Future of Business under Bush essays

Future of Business under Bush essays President George W. Bush has announced a 6-point agenda for stimulating the US economy that he plans to implement, if re-elected. The plan would help businesses as follows: The cornerstone of President Bush's economic plan is his proposal for eliminating double taxation on corporate dividends carrying a price tage of $ 370 billion over the next 10 years. At present, the IRS taxes a company's profits and then taxes investors who receive the profits as dividends as well. The measure is likely to benefit entrepreneurs and businesses that pay dividend income, and seeks to strengthen businesses in the long-term that choose to distribute capital to their investors by means of dividends. (Jones, 2003) Current tax laws permit small businesses to write off up to $25,000 worth of equipment purchases as expenses. The President's plan would increase that limit to $75,000 and index it to inflation - encouraging small businesses to buy technology, machinery, and other equipment needed for Small businesses would be allowed to join together to purchase health coverage for workers at lower rates, resulting in lower health care costs. Measures are planned to reduce mass tort lawsuits against businesses and health care workers and insurance companies that drive up costs of doing business. ("President Bush's Six-point Plan, 2003") Another Bush proposal relating to businesses is a comprehensive national energy plan focusing on upgrading the nation's electrical grid, promoting energy efficiency, and increasing domestic energy production. (Ibid.) ...

How Long Are the SAT Subject Tests

How Long Are the SAT Subject Tests SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips The SAT subject tests are all one hour in length and are all multiple choice. However, they differ in features, format, and the time pressure you will feel depending on where your academic strengths and weaknesses lie. Let's discuss the differences among the subject tests and how you can beat the time pressure. First, let's consider the unique features of the test. Unique Features There are 21 different subject tests (I'm counting Biology E and Biology M as two separate tests). Of these tests, the language, biology, math, and chemistry tests have some special features, as explained below. Language Subject Tests Some language tests include a Listening component. Listening tests are always given in the first hour on test day, so you can only take one Listening test per test date. French, German, and Spanish have non-Listening and Listening options. Chinese, Korean, and Japanese can only be taken as Listening tests. Language Subject Tests are also the only Subject Tests with four answer choices per question. All other Subject Tests have five answer choices per question. Biology Subject Tests If you choose to take the Biology subject test, you have the option of Biology E or Biology M. While they share 60 core questions, each has an additional 20 questions with an ecological or a molecular focus. Learn more about which concentration makes sense for you by taking a look at some practice questions. Math Subject Test There are two math subject tests, Level 1 and Level 2. Level 1 requires two years of algebra and one year of geometry. Level 2 requires the same plus some understanding of trigonometry and pre-calculus. Level 2 also requires more extensive use of (and comfort with) a graphing calculator. Chemistry Subject Tests The chemistry test has a separate section on the bubble sheet for you to answer 5 special questions. These questions will ask you to compare two statements by balancing equations or making predictions about chemical reactions. The other tests are relatively straightforward in their format. Since all of them are one hour, a better question than, "How long are SAT subject tests?" would be "How many questions are on SAT subject tests?" This is where the answer gets a little more complicated. How Many Questions Are On Each Subject Test? Subject # of questions Literature ~60 US History 90 World History 95 Math Level 12 50 Bio E/M 80 Chemistry 85 Physics 75 French and German 85 (~85 with listening, 35% are listening) Spanish 85 (~85 with listening, 40% are listening Hebrew 85 Italian 80-85 Latin 70-75 Chinese with Listening 85 (33% are Listening) Japanese and Korean with Listening 80 (35% are listening) There isn't a huge amount of variation in the number of questions per SAT subject test time- the Literature test is the one that stands out as having significantly fewer questions. Don't assume this means it's easier, though! The Literature test involves close reading of passages, which takes up some of your valuable 60 minutes of test-taking. Now that you know how many questions are on each test, how can you use this information to maximize your time management under these strictly timed conditions? Tips on Timing Time Yourself When You Prep As you can see in the above chart, almost all of the tests have more questions than minutes. This means you are expected to spend less than a minute on each question. The best way to master the material and perfect your pacing is to practice under simulated timed conditions. Sit down for exactly one hour with a practice test, and don't give yourself extra time. Record how you do and see if you can beat your score each time you practice. You'll almost certainly see improvement as you get more familiar with the test. Use Questions From Real Tests College Board offers useful practice material here. You can learn about the content of each individual test and practice with questions taken from real tests administered in the past. Using high quality, relevant prep materials is the only way to prep effectively for the real thing. Move Quickly and Efficiently The strict timing of these tests allows no room for lengthy consideration or debate. If a question completely stumps you, don't waste valuable time on it. Mark it, skip it, and come back to it at the end with fresh eyes, or simply to make a guess and fill in a letter on the bubble sheet. You might get lucky and get the point! If you're skipping questions, leave a small amount of time at the end to revisit them or fill in the bubble sheet with guesses. Understand Your Ideal Testing Style Will taking three tests in one morning energize or exhaust you? Will you be able to focus on two or three subjects in one sitting, or will fatigue prevent you from performing well? The subject tests start between 8:30 and 9:00 in the morning. You'll get a five minute break between each test. Some students get an adrenaline rush jumping from one subject test to another. Others might have trouble shifting gears between subjects. Again, practicing under simulated conditions may help you figure out your testing style and whether you should take several subject tests on one date or space them out. Not only will timing yourself help create the conditions of the real test, but finding friends and peers to practice with will also resemble the experience of testing beside others. Guessing Strategies for SAT Subject Tests Unlike the general SAT, for SAT Subject Tests you lose a fraction of a point for each question you answer incorrectly. Here's how scoring works for Subject Tests (all the Subject Tests except the foreign language tests have five answer choices. Foreign languages tests have four answer choices): You get 1 point for each correct answer. A fraction of a point is subtracted for wrong answers: 1/4 point is subtracted for five-choice questions. 