The Legacy of President Bill Clinton :: Political Politics Presidents Government Essays

The Legacy of President Bill Clinton People will always remember Bill Clinton, for what reason, however, might be different. Some might remember him as a wonderful president who helped our country pull through the millennium unscathed. He protected our environment, promoted education, strengthened our economy, dropped the crime rate, dropped our nation’s poverty levels and had some victories with international policies. At the same time we have health care that is falling apart, some problems with the military and a scandalous affair. Considering this one has to wonder what his legacy will be. A respected leader who learned as he went and made many valuable reforms? Or a president who didn’t hold to his promises, and lied to the country? President Clinton has done many things during his presidency. Some were good some were bad. He made some mistakes and bad choices, but in the whole, he helped our country excel and flourish. One of the things Clinton is most famous for, but not the proudest of, is his affairs. The issue of Clinton having an affair with Monica Lewinsky is purely personal. It should have been discussed within his family and in his family alone. Many people seem to forget that Presidents before him have done the exact same thing. John F Kennedy is probably the best known with his affairs. This doesn’t diminish the fact that Clinton took it one step farther and lied about the affairs. Lying to the nation wasn’t a smart move. Does anyone know what John F Kennedy would have said, if asked about his affairs? How do we know that he wouldn’t lie? When Clinton was sworn in he said, â€Å"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.† No where in the oath does it say, â€Å"I will not lie.† By doing so he hasn’t broken his promises, he just let the country down. Right before President Bill Clinton left office he issued more than a few pardons. A pardon is saying that the criminal has served his or her time, not that they didn’t commit the crime. One of these pardons was Marc Rich, along with Roger Clinton and 139 other people. Marc Rich was listed on the Department of Justice’s Web site as an international fugitive.

CHINAS RESPONSE TO OVERPOPULATION :: essays research papers

Introduction Today so many children and people in the world suffer from poverty and starvation. In so many third world country's families are going without food or good water. Never before have we seen so many children die before the age of five. It is impossible to feed all of these mouths and clothe all of these backs. The world is full of natural resources at our disposal. These resources are taken for granted and not preserved the way they should be. As a result, fossil fuels will not be available in a matter of years. Nature is missing links due to the extinction of many species, many we don't ever get a chance to learn about. More people means more products made in factories, more jobs needed, and more consumption of this earth's precious resources. Were are overcrowded! We are overpopulated. Not to mention all of the disease that is spread through the poverty stricken slums that the malnourished live in."We are already living with the consequences of human population growth. Ther e are now so many people, that we were probably pretty much forced to modernize and give up smelly outhouses in favor of the more convenient and practical flush toilet. Sanitation workers are paid to collect the trash that huge cities of people generate, as large populations need proper sanitation."(Garrett Hardin) We try to regulate this epidemic by using birth-control and other devices, but we see what good all of that is doing. We ourselves are setting up for extinction. There must be a way to control the overpopulation. We should not be a disease to this planet. Do we not see the connections between science and society!? Gaylord Nelson was quoted as saying, "The number one environmental problem facing the earth today would have to be population. Where on Earth Are We Going? He said the answer is: "It's all up to us. The level of human population and the scale and intensity of human activity has reached a point where we are literally affecting the very conditions o n which human life and well being depend. "The first major effect of overpopulation is consumption of valuable resources. This is one of the major causes of depletion of our natural resources. When mentioning consumption, we are referring to all the products we buy and use. In the United States, Americans consume far more than what is necessary.

