Plutarch - Fall of the Roman Republic Research Paper

Plutarch - Fall of the Roman Republic - Research Paper Example Despite the person based accounts, which to an extent seem like a mere collection of biographies, Plutarch provides a detail discussion on the underlying forces and factors that undermined and eventually ended the Roman Republic. Plutarch discusses historical figures not as mere personages of history but as prime movers of events. Plutarch’s style in which discussions of historical events are pegged on the lives of individuals has influenced historical references up to today. An example is the analysis of the Agricultural Crisis in Rome where â€Å"Hannibal’s invasion had destroyed farms and farmland.†3 At the center of the Agricultural Crisis were the Gracchus4 Brothers, â€Å"Tiberius Gracchus elected tribune in 133 B. C. promised to help the farmers. He called for taking of public land and distributing it among the landless farmers.†5 This clearly contains Plutarch’s style wherein individual persons are at the center of major events most especially events that precipitated to the decline and eventual end of the Roman Republic. Moreover, analysis of the period of decline up to the end of the Roman Republic centers on the personas of the individuals that were identified to being so influential and powerful that their personality, life and ideas forged the destiny of Rome. â€Å"The disintegration of the Roman Republic is the first example in European history of the collapse of a constitutional system. One school of thought contends that individual generals and would be dictators like Julius Caesar and Pompey destroyed the traditional political system of Rome through ruthless ambition. According to this view, the Commanders of the Roman army, acting like feuding Mafia dons, turned their armies inward upon the Constitutional system.† 6 From another source, â€Å"Julius Caesar's adoptive son, Octavian, became, like Augustus, the first  emperor of Rome. According to modern ways of looking at things, this or the assassination of Julius Caesar on the Ides of March 44 B.C. marked the official end of the Republic of Rome.

Capital Market Union: Do We Need One?