1/3 point is subtracted for four-choice questions. 1/2 point is subtracted for three-choice questions. No points are deducted for questions left blank. If your final score is a fraction, it's rounded to the nearest whole number - 1/2 or more is rounded up; less than 1/2 is rounded down. What does this mean for you? Too many random guesses could bring down your score, so you have to be smart on when to guess on a question (and risk a point deduction) and when to leave a question blank (with no change of getting it right). Here are some strategies to follow: If You Can't Eliminate Any Answer Choices If you're really stumped on a multiple-choice question and can't eliminate any of the options, don’t guess yet. Skip the question for now and return to it after you've finished the rest of the exam. What if you still can’t eliminate any answer choices? Then leave the question blank. Don’t blindly guess without eliminating any answers. Without eliminating any of your answer choices, you have a high chance of losing points by choosing the wrong answer. Here's the math: on a question with five answer choices, you have a 20% chance of selecting the right answer by guessing blindly. If you guess on five questions, odds are you will get four questions wrong and one right, or zero points total! This is why there is a wrong answer penalty on SAT Subject Tests it makes blind guessing pointless (literally). But because of how randomness works, you might end up guessing incorrectly on more questions than expectedmbsp;leaving you with a net negative number of points. If You Can Eliminate Only One Answer Choice It may make sense to guess here. Cross off the answer choice that you know is incorrect, and take a look at the rest of the answer choices to see if you can narrow down your options further. In this situation, you'll likely gain more points than you lose by guessing. If you guess randomly on 16 questions where you can eliminate one answer choice for each (with five answer choices to start), you will gain a full point on average (4 - (.25 x 12) = 1). It's not huge, but compared with leaving all those questions blank and getting nothing, that’s a pretty good deal. But remember, this advice assumes purely random guessing, which is rare. A certain answer might be appealing to you for whatever reason, so you will go for that choice instead of taking a truly random guess. Test makers often try to make incorrect answers look more appealing so students are more likely to get tricked and choose them. When taking these factors into account, your chance of guessing correctly after eliminating one answer choice is actually less than 25 percent. In the example above, if you were to get even three questions right rather than four and 13 wrong rather than 12 you would be losing a quarter of a point (3 - (.25 x 13) = -0.25). If you do decide to guess in this situation, pick an answer as much at random as possible, rather than getting mired in the wording of each choice. For example, you may choose to always "A" on questions you're guessing on (unless that's the choice you've eliminated) to make your guesses as random as possible. If You Can Eliminate Two or More Answer Choices Now we’re talking! Even with the tricky wording of SAT questions, your chances of choosing the correct answer are high enough here that it may be appropriate to guess. Say you have a set of 15 questions where you guess after eliminating two choices (leaving you with three answer choices per question). With random guessing, this gives you a net total of 2.5 points (five questions correct, 10 incorrect; 5 - (0.25 x 10) = 2.5). Even if you don’t do quite that well and end up getting one more question wrong and one less right, that still gives you 4 - (0.25 x ) = 1.25 points earned. Of the answer choices you have left in this scenario, try to guess randomly. It can still be risky to guess here because we're assuming that all the answer choices you eliminated are definitely incorrect. However, if you have done your homework on the SAT and are familiar with strategies for eliminating incorrect answers, you should be good to go. Additional Note: If you take a practice test, I would recommend marking all the questions you guessed on so that you can later evaluate the success of your guessing strategies. This will also prevent you from just ignoring questions you got right by chance, which you should still revisit if you don't understand the material. Summary While these tests seem to have a lot of questions in a short amount of time, you'll definitely be able to get to all of them if you study effectively. Prep with high quality materials and train yourself in time management and pacing, the same way you would as an athlete. Taking two or three subject tests in one day may sound tough, but a lot of students actually get into a highly focused zone and feed off the energy of the challenge. Be strategic about how you schedule your tests, but remember you can always take the subject tests again if need be- most colleges will take your highest scores. Click here to learn about when you should take the SAT Subject Tests in and around the general SAT and all your other tests and finals. What's Next? Now that you're familiar with the length of the subject tests, how can you decide which subject tests to take? This article will help you choose which subject test is best for you. Are you also taking the SAT? Just like with the subject tests, it's vital to know the format and timing of the SAT. Click here to learn about the SAT and how you can manage your time during this long test. Also, check out our famous guide to how you can score a perfect SAT score. Are you more interested in the ACT? Read about how long it is and how you can pace yourself throughout the different sections. Then read about what a good ACT score for you is. Need a little extra help prepping for your Subject Tests? We have the industry's leading SAT Subject Test prep programs (for all non-language Subject Tests). Built by Harvard grads and SAT Subject Test full or 99th %ile scorers, the program learns your strengths and weaknesses through advanced statistics, then customizes your prep program to you so that you get the most effective prep possible. Learn more about our Subject Test products below:

