Jacksonian Democrats DBQ Essay

In the 1820’s and 1830’s, the Jacksonian Democrats, with Andrew Jackson as their leader, viewed themselves as the guardians of the Constitution, political democracy, individual liberty, and equality of economic opportunity. However, this view did not truly represent the actions taken by President Andrew Jackson and his followers, it was only a faà §ade put up to mask their sectionalist ideas. One of the disparities in the views and actions of the Jacksonian Democrats involved social equality. Jackson repeatedly held sectionalist views and did things that were better for the average, poor community than for the country as a whole. One such example of this is shown in Documents B and C involving the National Bank. In his National Bank veto message in Document B, Jackson says, â€Å"It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes.† Jackson singles out the wealthier class and accuses them of being selfish. Because this ridiculous comment has no intelligent purpose other than to create an enormous, nationwide class clash, it must be seen as evidence that Jackson was a sectionalist. Daniel Webster responded to this message in Document C by stating, â€Å"It manifestly seeks to inflame the poor against the rich †¦ for the purpose of turning against them [the other class] the prejudices and the resentments of the other classes.† Daniel Webster is saying what was previously mentioned. It was as though Jackson was trying to anger the poor to turn against the rich. Jackson’s actions show that his primary goal was not to help the country, but to address his own personal issues. This completely contrasts the Jacksonian Democrats view of themselves. The Jacksonians thought that they were acting in the best interest of the country, where they were truly thinking about their own needs. The Constitutional rights of the people were also violated during the Jackson presidency. In Document F, we see that South Carolina had resolved that fellow states would make it a crime to print, publish, or distribute anything that was anti-slavery. They did this because slavery was their economic backbone, and without it, their economy would plummet. South Carolina was requesting that a sectionalist opinion be enforced over a constitutional right. If Jackson was really what he claimed to be, he would  have rejected this request. However, he willingly violated the Constitution and abused his Presidential power when he told Postmaster General Amos Kendall to censor all of the mail. Next, in Document G, we see a painting that shows what happened to the Native Americans during the Trail of Tears. Earlier in Jackson’s life, he was a General for the American army. His most notable campaigns were the wars with the Seminole Indians. Jackson had a strong hatred towards the Seminoles when he was a General that carried over to his presidency. His decisions and treaties to force the Native Americans out of their land show that he only had his agenda in mind and that he was a true sectionalist. These actions violated one of the fundamental Constitutional rights that our country was founded on, freedom. The Jacksonian Democrats view of themselves was not entirely accurate because of the class issues and disregard of the Constitution during Jackson’s presidency. Jackson forced the Native Americans out of their land, repeatedly created class clashes, and held sectionalist views. The principles behind these actions were the antitheses of those that this country was founded on. This not only shows the hypocrisy of the Jacksonian Democrats, but it proves that they did not accurately view themselves.