Clinton Climate Change Initiative Program in Australia and the Progress of Barangoo Waterfront Development Project in Sydney so Far

Climate change has come to be one of the issues that have had far-reaching implications for the world in which we live. As people who are proud of our heritage and who need to live a fulfilling life, we need to do a lot more to fight climate change. For it is clear that unless something is done and done fast enough then this dear homeland of ours will be no more in a matter of several years (Pittock 2003). Therefore, my appeal is to all Australians to work hard to make the earth a good, safe place to live in not just today but also for generations to come.The way to go is to conserve our environment – to reduce carbon emission as far as possible as to date climate change is largely attributed to the rapid increase in the amount of carbon in the atmosphere in different forms. The Clinton Foundation has been in the forefront in this fight against climate change (The Clinton Foundation 2010). It has initiated many projects in the country to ensure that carbon emission is reduced. The Clinton Climate Change Initiative Program is a typical climate change program that is aimed at helping this country achieve its goal of becoming greener.Through the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI), the Clinton foundation aims at working with the government to provide greener sources of energy, counter carbon emissions by using renewable energy sources in homes and offices, and reducing organic waste through use of recycled material (The Clinton Foundation 2010). It also seeks to create avenues for absorption of large quantities of carbon such as forests. The target is greenhouse emitters which range from industrial emissions through domestic energy sources to wasteful use of material or careless dumping.Working jointly with C40, CCI seeks to see cities greener and cleaner (The Clinton Foundation 2010). Through the Greener Government Buildings Program, CCI targets to make reduce the use of applications in government buildings which emit greenhouse gases. Reduced use of energy a nd reuse is a point of emphasis (Freestone 2010). All of us ought to seek to visit the Clinton Foundation’s official website and its other information resources to be better placed to work jointly with it to ensure we live in a safer and greener country.It is upon us all to work alongside CCI to make climate change less affective of our lifestyles. Now is the time for every Australian to do something that will count towards curbing adverse climate change. For this is for our own good. It is for us and for posterity. The more we conserve and preserve now, the more secure we make our future and the future of our children after us (The Clinton Foundation 2010). The Clinton Climate Change Initiative Program is currently running different projects to this effect, with the notable one being the Barangoo Waterfront Development Project in Sydney.This project is a partnership between the Clinton Foundation and the government of New South Wales and aims to create a park in the city of Melbourne’s area of Barangoo so it becomes part of the central business district (The Clinton Foundation 2010). This is a beautification approach that seeks to protect the waterfront of the city center and to capture the emitted carbon so the city is cleaner and greener. Once an inner city, Barangoo is being transformed to become part of the city center and so reduce congestion (Preston & Jones 2006).The main constructions are a headland park and a public domain. So far, work on the headland park has commenced and soon works are going to start for the public domain. The city, one the project is completed, is expected to be literally green with magnificent parks and surrounding blue waters. Magnificent buildings will adorn the nicely shaped harbor to demonstrate just how far collective effects and commitment can change cities for good. Also yet to be completed are a newly created headland park and a very modern waterfront. The headland park is located north of Barangoo (Beatle y 2008).Already done is a foreshore promenade that extends along the harbor and is part of a 14 kilometer foreshore walk joining Anzac Bridge to Woolloomooloo. Under the headland park is a car park that is almost hidden by the greenery. It is expected that the remaining part of the project will carry on to completion soon, to make Sydney a real green city and a demonstration of what being green really is. Word count: 747 References Beatley, T 2008. Green Urbanism Down Under: Learning from Sustainable Communities in Australia. Island Press Freestone, R 2010. Urban Nation: Australia's Planning Heritage.Csiro Publishing Pittock, B 2003. Climate Change: An Australian Guide to Science and Potential Impacts. Retrieved at: http://www. ccma. vic. gov. au/soilhealth/climate_change_literature_review/documents/organisations/ago/science-guide. pdf Preston, BL& Jones, RN 2006. Climate Change Impacts on Australia and the Benefits of Early Action to Reduce Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Retrieve d at: http://www. csiro. au/files/files/p6fy. pdf The Clinton Foundation 2010. What we Do. Retrieved at: http://www. clintonfoundation. org/what-we-do/clinton-climate-initiative/

Animal Should Not Be Kept in Zoo

In Luke 7, when John the Baptist sends his disciples to find out if Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus tells them, â€Å"Go back and tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind see again, the lame walk, those suffering from virulent skin-diseases are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised to life, the good news is proclaimed to the poor. † So, who are the poor? The poor are those who are in need of the help of God; those who are open to the plan of God in their lives; those who are simple hearted; the humble.When Elizabeth hears the ‘good news’ (Lk 1:19) that was announced to Zachariah, she acknowledges that the Lord has removed her humiliation of being barren (Cf. Lk 1:25). When Mary sings her magnificat in the presence of Elizabeth, she would say, â€Å"The Lord has looked upon the humiliation of his servant† (Lk 1:48). In short, being poor simply means being open to God. It is to those who rely, depend on God that the Good News is proclaimed. A nd it is to us that the Good News is proclaimed.If we consider the Good News as a message, then, it is liberty to captives – the experience of freedom from all that binds us including sin; it is healing to the sick. It is the promise of the favorable year (kairos), the time of Grace. So Good News is not a set of information. It is an experience! Again, the Good News is a community and personal experience with Jesus. It is the possibility to experience God in the person of Jesus. Jesus Christ is the Good News. This is what actually amazed the hearts of those listeners in the synagogue, as Jesus said: â€Å"Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing† (Lk 4:21).In other words Jesus was saying, â€Å"The times that Isaiah prophesied are here. It is possible to experience the Good News in my person! † Therefore, today Jesus is bringing hope, joy and favor to us. On the table of his altar we will have the greatest opportunity of being able to experience Jesus i n person. He is the living word that has power to change and transform lives, and bring freedom and healing to those who receive him as their Lord and Savior. Open your heart. Do not be afraid. Let him to make you free from any oppression, spiritual emptiness or lack of happiness. The gospel of salvation is â€Å"good news† for us today.