Victim Advocacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Victim Advocacy - Essay Example The need for such profile of the victim arose and its utility was realized when the investigation teams had to solve the cases of serial criminals. The development of the profile of the potential victims on the basis of the existing victim's information helped to trace the serial criminals. However, this strategy is now not restricted to the serial crimes only, rather a separate field of studies has been developed to work on the matter; this field is termed as 'victimology'. "The scientific study of victimization, including the relationships between victims and offenders, the interactions between victims and the criminal justice system -- that is, the police and courts, and corrections officials -- and the connections between victims and other societal groups and institutions, such as the media, businesses, and social movements." (Karmen) The concept of victim dates back to ancient cultures and civilizations. Its original meaning was rooted in the exercise of sacrifice -- the taking of the life of a person or animal to satisfy a deity. (Karmen) Before 1940's, as mentioned earlier, the criminology and the crime investigation had total focus of research and academic analysis on the criminals, victims had no significant place in the investigation. However, the field of criminology gave birth to victimology when Mendelson and Von Hentig started studying the victims of the crime as well, since were of the view that like criminals, the victims should also be the integral part of such analysis. These two are know as the father of the study of Victimology. (Roberson) Mendelson asserted that victims had an "unconscious aptitude for being victimized." (Roberson, 1994) Von Hentig published an article in 1941 with the title "Remarks on the Interaction between Perpetrator and Victim" (Hentig). Later on, he published "The Criminal and his Victim", a textbook on criminology in which he wrote a chapter about the victim (Hentig). He treated the victim as one of the participants in a crime. The term victimology was evolved by Mendelsohn in 1947 in a paper presented in French at a congress in Bucharest. Another significant contribution in the development of the field of Victimology as a separate discipline of studies is by S. Schafer who published in 1968 a remarkable book on the subject entitled "The Victim and his Criminal; a study into functional responsibility" It was the result of all these efforts that victimology evolved as a separate branch of studies in 1970's and is now progressing by leaps and bounds. Difference between Victimology, Criminology, Sociology and Psychology: Before moving on to the differences, one must be clear about respective definitions since they form the basis for difference. Criminology is the scientific study of the crime. Sociology is the study of the individuals, groups and institutions

Propaganda Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Propaganda - Assignment Example Posters have been used as an informative or propaganda means for a very long time. They have been advancing with the advancement in technology. This advancement has been majorly structural and appearance in form of colour and shape but the purpose remains informational conveyance. (b) Introduction: This paper is going to give the full meaning of the term propaganda and its importance in the society. The term propaganda refers to the different means used by media and other informative systems in informing about different emerging issues. These issues might be pertaining to fields such as politics, education, economic development, agricultural field, industrial development, environmental conservation, energy conservation and other lively related fields. The use of propaganda started a long time ago but has been undergoing evolution as technology advances and modernity takes over. In this section, the paper would be giving samples of posters developed with a purpose of informing people about six main fields in human life. This paper would then give a brief explanation as to how these types of posters have undergone structural change as they retain their purpose and theme in human life. Therefore this paper would look at five different posters and the historical context under which each of these posters was created. It would further look at how politics and culture of people has influenced them. In addition to that, the ways in which each poster is set to meet its intended purpose as based on the targeted audience. (c) Different types of posters and the message they convey to the society (a) The poster above is a poster on fighting pollution in the society. It is a hand designed poster as from its look. It is a type of poster that is linked with the 1920s. During this time, the world had undergone less advancement in technological field. When this poster is presented in a new form of the present generation where technology is exclusively used, it would be structura lly improved. This structural improvement would be from a hand drawing into a photo taken picture with at least a digital camera recorder. If not in form of a photo, it would take the form of mobile pictures where human being should be associated in the picture. Nowadays, if a poster on fighting pollution should be produced, then it should show an illustration of the effects of pollution on the environment. Culturally, people who are the main preservers of the environment from pollution should also be included. This is the political and cultural effects that politics would have on the poster above. The main reason is to make clear and sure that the theme of the poster is well conveyed to the society which is the intended audience. (b) The above poster is a poster created in the new generation of 21 century with fine artists showing out their talent. It is a politics related politics and that is a reason why the term â€Å"HOPE† is included to encourage people on choosing the person on the poster during election (Stromquist, 2008). Therefore, despite the fact that the poster was meant to be coloured, the whitish colour was intentionally put in to show peace and purity. In the new generation where most of the youths are unemployed despite their good talent and thus they require employment opportunities. Therefore, the

How to Be A Good Student Essay -- Teaching Public Schools

How to Be A Good Student To become a success in life, we all need to learn to become a good student in every aspect of life. Becoming a good student takes much work and self-discipline. There are many ways that a student can stand out from the rest of the class. These good students are distinguished by their attitude, intellectual skills, consciousness, and achievement. Attitude is primarily a genuine desire to learn and the will to do hard academic work to achieve understanding. It is also shown by how well you apply yourself even to subjects in which you have little interest and how much you can achieve even when a teacher’s style is not what you are used to. Also attitude can change the way you percieveperceive things and make you want to either quit or do better. Havin...