Assisted Suicide – Introduction

Introduction/Rationale â€Å"No person is entitled to consent to have death inflicted on him, and such consent does not affect the criminal responsibility of any person by whom death may be inflicted on the person by whom consent is given. †, this is according to the Indiana Code of Criminal Law and Procedure. In ancient days, assisted suicide was frequently seen as a way to preserve one’s honor. For the past twenty-five years, on the other hand, the practice has been viewed as a response to the progress of modern medicine. New and often expensive medical technologies have been developed that prolong life. However, the technologies also prolong the dying processes, leading some people to question whether modern medicine is forcing patients to live in unnecessary pain when there is no chance they will be cured. Despite the changes in modern medicine, the attitudes toward assisted suicide in America’s courts and legislatures have not altered considerably. Debate over assisted suicide nearly always centers on the â€Å"slippery slope† argument. This argument holds that permitting one behavior will lead to a series of increasingly dangerous behaviors. Critics argue that if voluntary assisted suicide is legalized for competent, terminally ill adults, the acceptance of involuntary euthanasia for incompetent, elderly, or uninsured people will follow. Assisted-suicide advocates contend that the slippery-slope argument is fallacious. They argue that legalizing assisted suicide would not place patients’ right to life at risk because America is founded on democratic values that would ensure the rights of all citizens. Assisted Suicide is defined as an attempt to take one's own life with the intentional assistance of another person. It is a form of euthanasia in which a person wishes to commit suicide but feels unable to perform the act alone because of a physical disability or lack of knowledge about the most effective means. An individual who assists a suicide victim in accomplishing that goal may or may not be held responsible for the death, depending on local laws. The participation of health professionals, especially physicians, in assisted suicide is controversial. Nowadays, assisted suicide is still debatable if it will be legalized or not. However, in Philippines, since it is a religious country. Assisted suicide remains prohibited for no one can take away one’s life except God and it is clearly stated in the Ten Commandments, ‘Thou shall not kill’. Assisted Suicide or Physician-assisted suicide has its proponents and its opponents. Among the opponents are some physicians who believe it violates the fundamental principle of medicine and believe that doctors should not assist in suicides because to do so is incompatible with the doctor's role as a healer. Physician-assisted suicide is often abbreviated PAS. It is called doctor-assisted suicide in the UK. The debate over whether assisted suicide should be legalized in the United States—a nation considerably larger and more diverse than the Netherlands—is not likely to be resolved in the near future. People on both sides of the issue will undoubtedly pay close attention to developments in Oregon, and perhaps other states, in an effort to bolster their side of the slippery-slope argument. Body Many have argued that it would be worse, morally speaking, for health care professionals to engage in assisted suicide, than others because it would weaken the basic values of the health professions. Others argue that these values include providing relief from suffering and that there are rare times when death is the only means of achieving this goal. Germany actually accepts assisted suicide but is against euthanasia, largely because of the issue of patient control. If the patient is performing, the action that leads to death it is more likely that this was a voluntary choice for the patient. Thus, there is less risk of abuse. Many people thought that assisted suicide and euthanasia is the same but the truth is these two terms are completely different from the other. The main difference between assisted suicide and euthanasia is that in assisted suicide the patient is in complete control of the process that leads to death because he/she is the person who performs the act of suicide. The other person simply helps for example, providing the means for carrying out the action. In the US, only the State of Oregon permits assisted suicide or physician-assisted suicide. The Oregon Death with Dignity Act allows terminally ill state residents to receive prescriptions for self-administered lethal medications from their physicians. It does not ermit euthanasia, in which a physician or other person directly administers a medication to a patient in order to end his or her life. The Oregon law allows adults with terminal diseases who are likely to die within 6 months to obtain lethal doses of drugs from their doctors. A relatively very small number of people sought lethal drugs under the law and even fewer people who actually used them. Many patients have said that what they want most is a choice about how their lives will end, â€Å"a finger on the remote control, as it were. † Like for instance, the case of Diane, one of the patients of Dr. Timothy Quill. She was diagnosed with acute myelomonocytic leukemia and she was under Dr. Quill for a period of 8 years. Dr. Quill informed her of the diagnosis, and of the possible treatments. The series of treatments include multiple sessions of chemotherapy and bone marrow transplant, accompanied by an array of ancillary treatments, in which the rate of survival is only 25% and it is very hard to find a bone marrow donor that will perfectly match her bone marrow type. Upon knowing, she decided to control the time of her death and informed Dr. Quill so that she could avoid the loss of dignity and discomfort, which will proceed to her death. She called Dr. Quill for barbiturates complaining for her insomnia. Dr. Quill gave her a prescription of the amount to take to make her sleep and the amount she will take to commit suicide. Few days after, Diane called her friends including Dr. Quill and say goodbye. Two days after Diane took away her life after they met. This is an amazing example of a case study of an assisted suicide, which really shows the difference between assisted-suicide from euthanasia. Analysis/Author’s Discussion Approaching the problem of suffering among the dying through the lens of assisted suicide is like looking through the wrong end of binoculars; it narrows and distorts the view. My focus is in reducing the conditions that make assisted suicide seem an attractive alternative to patients facing the prospect of living with an incurable illness and to society struggling to care for the dying. Success will not come with making assisted suicide legal, but rather with making them unnecessary. According to Dr. Ira Byock, as a doctor, his commitment is to do everything possible and anything that is necessary to alleviate a person’s suffering. In the very rare situations in which physical distress is extreme, it is always possible to provide comfort through sedation. I firmly agree with Dr. Byock for the main role of a doctor is to save life and to heal the sick not to kill or take away people’s lives. The difference between what Dr. Byock do from euthanasia is that palliative care does whatever is necessary to alleviate the suffering while euthanasia is focused on eliminating the sufferer. As a Catholic, being a tool to take away one’s life is a mortal sin and assisted suicide was never accepted as a legal practice here in Philippines. But for me, I disagree in the practice of assisted suicide and it will always be wrong to help in taking away people’s lives no matter what the reason it will be. Still assisted suicide remains debatable and still a lot of cases are still on-going. Conclusion Assisted suicide brings out some of the deepest feelings amongst human beings. It is a hard decision that nobody wishes to take, and is the power over life and death. Is killing a terminally ill patient justifiable? Who determines the worth of one’s life? God or human? The answer to this question varies, as there are many points of view to this controversial issue. Thus, assisted suicide is a form of suicide, which involves a person other than the person taking his or her own life. And during which the other person assists in direct or indirect physical means in giving effect to the suicide or, in the event of a statutory definition, in a manner as set out in that statute. The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the world. The debates go back and forth, about whether a dying patient has the right to die with assistance of a physician or other person. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Some physicians and Christians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying and killing. Those among us, who think we would want assisted suicide if we were sick, should ask ourselves whether that is also what we would want for our lover, sister, brother, or child who was incurably ill. Would we want them to die quickly, so that they would not become a burden to us? If not, we need to look deeply into what â€Å"success† would look like in this time of living we call dying. Recommendations †¢I acclaim not to legalized assisted suicide for as a Christian, to help in taking away one’s life is always a mistake. Since our role as a steward of the earth is to preserve our lives. †¢We expect physicians to heal and preserve life, not to kill on request. I want to be able to trust my doctor to do what is best for me in every situation by not doing illegal stuffs like assisting suicide. †¢ Since, assisted suicide is a moral issue, I recommend that it has to be resolved on the basis of principles we use to deal with every other question about right and wrong, not a special case. Depression, when present, should be treated. I endorse that patients should be given sufficient time and counseling to enable them to make sure their decision represents their deepest wishes. But at some point we have to decide whether patients are to be permitted to be the authors of their own destiny or not. †¢The option of â€Å"self – deliveranceâ₠¬  should not be taken for granted for some might take advantage of it especially the mentally ill people who would grab the opportunity to decide when to end their lives. Bibliography: http://medical-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/assisted+suicide http://www. duhaime. org/LegalDictionary/A/AssistedSuicide. aspx Criminal Code of Canada, Revised Statutes of Canada 1985, Chapter C-46 http://www. dyingwell. org http://www. pages. drexel. edu/~cp28/euth1. htm http://www. oppapers. com/essays/Physician-Assisted-Suicide-Case-Study/38054 The Ethics of Assisted Death: When Life Becomes a Burden too Hard to Bear (Lima, OH: CSS Publishing Co. , 1999). http://www. enotes. com/assisted-suicide-article