Hume and Kant on Free Will Essay

Abstract This paper is an attempt to show how Kant’s ideas concerning practical and transcendental freedom of the will was a significant correction to the parallel theories of Hume. It starts out by clarifying Hume’s critique of free will, especially as it appears in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. It draws the conclusion that Hume’s philosophy is espousing skepticism, and that Kant’s effort is to overcome this skepticism and restore trust in reason. The philosophy of Kant is outlined in order to make the last point. It is generally agreed that Kant supplied the definitive stamp to philosophy that ushered in the modern age. Hume, though enormously influential in his time, and a favorite in the French salons of philosophy, fell into disrepute in the Victorian era, and only since has become a subject of restored interest. Yet Hume is the philosopher cited by Kant as having stirred him from his â€Å"dogmatic slumbers’. He had espoused a philosophy of empirical skepticism, so thorough and devastating in its scope that it became impossible for Kant to remain in his settled certainties of Newtonian science. It was the spur that carried him on to compose the Critique of Pure Reason (1781), where reason is restored, and man is once more vindicated as a rational being. Just because he refuted and answered Hume’s skepticism does not imply that the latter philosophy is nullified. We must keep this in mind, that Hume’s skepticism is completely valid as far as sense experience is concerned, and Kant does not refute any part of this philosophy. What he does is posit a further dimension to human understanding, specifically, the synthetic a priori faculty of the mind, the existence of which Hume did not suspect. Only after this addition is the primacy of reason restored. So we cannot say that Kant has destroyed Hume’s philosophy, rather he has added to it. Central to Hume’s skepticism is his critique of â€Å"cause and effect†, which is spelled out to its most profound depths in chapter VII of the An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748). The preliminary task is to outline the copy principle. The premise to this is that all knowledge begins from sense experience. Among such we are able to distinguish between primary and secondary sensations. The primary sensations are extension, motion, inertia etc, which are indeed the concepts that physics tackles. Color, taste, smell etc are said to be secondary sensations, composed or derived from the primary ones. The copy principle says that the primary sensations, though not delivering complete information from the material object – which is more poignantly described as â€Å"the object in itself – nevertheless is a faithful copy of it. This is why primary sensations are distinct and forceful presences in our mind. Secondary sensations are in turn copies of the original copy, and due to this derivative nature they lose distinctness to us. We will examine the copy principle of Hume in a moment. For the time being we accept it as such and consider the consequences. For Hume’s purposes, it has allowed him to refer to objects and their motions with confidence, and not to be held back by the validity of these concepts. For without the principle we don’t know as yet that objects are objects, and motion is motion, and we would have had to deal with a chaos of sense experience, and nothing meaningful to refer to it against (1993, p. 12). So now, with the copy principle of Hume as foundation, we proceed to talk about objects in motion. Next, we observe interdependence between objects, carried out in space and time. We â€Å"know† that motion in one object is â€Å"cause† to motion in another. A billiard ball in motion strikes another, and after impact the second acquires a velocity too, and the faculty of our understanding tells us, without the least inkling of doubt, that the impact imparted by the first ball is the cause of the second ball gaining motion. This understanding is so refined that we can, with a little help from Newton’s mechanics, predict the exact trajectory of the second ball by analyzing the trajectory of the first. We know it, but how do we know it? This is the crucial question for Hume. For if we do not have the answer we are left with skepticism. After impact with the first ball the second could have taken any one of an infinite number of trajectories. But it takes only one, and indeed we expect it to take only that one. A physicist may come along and try to convince us that it could not have taken any other trajectory because the laws of motion stipulates that, with the initial conditions given, the path it takes is the only possible one. But this is not an answer to the observer of the billiard ball, because he doesn’t care what the laws of physics are. If nature had followed another mathematical law then another outcome would have been just as valid. The observer could then have framed his conundrum differently: Of the infinite possible mathematical