Atomic Threat: New Weapon of the 1940s

What follows will be a brief summary and review of three books concerning the advent of the atomic bomb, its use on Japan, the politics and diplomacy involved   and the effects that Truman and his cabinet suspected that the bomb would have on future wars and future politics.   Three authors, Gar Alperoitz, Herbert Feis and J. Samuel Walker present similar information about the development and use of the atomic bomb and the concerns that those few politicians with intimate knowledge of the bomb suspected its existence would have on future global politics. The authors speak from different perspectives and yet at points provide strikingly similar details about the events surrounding the development of the bomb.   While all three authors focus on the development and use of the bomb, each approaches the subject from a slightly different perspective.   Alperovitz focuses on diplomacy with Stalin, Walker focuses on the situation in Japan and Feis pays more attention to those involved with the development of the bomb, both politicians and scientists.   We will begin our considerations of these different approaches with Alperovitz's focus on the effects the bomb had on diplomacy and move on from there. Alperovitz book consists of a long 60 page introduction, eight chapters and four appendices describing the relations between the United States and the Soviet Union prior to and after the advent of the bomb.   He begins with Truman's concerns about the Russians when he took over from FDR. As he prepared for his first meeting with a USSR representative Truman declared that â€Å"if the Russians did not care to cooperate, ‘they could go to hell.'† A few hours later, the President expressed the same view to Soviet Foreign Minister V. M. Molotov in rather undiplomatic terms. Truman desired to continue FDR's policy of cooperation with the Russians, but his attitude when he spoke the above words were not the result of a moment's flash of temper. Problems were developing over the USSR's dealings with Poland.   Alperovitz's primary argument that the bomb had a very significant influence on American views of diplomacy with the USSR long before the bomb. The bomb was inextricably bound with Truman's strategy at Potsdam in July 1945 and â€Å"was regarded as a ‘master card' of diplomacy.† (Alperovitz, p. 1)   Alperovitz states that â€Å"†¦a major reason the bomb was used was ‘to make Russia more manageable†¦.† (Alperovitz, p. 1).   Touched upon the impact of nuclear weapons on the beginning of the Cold War. â€Å"In August 1945, Eisenhower felt that ‘before the atom bomb was used, I would have said yes, I was sure we could keep peace with Russia. Now, I don't know†¦People are frightened and disturbed all over. Everyone feels insecure again.† (Alperovitz, p. 2)   Truman and some members of his cabinet believed that Russia was attempting to dominate Eastern Europe so concerns over Poland had been chosen as a symbolic issue to force a showdown with Stalin because of Truman's concern that Stalin was had plans for all of Eastern and Central Europe.   (Alperovitz, p. 70)  Ã‚   Secretary Forrestal stated, â€Å"This difficulty over Poland could not be treated as an isolated incident.† (Alperovitz, p. 70) â€Å"Forrestal argued: ‘We had better have a showdown with them now rather than later.'† (Alperovitz, p. 70) On the surface, this showdown strategy seemed to have been a complete reversal of FDR's policy only a few weeks earlier. There were three major obstacles to Truman's firm, showdown approach. First, FDR appeared to have had a strong belief that cooperation with Russia was possible. Second was the concern that American-Soviet cooperation might be destroyed and that a separate peace accord between Germany and the USSR might be signed, a concern that was eliminated when the German government collapsed. The third concern was that a showdown with Russia might result in the loss of Soviet help in the war against Japan. While Truman's approach was one of an immediate showdown with Stalin, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill took a different approach. â€Å"He believed it might be possible to obtain additional concessions from the Russians if he could maintain the extended troop positions†¦Ã¢â‚¬  rather than withdrawing Anglo-American troops as General Eisenhower had proposed. (Alperovitz, p. 90) Churchill was prepared to use any argument at his disposal to persuade Truman to his point. Churchill cabled Truman, â€Å"‘The Russian occupational zone has the smallest proportion of people and grows by far the largest proportion of food†¦Before we move from the tactical positions we have at present achieved,' the Russians should be forced to agree that ‘the feeding of the German population must be treated as a whole and that the available supplies must be divided pro rata between the occupational zones.'† (Alperovitz, p. 91) When Truman took up the issue with his Joint Chiefs of Staff for advice, they were unwilling to use troop positions for political purposes. Even though Truman recognized that the Russians were in a strong position, he followed the showdown on Poland with a firm approach to the problem of cooperation in Central Europe. (Alperovitz, p. 93) Truman's joint action with Churchill stressed his willingness to present a united Anglo-American stand against Russia. Like General Eisenhower, various military authorities believed that this approach to the troop issue would yield negative results. By mid-May 1945, Truman's plan for cooperative control of Central Europe was faced with a direct challenge. On April 24 1945, one day after President Truman had a showdown with Molotov, Secretary of War Stimson wrote President Truman stating, â€Å"(The atomic bomb) has such a bearing on our present foreign relations and such an important effect upon all my thinking in this field that I think you should know about it without further delay.