Joint Venture Essay

Joint ventures are business ventures formed by two or more companies to achieve aspecific, but limited, objective. An example would be the development of an offshore oil field, where a group of companies combines to build and operate a drilling platform and related pipeline. The project is owned equally by the affiliated enterprises and its management could be controlled either by one of the partners or by a separate management could be controlled either by one of the partners or by a separate management organisation established just for the project. The venture may be organised as a partnership ,a corporation ,a joint-stock company or some other legal form, and it can contunieindefinetly.The rational for a joint venture is usually to diversify risk among the members and or to combine expertise and assets that none of the participants provide alone. : Roy L.Crum,Eugene F.Brigham& joel.F.Houston.(2005)Fundamentals of international finance.1st edn. THE ADVANTAGES OF JOINT VENTURES: * Access to expertise and contacts in local markets, each partner agrees to ajoint venture to gain access to the other partner’s skills and resources. Typically the international partner contributes financial resources, technology or products. The local partner provides the skills and knowledge required for managing a business in its country. * Reduced market and political risks * Economies of scale by pooling skills and resources(resulting in e.g. lower marketing costs) * May avoid local tariffs and non-tariffs barriers * Shared risk of failure * Possibly better relations with national governments through having a local partner. THE DISDVANTAGE OF JOINT VENTURES: * Objectives of the respective partners may be incompatible ,resulting in conflicts * Contributions to joint ventures can become disproportionate * Los of control over foreign operations * Completion might overburden a company’s staff * Partners may become locked into long term investments from which it is difficult to withdraw * Cultural differences may result in possible differences in management culture among participating firms * Problems of management structures and dual parent staffing of joint ventures. * Transfer pricing problems as good pass between partners Sven hollensen.(2004)global marketing(adecision-oriented approach).3rd edn.