laws why just that one? There is nothing in the inner logic of the situation that dictates that the first ball should produce exactly the prescribed trajectory in the second. Hume said this about the experimental set-up, that we may try an experiment ten times, and may arrive at the exact same result ten times. But this does not prove that the specific outcome is inevitable. Not even if we confirmed the outcome a million times, because we would still only have a statistical probability and not a proof. Hume’s conclusion is that there is no rational link between cause and effect. Yet we expect effect to follow cause, immediately and irrevocably. If this is so then, explains Hume, it is a feeling transmitted to us by custom. What exactly he means by custom is left vague. He could not have meant anything other than â€Å"observing over and over again†, even though this fails to take into account new experience. He himself supplies a famous counterexample in the Enquiry. Some one who has experienced all the shades of blue, except for a tiny strip of the spectrum, is expected to report a gap when looking at the full spectrum of blue. But the fact is that he does not observe a gap at all, and recognizes at once the full spectrum of blue, even though he is experiencing a particular shade on blue for the first time. The recognition was instantaneous, and the eye did require â€Å"accustoming† beforehand. This readily disposes the theory of â€Å"custom†. Hume, however, continues to insist that our convictions regarding cause and effect can have no other source than custom. That the inference to custom is a vague one is made clear when he comes to consider free will. The very act of consciousness, he says, testifies to the existence of free will. But coming to reflect on how it is possible that we are able to willingly set our limbs into motion, and to move and external object thereby, it appears nothing less than miraculous. The mystery in nothing less than how one immaterial body imparts momentum to another: For first: Is there any principle in all nature more mysterious than the union of soul with body; by which a supposed spiritual substance acquires such an influence over a material one, that the most refined thought is able to actuate the grossest matter? (Hume, 1993, p. 43) The upshot is that we cannot explain free will, just as surely as we cannot explain cause and effect. ‘Custom’ was hesitantly introduced to explain cause and effect, and the same comes to the rescue of free will. As constant observers of nature we come to expect an effect to always follow a cause, and the same analysis ought to be applied to the orbit of human will. In all times and in all places humans have shown a constancy in their day to day affairs, which points to a constancy in human nature. The speculation concerning the scope of free will is overdone by the philosophers, maintains Hume. The exercise of free will, when looked at through the vista of human history, does not display divergence as much as it displays constancy. Hume broaches on the distinction between freedom and necessity to make this point clear. Inanimate objects convey to us most clearly the quality of freedom. We may describe an inanimate object as indifferent to the rest of the material universe, and in that sense free. But this freedom also entails necessity. The object is subject to the necessary laws of causation, and indeed is bound entirely by them. This is the relationship that binds cause and effect to inanimate objects, and is a relationship that is composed of both freedom and necessity. Hume transposes the same analysis to the relationship between human beings and free will. The will is indeed free, but being so implies that it conforms to human nature. He proposes the following definition: By liberty, then, we can only mean a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will; this is, if we choose to remain at rest, we may; if we choose to move, we also may. (1993, p. 63) The notion of free will advanced here bears a crucial difference to the popular one, and begs to be spelt out. What Hume describes as free will is not a choice between course ‘A’ and ‘B’. Rather the choice is between ‘A’ and ‘not A’, the latter implying stagnation, not an alternative course. This is the entire extent of our free will. We choose either to move forward, or else to stand still. This is what Hume would describe as freedom to act. Free will, however, is in complete accordance with human nature, and therefore follows the laws of necessity, just as everything else in contingent reality. Free will urges us to act â€Å"freely†. With freedom to act we may respond to this urge, or we may desist. In the final analysis our understanding of free will hinges on custom, in the same way as does our understanding of cause and effect. The past is guide to the future in the probabilistic sense. Beyond probabilities we have no understanding of either, contends Hume. In order to enforce this skepticism he proceeds to dismantle