† (Alperovitz, pp. 103-04) Up to this point, President was apparently unaware of the bomb. Stimson had casually mentioned to Truman about an â€Å"immense project†¦(that) was under way–a project looking to the development of a new explosive of almost unbelievable destructive power,† Stimson had felt no compelling reason or need to fully discuss the matter with President Truman up to that time until after the showdown with Molotov. (Alperovitz, p. 104) Secretary Stimson discussed the atomic bomb with the President for three quarters of an hour and it was â€Å"assumed–not decided–that the bomb would be used.† Truman was made aware that Japan had been the target of the weapon development program and that a special Air Force group was about to leave for its overseas base. Although Stimson expressed confidence that the bomb would shorten the war, the use of the bomb against Japan was not main subject of discussion. The diplomatic implications of the atomic bomb dominated private discussion between Stimson and Truman during the last week of April and the first week of May, 1945. President Truman eventually came to agree that the atomic bomb would have decisive implications for diplomacy with Russia. By shortly after April 25, 1945, British representatives knew that a committee would be set up â€Å"to consider the whole ranged of political issues which will arise in connection with the atomic bomb.† (Alperovitz, p. 110) News of the atomic bomb first came to the average American and to most senior government officials from the newspapers. The weapon's power was disclosed in a way that produced great emotion and optimism about its usefulness as an instrument of high policy. (Alperovitz, p. 237) On August 16, 1945, after the bomb was used and the war ended, Truman told the press, that â€Å"Japan would not be divided into occupation zones, and declared †¦that as far as Japan was concerned, ‘in the event of any difference of opinion (among the Allied powers) the policies of the United States will govern.† (Alperovitz, p. 240) The atomic bomb had strengthened the American hand in diplomacy. In the â€Å"whirlwind days† â€Å"immediately after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, American diplomacy changed†¦swiftly.† Secretary Byrnes underscored the breadth and scope of the departures from typical diplomacy by saying, â€Å"Those†¦days†¦were full of action.† The sheer volume of work caused the Secretary of State to ask that the London foreign ministers' meeting set for September 1 be postponed until September 10.† (Alperovitz, p. 243). Truman declared: â€Å"The atomic bomb is too dangerous to be loose in a lawless world†¦We must constitute ourselves trustees of this new force†¦The best interests of the United States require the utmost cooperation by all concerned in keeping secret now and for all time in the future all scientific and technical information†¦.† (Alperovitz, p. 243) One week later, Truman directed that no information on the nuclear development project be released without the specific approval of the President. (Alperovitz, p. 243) Alperovitz clearly points out that the atomic bomb and the temporary American monopoly in possessing the bomb was viewed as a â€Å"great advantage to American diplomacy. In (Secretary Byrnes') view, the ‘primary task was to establish a â€Å"lasting structure of peace†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦A stable Europe, essential to world peace and American security alike, was the number-one goal. Byrnes believed that the nuclear monopoly could be maintained for at least seven years†¦within that period, with the support of the revolutionary weapon, his diplomacy could easily achieve its idealistic objectives. Thus, the weapon seemed a crucial factor in forcing agreement to an American plan for permanent peace–a plan which, ipso facto, would prevent another world war.† (Alperovitz, p. 245) Alperovitz goes on to add that Byrnes vision â€Å"obviated the danger of an arms race.† (Alperovitz, p. 245) History has shown that Byrnes was clearly wrong. Not only did the atomic bomb fail to eliminate the arms race, but it seems to have added to the race tremendously, but with all that was at stake, the bomb made going to war a much more risky proposition than it had been in the past. J. Samuel Walker's book â€Å"Prompt and Utter Destruction† focused on another aspect of the new weapon. Walker notes in his preface that, â€Å"The question of why President Truman used atomic bombs against Japan has intrigued me since I was an undergraduate history major. Indeed, it was the first issue in which the competing arguments of different scholars caught my interest†¦.† (Walker, p. ix) This statement in his preface sets up the direction for his book. Walker states, â€Å"In fact†¦Truman never faced a categorical choice between the bomb and an invasion that would cost hundreds of thousands of American lives†¦the prevailing perception (about the president's alternatives) vastly oversimplifies the situation in the summer of 1945†¦.† (Walker, p. 5) Walker points out 1) that there were other available options for a â€Å"reasonably short time† end to the war without resorting to the bomb, 2) Truman and his key advisers believed that Japan was so weak that the war could end even before an invasion began and 3) American military planners believed that even in a worst case scenario, American casualties would be far fewer than the hundreds of thousands Truman and his advisers claimed after the war. So, â€Å"Was the use of the bomb necessary at all† and if so, 2) â€Å"What exactly did it accomplish?