall Motors has tried to introduce a new heavy motorcycle with the intention of enhancing the profitability and acquiring high market share in global market place (General Motors UK Limited , 2014). Analysis of the Context In order to determine the internal situation of Vauxhall Motors, it will be vital to apply ‘SWOT’ analysis method for better understanding the current situation of the company. According to the report of Global Data (2012), Vauxhall Motors is one of the leading automotive players in the global market