the Cartesian theories that pretended to explain mind and matter interaction, especially the theory of occasionalism advanced by Father Nicholas Malebranche. In this theory God is made both motivator and executor of every act or incident that seems to be â€Å"cause†, while the circumstances which we call a cause are only occasions for God to act in such a manner. Hume complained that this not only made God a slave to his own creation, but it also eradicated free will, making everything â€Å"full of God† (1993, p. 47). By disposing summarily the Cartesian explanations of cause and effect Hume makes his skepticism complete. Kant overcomes this skepticism by revising the premise of Hume. The correction is made most forcefully in the opening to the Critique: Although all our knowledge begins with experience, it does not follow that it arises entirely from experience.   For it is quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that which we receive through impressions and that which our own faculty of knowing (incited by impressions) supplies from itself†¦ (1999, p. 1) To be fair to Hume, he does consider this possibility, and ponders whether there is a blueprint in the mind where all ‘causes’ and all ‘effects’ can be referred back. (1993, p. 44). But he dismisses this idea when he realizes that a static blueprint can never account for the dynamic reality. However, the faculty that Kant is suggesting is not static, rather dynamic and creative, and here lies the crucial difference. In the technical terms of Kant it is the synthetic a priori faculty of the mind. This is distinguished from the analytic a priori faculty, such as logic. The rules of logic are extant in the mind (a priori), but form a self-consistent system (analytical), and therefore do not depend on sense experience. On the first instance it seems impossible that the mind can have a faculty that is synthetic a priori, where synthetic implies that it is creative. It entails that order is created out of the chaos of sense experience, and order that was not there before. But Kant also provides proof that the mind is capable of synthesis. Mathematical propositions are synthetic a priori, he contended. The proposition â€Å"3 + 5 = 8† may sound like self-consistent logic, but it is not really so. â€Å"8† is a completely new concept, and is not contained in either â€Å"3†, â€Å"5† or â€Å"+†. If we know that â€Å"3 + 5 = 8†, it is due to a synthetic a priori faculty in the mind. As Kant relates in the Prolegomena, when he realized that mathematical propositions are indeed synthetic a priori, it led him to ponder on what other such concepts the mind uses to facilitate understanding, and it appeared to him, in due course, that â€Å"cause and effect† was a concept of understanding that derives from the same faculty. He does not at all concern himself with material reality as a â€Å"thing in itself†, that which the materialist philosophers were after in order to provide a foundation to Newtonian science. Like Hume he maintains throughout that an absolute material reality is beyond knowledge, and to speculate on its existence was futile. We only need to consider what we perceive and what we do. He also shows that Hume falters at exactly those points where he cannot dismiss material existence in itself. The copy principle is slavish to a material object in itself. The object does not deliver copies to our mind; rather the mind provides the concepts of space in which we are able to conjure up material objects from sensory data. Both â€Å"space† and â€Å"time† are pure concepts of the mind, contends Kant, and like â€Å"cause and effect† are the tools by which we come to understand contingent reality (Prolegomena, 2005, p. 26). As soon as it is made out that we are the responsible architects of our own reality, and are not passive bystanders to an absolute material reality beyond our control, we suddenly discover ourselves as moral beings. Therefore the subsequent direction of Kant’s philosophy, after the metaphysics of understanding has been established, is towards a metaphysics of morals. And so emerges the crucial distinction that Kant makes between practical and transcendental freedom. To say that we have practical freedom implies we are able to understand the world, and by doing so we direct the will accordingly. We will do so of course for practical purposes – survival, utility, convenience, happiness etc. this would seem to cover the entire orbit of freedom. But Kant went on to demonstrate, in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), that such freedom is not actually freedom at all, and indeed is a binding. Thus far Kant is in concord with Hume. Now, the metaphysics of understanding, as spelt out in the Critique, is not the entire picture. The synthetic a priori faculty of the mind fashions understanding out of sensory experience. But such understanding does not lead to truth. As pure concepts of understanding space and time are both necessarily infinite. But because they emanate from the