† Walker begins by taking a look at the President. Truman won greater affection and esteem from the American people after his presidency and after he died than he had while president. He was honest, often indiscreet and blunt and needlessly offensive and â€Å"his decisiveness could lead to superficial or impulsive judgments.† (p. 7) The world was embroiled in a global war that made his arrival into the Oval Office a period of extraordinarily difficult problems and, even though he had been vice president, he came to the White House without adequate preparation. Indeed, he began his turn at the helm basically â€Å"in the dark about many of his predecessor's policies and commitments†¦.† (Walker, p. 9) The one fundamental military strategy from Roosevelt that seemed clear to Truman was his predecessor's desire â€Å"to achieve complete victory at the lowest cost in American lives.† (Walker, p. 9) After October 1941, President Roosevelt authorized a major effort to explore the feasibility of an atomic bomb. The Manhattan project began with the purpose of addressing the â€Å"bewildering variety† of scientific and engineering uncertainties connected with nuclear energy and the bomb. Once scientists had proven that a nuclear chain reaction was possible, the Manhattan Project focused on designing a bomb and producing the fuel to make it work. All of this was kept secret from Vice President Truman, so when he suddenly became President, he knew virtually nothing about the Manhattan Project or the bomb even though he had learned of â€Å"a massive and highly secret effort to build a new weapon† while he was chairman of the Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program in the Senate. However, while serving as a senator he did not receive any details. Secretary Stimson confirmed and elaborated information about the bomb to the President in a meeting on April 25, 1945, but Secretary Stimson warned, â€Å"the existence of such a weapon would create profound problems because the United States would not be able to maintain a monopoly on the technology. Further, the issue of sharing information about the atomic bomb would become ‘a primary question of our foreign relations.† (Walker, p. 13) When Truman took office, he was outraged by the Soviet conduct in Poland, but he did not want to ruin the relatively good relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. Germany surrendered on May 8, 1945, less than a month after Truman became president, but the war in Japan raged on. Americans were still upset about the attack on Pearl Harbor and had also become outraged when the U.S. government learned about how the Japanese mistreated American prisoners and released that information to the public and the Japanese were equally as disdainful of Americans thanks to the â€Å"warped stereotypes† Japanese leaders painted of Americans during the war. So, the Americans fought a â€Å"war without mercy in Japan. (Walker, p. 23) Even though the Japanese people were losing confidence in their leaders and public morale was deteriorating, the fact that Japan was on the verge of defeat did not mean that the country was on the verge of surrender. By the end of June 1945, both American and Japanese leaders, including Japan's emperor, as well as the Japanese people realized that the war would end in Japan's defeat.   On June 17, 1945, President Truman wrote in his diary that deciding between invading Japan and relying solely on bombing and blockade to end the war was his â€Å"hardest decision to date.† ( Walker, p. 35) Advisers in the Truman administration realized that â€Å"‘there was a large submerged class in Japan' that did not favor the war but would ‘fight tenaciously' for their homeland.† In a meeting on June 18, 1945, Secretary Stimson hinted that he â€Å"thought the war might end by some other means, though at this time he did not specify what the alternatives were.† (Walker, p. 37) Meanwhile, although there were some proponents who were in favor of moderating the stance for Japan's unconditional surrender, the prevailing attitude in the United States as a whole was for the unconditional surrender of Japan. By July 13, 1945, it was clear that America's demand for an unconditional surrender was the main obstacle to a settlement. So, despite the mutual desires of the American people and the Japanese people for peace and the leaders of both countries faced the same obstacle–unconditional surrender. President Truman faced choices as to how to overcome this dilemma. There were three choices, including invasions with the potentially high costs. A fourth alternative also existed, the atomic bomb. Truman and his advisers proceeded with their planning as if the bomb didn't exist because the bomb had not been tested successfully, but those in the administration who knew about the bomb hoped that a successful test would lead to their goal of ending the war at a lower cost than the alternatives. Final preparations for the atomic test, named â€Å"Trinity† proceeded amid strain, excitement, uncertainty and ominous weather forecasts, but at 8:00 AM on July 16, 1945, Secretary Stimson receive news of the successful test of the bomb. President Truman was delighted when he heard the news. Secretary Byrnes was committed to the belief that the bomb would be an instrument to advance American diplomacy, particularly in light of growing differences with the Soviet Union. On the diplomatic front, Truman took his cue from Secretary Byrnes and agreed that the bomb would serve as a valuable tool for diplomacy. Ultimately, it appears that Truman used the bomb â€Å"because he had no compelling reason to avoid using it.