Dividend Imputation System Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Dividend Imputation System - Essay Example Previously the corporate tax rate was 39% and now it has been reduced to 30%. Dividend imputation was brought in during the year 1987. It is a tax reform brought about by the Hawke/Keating government. Before the reform a company had to pay company tax on its gains and after that if the company paid a dividend it was also taxed again as income for the shareholder and this led into a form of double taxation. Dr Henry who is leading the Federal Government's taxation review, stated that, "If domestic shareholders have access to full company tax imputation, the company tax actually increases their dividend income - both in pre-tax and post-tax terms". In 1997 the eligibility rules for the same were introduced, with a $2000 minute shareholder exemption. In the year 1999 the exemption was enhanced to the current $5000. In the year 2000 franking credits were made completely refundable rather than decreasing tax liability to zero. In the year 2002 preferential dividend streaming was cast out. Australia's arrangement of dividend imputation which is otherwise known as franking is a key concept which new capitalists had to realize. Australian companies did not escape illogical capital allotment decisions. The imputation system encourages a more liberal distribution of profits by dividends. The most significant facet of this system is that Australian resident individual shareholders get a rebate in respect of tax which is already paid by the company on dividend income. This refund is known as the franking rebate. For instance if an individual pays tax on other income at the highest marginal rate of 47% which excludes the 1.7% Medicare then his tax liability on a entirely franked dividend is cut down from 47% to 17% by the franking rebate. At the same time if a taxpayer has to pay tax on other income at the marginal rate of 30% excluding the 1.7% Medicare levy then his tax liability is decreased from 30% to -9% by the franking rebate. Lastly when an individual pays tax on other income at the trivial rate of 20% exclusive of the 1.7% Medicare levy then the tax liability on a totally franked dividend for such a taxpayer is cut down from 20% to -25% by the franking rebate. As the franking rebate is more than the payable tax, the rest of the rebate can be utilised to offset other income like salary etc. As per calculations the individual mentioned above will have a tax credit of $250.00. Present treatment of resident shareholders in resident company with source of income in Australia: Australian Company Taxable Income = $1000 Australian company tax =$ 300 (which creates $300 of franking credits) Income after tax = $ 700 If the company wants to pay off all its after tax income the highest franking credit that it can apportion for distribution is $300. The consequences of an allocation of $700 along with a franking credit of $300 for a 48.5 % marginal rate shareholder, a 31.5 % marginal rate shareholder, for an Australian corporate shareholder and a superannuation fund shareholder is as follows:- 48.5% Marginal rate shareholder Dividend = $ 700 Franking credit =$ 300 Dividend grossed up =$1000 Tax @ 48.5% =$ 485 Tax offset =$ 300 Net tax payable = $ 185 Dividend after tax =$ 515 31.5%

Argument about SONY organizational charts Essay

Argument about SONY organizational charts - Essay Example Company’s CEO, taking into consideration the financial situation of Sony, the problems with its electronics department ex-profit-generator that appeared to show ‘a lackluster performance’ (Certo & Certo, 245), came to the conclusion to conduct major organizational changes. The company was divided in 4 divisions with a vice-president (VP) responsible for each of them. Now on the top of organizational structure of Sony stand the CEO, who had 4 VP (each responsible for one division) in submission. Despite the fact that this organizational structure has its advantages, some better results might be achieved in case two more executive VPs would be put between CEO and VPs of departments. Although, lots of variations links between divisions, executive VPs and CEO available, in this case we will stick to the idea that these two executive VPs had an authority over VPs of the particular divisions and that CEO had only them two in submission (see illustration in appendix). Less sources of information. Because of this organizational change the CEO now needs to focus only on tracking two people, but not four. By doing this he can spend less time on getting reports, analyzing them and making significant observations to make future decisions, but can delegate his executive VPs to be responsible for analyzing all the data and reporting him only the most valuable information. This will give him more free time to focus on general strategic planning in organization. As now the CEO has executive VPs in submission that might be responsible for filtering and analyzing information, he might make more well-thought decision and an overall performance of the company might go up. More balanced organizational strategy. For this proposed organizational structure, the executive VPs could be in charge of particular divisions grouped, so they might have more well-balanced organizational strategy. For example, VP with a background in marketing and sales can be focused on promotion of