finite mind they are also finite. So in their very make-up space and time lead to contradictions. The same end must necessarily meet anything that takes place within space and time. So that matter is both infinitely divisible and also made up of concrete building blocks. As another example, we have free will, but at the same time everything is caused, so we don’t have free will. Such examples are put forward by Kant as pairs of â€Å"antinomies†. According to our understanding both consequences are valid, and yet they mutually contradict each other. All practical reasoning necessarily leads to pairs of antinomies. This must be so, because we reason by means of subject and predicate, where the subject is the cause of the predicate. But this subject is in turn predicate to another subject, and so on in an infinite chain of causation. If there was an ultimate subject at the beginning of this chain, we could have claimed to have discovered the final cause, and thereby have at hand a pronouncement of truth. But in contingent reality there is no such final cause. So whenever we try to make pronouncements of truth we must face contradiction. We cannot say that practical reason is false for this reason. Life is ruled by contingencies, and practical reason is to explain the contingent, or to facilitate such understanding. Absolute truth lies beyond all contingencies, and this is ruled by â€Å"pure† reason, explains Kant. It is not within the grasp of the human mind, yet it is the underpinning of the mind, and is the source of all innate faculties. The same analysis applies to practical freedom, which is but the corollary to practical reason. With practical freedom we choose our course according to practical reason, i.e. we are motivated by self-serving motives – happiness, honor, respectability, and so on. But in doing so we bind ourselves to those endless chains of contingencies, so that we are not really free. We chase material acquisition in order to be happy, and yet it always eludes us. The definition of freedom is to escape all contingencies, and yet by the application of practical reason we are mired more and more into contingent reality. Therefore we are not free. This is indeed a contradiction, one which Hume does not pay heed to. The very act of consciousness tells us that we are free, that out will is free. If practical reason does not embody this freedom, then surely pure reason must do so. By the same token, we are in possession of a transcendental freedom, which is a path that overcomes all contingencies, and is dictated by pure reason. Kant describes this path as the moral one. We recognize and follow this path from a sense of duty. To clarify what it is, duty is done for its own sake. There is no material motive whatsoever attached to it. Not for any particular good, it is done for the universal good. It is a categorical imperative, meaning that the very make-up of our being, or pure reason, dictates that we follow it. As an aid to identifying one’s duty Kant devised the following wording for the categorical imperative: â€Å"I ought never to act except in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law† (Moral Law, 2005, p. 74). Kant is described as overcoming Hume’s skepticism. But it is questionable whether the latter is a skeptic at all. According to a contemporary, Hume’s philosophical paradoxes are delivered with a confidence that belies skepticism: â€Å"Never has there been a Pyrrhonian more dogmatic† (qtd. in Mossner, 1936, p. 129). A more recent reassessment of Hume is carried out by the German Neo-Kantian philosopher Ernst Cassirer, who opines, â€Å"Hume’s doctrine is not to be understood as an end, but as a new beginning† (1951, p. 59). The nature of this new beginning is well articulated by Hume himself. â€Å"Indulge your passion for science,† nature tells us, according to Hume, â€Å"but let your science be human, and such as may have a direct reference to action and society† (Hume, 1993, p. 3). If we listen carefully, the moral note that Hume is sounding is hardly different from that of the categorical imperative of Kant. Not for the person’s sake, but for humanity’s sake. Not for the particular good but for the universal good. This is the essence of Hume’s projected â€Å"science of man†, as it is also the heart of Kant’s metaphysics of morals. References Cassirer, E. (1951). The Philosophy of the Enlightenment. Trans. Fritz C. A. Koelln and James P. Pettegrove. Boston: Beacon Press. Hume, D. (1993). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. E. Steinberg (Ed.) Boston: Hackett Publishing. Kant, I. (1999). Critique of Pure Reason. W. S. Pluhar (Trans.), E. Watkins (Ed.) Boston: Hackett Publishing. Kant, I. (2005). Kant’s Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing. Kant, I. (2005). The Moral Law: Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Translated by H. J. Paton. New York: Routledge. Mossner, E. C. (1936). Bishop Butler and the Age of Reason: A Study in the History Of Thought. New York: Macmillan.   