† (Walker, p. 95) American leaders had assumed that the bomb would be used when available and there were no military, diplomatic, political, or moral considerations contrary to that assumption. Diplomatically, it placed America in a stronger position with the Soviets and it was politically popular as a means in ending the war quickly as opposed to the dire prospects of victory without the bomb. Herbert Feis opens his work by considering how the war could be ended. In May 1945 the war in Europe was over and Japan fought alone. Japanese life and production was being â€Å"smashed and burned†. The question was, â€Å"How could (the war) be ended surely and quickly?† (Feis, p. 3) â€Å"The obvious and perhaps most certain was was to beat down the Japanese until they could no longer fight on–by enlarging the assaults on Japan and Japanese armed forces wherever they could be reached†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Feis, p. 3) Another means was by inducement and a third, the most secret, was by shock. Each of these approaches could end the war or two or three of them could do so in combination. The end of the European war made American, British and Russian troops available for use in the Pacific. As for the war in the General Marshall felt â€Å"that the hope that air power alone would be able to drive Japan out of the war was unjustified; and that the task would be the more difficult there since the Japanese were scattered through mountainous country.† (Feis, p. 9) The U.S. had planned an invasion of Kyushu, but there were concerns that America could not go further and force its way upon Tokyo. (Feis, p. 11) The Joint Chiefs adopted strategic plans for the war in the Pacific on May 25, 1945. Those plans were approved by President Truman on June 18th, but those plans included the desire to have Russian forces enter the final assault with U.S. forces. General MacArthur emphatically stated to a visitor from the War Department that â€Å"no attempt ought to be made to invade Japan proper unless and until the Russian army had been previously committed to action in Manchuria; that he though this was essential, and should be brought about without†¦delay†¦.† President Truman's tone was stern. He felt that Japanese aggression against China, the Japanese assault upon America and the Japanese cruelties during the was warranted severity and he reaffirmed his intention to carry on the war â€Å"until the Japanese military and naval forces lay down their arms in unconditional surrender.† (Feis, p. 16) On the morning of May 28, 1945, President Truman was urged to try to induce the Japanese to surrender by dispelling the worst fears of the consequences. Secretary Stimson and General Marshall concluded that â€Å"the question of what to say to the Japanese and when to say it, should be governed by whether and when the United States had the atomic bomb.† (Feis, p. 19) Others in the cabinet did not believe that Japan would heed any warnings of surrender until the Japanese were more thoroughly beaten down. (Feis, p. 19) Although the prime incentive for making the bomb was the effort to defeat Germany (Feis, p. 28), the dimensions of creating the bomb became apparent and its creators were compelled to face the fact that the war against Germany might be over before the bomb was ready for use. The number of issues surrounding the creation of the bomb included what type of bomb to make. During the creation of the bomb, those in the Roosevelt administration who knew about it believed that knowledge needed to make the new weapon could be confined long enough as to allow the United States and Britain to secure an advantage that would keep the Soviet Union from being too pushy.   When Roosevelt died, Secretary Stimson lingered after the first Cabinet meeting to tell the new President briefly about the immense undertaking regarding the bomb of which the former vice president now president had no knowledge. As Truman learned more about the weapon with time, Truman began to recognize the enormous significance of the new weapon. The President accepted Secretary Stimson's belief that â€Å"†¦our leadership in the war and the development of this weapon has placed a certain moral responsibility upon us which we cannot shirk without very serious responsibility for any disaster to civilization which it would further.† (Feis, p. 38) When plans to use the bomb were considered, one consideration was to demonstrate the bomb's power before using it, but there were concerns against its use. The possibility that a country could assure its security by increasing its nuclear armaments (as was later the practice) was viewed to be invalid. It was felt that â€Å"the safety of all nations henceforth could be achieved only if they agreed to subject their activities in atomic energy to international control. However, the chance of bringing about such an agreement would be greatly lessened by the sudden and unannounced use of the weapon against Japan. Both the diplomatic and military value of the bomb spanned a wide range of concerns. Using the bomb against Japan faced a range of concerns as evidenced by the following statement: â€Å"†¦they range from the proposal of a purely technical demonstration to that of military application best designed to induce surrender. Those who advocate a purely technical demonstration of atomic weapons, and have feared that if they would wish to outlaw the use of atomic weapons, and have feared that if we use the weapons now our position in future negotiations will be prejudiced. Others emphasize the opportunity of saving American lives by immediate military use†¦.† (Feis, p. 54) Before using the new weapon, Americans were determined to continue their assault on Japan and officials in Washington were striving to compose a statement which would tell the Japanese how we intended to treat them once they surrendered.(Feis, p. 63) Feis considers issues not discussed by the other authors. He wonders, â€Å"Whether, if the United States had pledged itself as soon as the war was over to destroy the other bombs it had and dismantle the factories in which they were made other countries would have been willing to join with it in a trustworthy system of control of atomic energy, must remain forever a provocation to the speculative historian.: (Feis, p. 190) I could be biased by this, but I certainly enjoyed each of these books, however I must admit to a great interest in many aspects of World War II, including matters surrounding the atomic bomb.   These books covered an aspect of the war that took concerns of future wars to a new and frightening level and often placed the reader right in the thick of issues and diplomacy connected with the atomic bomb and other issues of the war.   All three books discuss the global atmosphere at the time of a world in turmoil at the end of World War II and the bomb's contribution that bringing that turmoil to an end, but at the same time, each of the books focus on aspects of the politics surrounding the bomb. All reveal the mutual suspicion and mistrust between Russia and her two strongest allies in the War, the U.S. and Britain.   They reveal how this mistrust played a role in the development, use and politics surrounding the bomb.   Each book portrays different details surrounding the development and use of the bomb.   Although or perhaps despite their different perspectives, all three books are interesting and had some surprizingly similar aspects.   Each author tells his story from a different perspective, each author outlines some aspects of their story with common events and from common perspectives. Alperovitz seems to focus a lot on Truman's concern regarding Stalin's desires for Poland and other areas of Eastern Europe.   Walker focused a great deal on events in the Pacific and Feis tended to concentrate much more of his focus on the development of the bomb.   Combined, these three books present an interesting and a more comprehensive look at how the bomb developed, its initial influence on diplomacy and how politicians felt that the existence of the bomb would impact future events in Europe. Each author tells an interesting and provacotive story with behind the scenes details from a different perspective and each author lays out interesting and compelling facts surrounding the concerns, suspicions and global politics between Russia and ther wartime allies, the United States and Great Britain.   I found each of them to be interesting and compelling reading. References Alperoitz, Gar (1965).   Atomic diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam; the use of the atomic bomb and the American confrontation with Soviet power .   New York, NY:   Simon and Schuster. Feis, Herbert (1966).   The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II.   Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press. Walker,   J. Samuel   (1997).   Prompt and utter destruction : Truman and the use of atomic bombs against Japan.   Chapel Hill, NC:   University of North Carolina Press.         

Barbie Growing Pains as the American Girl Goes Global...

Xiao-Hu WANG April 8, 2011 4-page paper: Case study of Global Marketing Barbie: Growing Pains as the American Girl Goes Global 1. Describe Mattel’s global marketing strategy for Barbie and assess its success. Does management demonstrate that it understands and embraces the needs to â€Å"think global and act local†? Mattels success should be attributed to its representation of American culture, and its Curated Consumption of its products, for example: when parents buy a Barbie doll to the children, it is easily acceptable price position and start , but after purchase it, the parents are bound to face follow-up to buy other clothing products linked to the Barbie doll, thereby it is enable to expand business ; in the aspects of global†¦show more content†¦How important is culture in dictating children’s toy preferences? Will cultural differences result in failure for Mattel as the company faces new competitors in the Middle East? We think Mattel lost in the Middle East, not only because of marketing strategy factors, but also the differences between the cultural values and the region represented by their products which is too large, or even it’s inacceptable. According to the Mattel’s Barbie, when further American culture his product represents, in a situation where in the area of the Middle East has generally hostile to the United States, as well as the differences in religious belief, its cultural values representative product is much harder purchased by local consumers, which can obviously be proved that the culture has an important influence to the product and the Marketing. As the article mentioned, some people in the Middle East even regard the Barbie as the same level of bomb, they worry about these products would influence the children’s cultural values. People in the Middle East believe generally Koran; the scriptures teach the people diligence, honesty, etc†¦ in addition to Barbie’s blonde hair is out of tune with his body, the Cadillac’s car and handsome boyfriend with the suit and tie is more contrary to their concept of the Koran, could also foresee the resistance