Pollution Control Issues Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Pollution Control Issues - Essay Example Introduction to Policy Area Pollution control is a major policy area of not only national but also global importance. We generally agree that pollution of land, water, and air should be controlled. But when it is the question of designing these controls or ascertaining that how much control is sufficient, major disagreements begin to surface. In this regard, Crandall states, â€Å"In 1970, popular concern about environmental degradation coalesced into a major political force, resulting in President Richard Nixon’s creation of the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the first of the major federal attempts to regulate pollution directly—the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970.† With the lapse of time, the federal government took several regulatory majors through the EPA. Non government organizations, research organizations, civil activists, etc. also got involved in the process. The contemporary trend in this policy area is to consider market based metho ds and strategies for pollution control. According to many legislators and lobbyists, the traditional command and control model is not working effectively enough. Classic Iron Triangle Structure Before describing what the classic iron triangle in the context of pollution control would look like, let’s focus on the concept of iron triangle itself. In U.S. politics, iron triangle defines the threefold interaction between the congressional committees, the interest groups, and the governmental agencies. Clientele directed executive functionary mechanism is the main characteristic of iron triangle, which may harm or neglect the greater public interest and provide benefit to the interest groups that are mainly formed of powerful corporate bodies (Hix, 251). The diagram below represents the iron triangle in the sphere of pollution control policy area. In the case of the policy area of pollution control, at one corner of the triangle will be the U.S. Congress Senate Committee on Envi ronment and Public Works, which is a major congressional committee that provides oversight and funds. On the other corner, there will be the EPA, which is a part of bureaucracy, or in other words, the executive of the governmental agencies. At the third corner, there will be the interest groups, which are major corporate bodies, particularly the energy and chemical giants. Significance of Issue Networks Issue networks can be defined as allied structures of several individuals and interest groups that attempt to promote an issue in the federal policy making and think tank. Landy and Milkis think that issue networks are instrumental in balancing rights and democracy vis-a-vis the political tradition and formation of sub-government of iron triangles. Issue networks are a sort of fluid mechanism that would provide the constituency of general public a practical and supple organization, which can accelerate a sustained civil action. In the context of pollution control we can say that the powerful corporations pursue the Congress members and EPA to loosen the regulations so that less money can be invested to obtain improved pollution controlling technologies that are relatively costlier or call for industrial unit replacements. Pollution control issue network can become a contextual counterbalancing factor, where people will have voice. Research organizations, civil activists, non government agencies, independent observers, social

Case study about Starbucks (marketing) Assignment

Case study about Starbucks (marketing) - Assignment Example This report will be solely based on the Starbucks case study and will focus on how the specialty coffee player can better survive and survive in the industry. In order to do this, this paper will look at the historical performance of the company, noting the company's strategies in response to its external market. The first portion will provide an account on how Starbucks has prospered and gained wide success in the early 1990s. Next, this report will look at the changes which have transpired in Starbucks market which significantly differentiates it from the 1990s. Through this analysis, this paper will evaluate why the customer satisfaction rating of the specialty coffee retailer declined. Lastly, Starbucks problems will be identified, stressing on how they can be reconciled and remedied. The success of Starbucks in early 1990s has been well documented. The main idea of its "founder" Schultz is to create a third place for the Americans to stay. It should be noted that during that time, Americans are confined to only two destinations-work and home. Schultz then wanted to create a place where the people can relax and enjoy themselves alone or with other people. This business concept has been instrumental in the success of the business organization in the early 1990s. Schultz did not just envision a retail shop which specializes in selling coffee but in creating the proper "ambiance" and strategies in order to convey the "Starbucks experience." Starbucks has operated in a three pronged strategy in order to capture its target market. First, the company concentrates in offering the best coffee in the US by sourcing its coffee beans from Africa, South America, and Asia Pacific. In order to ensure that it is distributing the highest quality coffee beans, Starbucks takes control as much of its supply chain as possible. This means working directly with the growers, supervising the roasting process, and controlling the distribution process worldwide. Secondly, Starbucks have focused on delivering excellent customer service to complement its products. It should be noted that the company's baristas are well trained in entertaining and dealing with the customers. The company believes that the Starbucks experience is not just a matter of delivering quality coffee products but excellent customer service. Thirdly, the specialty coffee retailer also invests in completing the experience by creating the appropriate ambiance. Starbucks has created an atmosphere which is inviting for its customers. In the words of Day, "People come for the coffee but the ambiance is what makes them want to stay." Consistent with what is emphasized in the course, it can be seen that the product offered by Starbucks is comprised of a tangible component, intangible component, and a symbol component. The tangible component, the substance, is addressed by Starbucks' quest in producing and delivering the highest quality coffee in its stores. As discussed above, it becomes an essential component of the value proposition and strategy of the company. The second component, which is service, is exemplified by the company's pursuit in offering