Capital Market Union: Do We Need One? Introduction Capital market integration is not a new topic in the EU. It became however pressing again after the international financial crisis, that exposed the limits of European firms overreliance on banks. The Juncker Commission made CMU one of its flagships initiatives, aiming at reducing national fragmentation and barriers in order to create a better environment for firms financing. While such a decision can be easily understood from a single-market perspective of analysis, the proposed and implemented reforms in order to establish such a unified market do not tackle deep structural differences at the national level, while also avoiding the strengthening of a central supervisor, undermining the efforts of harmonisation. What is CMU? The idea of a European Capital Market Union (thereafter CMU) was presented on 15 July 2014 by the soon to be President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker addressing the European Parliament[1], subsequently inserted in the Commissions priorities through the establishment of a new Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Market Union[2]. As repeatedly stressed by Juncker, the top priority of his presidency is to strengthen Europes economy and stimulate investment to create jobs, favouring a deepening of capital market integration and a reduction of the current fragmentation between national borders. In the words of former Commissioner Hill, the CMU is about linking savings to growth in Europe, Capital market union is not a novelty in the integration debate: the free flow of capital is indeed one of the fundamental principles (the so-called four freedoms) on which European integration is based since the treaty of Rome (art. 63 TFUE). In the 1980s a first wave of integration dealt with harmonisation of public offering and listing particulars. In 1993 the Investment Service Directive (ISD)[3] was agreed. In the wake of the EMU a new wave of harmonising measures was proposed under the aegis of the Financial Services Action Plan (FSAP), with the ambition to increase growth and reduce funding costs. The centrepiece was the 2004 Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID)[4], but it also contained measures regulating disclosure and market manipulation. Notwithstanding years of harmonising regulation and a common currency for most EU member states, capital market is still fragmented, integration often rests on a vertical base, few EU-wide structures have emerged in the last decade and the most powerful intermediaries are often of US parentage. Europe has struggled for decades to create a decent capital market, heavily relying on bank financing, and the financial crisis has retrenched and re-fragmented the landscape. A capital market channels money provided by investors and banks to borrowers through a variety of instruments, called securities. A central problem in the development of such a market is the information asymmetry between issuers and investors. As noted in Black (2000), both governmental bodies and self-regulatory organizations and reputational intermediaries play a role in guaranteeing the enforcement of transparency of information and correct price formation. Formal rules are only the beginning: the real challenge is the direct and indirect enforcement of new legislation. Rationale for CMU The proposal for CMU can be analysed through different lenses, justifying its rationale.First and foremost, the allocation of resources in the actual structure of the EU is over-relying on bank loans. While retail banks have a better knowledge of local situation, often providing more information to investors and borrowers, bank funding is not always the most efficient way for dynamic and highly growing enterprise to fund themselves. Moreover, due to the increased capital requirement for banks after the financial crisis and the difficulties encountered by some banks regarding their balance-sheets and the bias over sovereign bonds of their home country, financing opportunities have decreased. National fragmentation and the bias for national portfolios reduce the opportunities for cross-border funding, complicating the way investors and borrowers can meet their needs. Finally especially valuable for the Eurozone enhanced financial integration act as a private risk-sharing mechanism, spreading the risk inherent in investment on a cross-national field, thus reducing the risk of asymmetric shocks in the area and fostering the resilience of the block. This consideration is even more important considering the lack of political will to establish a public shock absorption mechanism as for instance proposed in the Five President Report (Juncker, Tusk, Dijsselbloem, Draghi, Schulz, 2015). Moreover, numerous forms of financing and better allocation of resources within the Eurozone foster the transmission channel of monetary policy, enhancing the ability of the ECB to meet its targets (ECB 2012). European and US capital markets The natural benchmark for capital markets is the US. Comparisons can be made at the EU level, but once we consider the country specificity we have an even more complex landscape. In fact big differences remain between national markets, mostly of a structural nature. When the CMU action plan was presented, although US and EU economies have roughly the same size, US venture capital market is five times EUs one and US equity markets are twice the EU ones in term of capitalization. Europe has a universal banking landscape with large banks covering commercial and investment activities. While in the US 80% of corporate debt financing depends on capital markets, in the EU 90% depends on bank financing[5]. Such dependence made the European economy vulnerable when banking conditions tightened in a number of member States during and following the international financial crisis. Moreover, the financial crisis had a considerable negative impact on securitization issuance in Europe, dropping from 594 billion euro at the end of 2007 to 216 billion in 2014 (on the rise since 2011). Finally, international capital requirement and EU banking regulation changes during the crisis impacted bank lending. Variation within Europe Other than having a different system to the one of the US on aggregate, within the EU there is also great variation on the depth and development of capital markets nationally.   Ã‚   Only 9 Member states have non-banking financial intermediation above 50% of GDP. Divergence can be seen also in the stock market capitalization of different member states as a percentage of GDP. Moreover, also the access to firms and individuals differ considerably among member states. Non-financial company reliance on equity issuance exceeded reliance on bank credit in only the UK and Denmark. Reliance on both equity and debt issuance exceeded reliance on bank credit in external company finance in only UK, Denmark, Finland, France, and Germany (European Commission, 2015a). Obstacles and barriers in the European Union landscape In the EU there are actually 28 different codes of tax, company and insolvency law that transnational investors have to deal with, blocking the smooth flow of capital between member states. Taking the example of bankruptcy law, different traditions and level of protections for investors are in place in member states. As Jey Westbrook, emeritus director of the International Insolvency Institute highlighted, The Brits have always had a more sympathetic idea to saving a debtor in trouble, Westbrook said. The Germans have had a much stricter view: There remains a big bias in favour of the idea that the management of this company screwed up, theyre losers, they probably did something fraudulent, the company should be bankrupt and pay the creditors as best they can, and the management should go join a monastery, so to speak. And then you have French law, which is somewhere in between but has much more emphasis on protecting employees and protecting jobs.[6]. The creation of truly European-wide securities moreover runs into the quest for harmonisation. Creating a security for home-mortgages, for example, requires that repossession laws in member states is to a certain degree homogeneous, same as the length of time spent in court to enforce a contract. Data from the World Bank doing Business indicators[7] show that litigation in court in countries like Italy and Greece can take up to three times the time spent in court in the Netherlands or Sweden. Banks normally bundle securities together into homogeneous groups (in our case Dutch mortgages packed together and Greek ones in a different securities). Moving to a single market for capital would require further harmonisation in national law in order to overcome national bias. Juncker CMU action plan After the publication of a Green paper in February 2015 and a public consultation to gather expert opinions, on 30 September 2015, the Commission adopted an action plan setting out a list of key measures to achieve a true single market for capital in Europe. It is supposed to be fully in place by 2019. As the plan reads there is no single measure that will deliver a Capital Market Union, meaning that a set of initiatives will be undertook in the short to medium run to facilitate the flow of capital, with the aim of reducing barriers between national borders. The process will take years, so it has not to be seen as a cyclical patch for relaunching growth in a stagnating post-crisis EU, but as a structural reform on the way credit is allocated throughout the continent. As outlined in the Green Paper the Commission supports market driven solutions when they are likely to be effective, and regulatory changes only where necessary (European Commission 2015a). Other than the action plan on CMU the commission also presented two directives on securitization: the first building blocks of CMU. The concrete outcome consists mainly of few technical proposals and amendments. First, changes to the prospectus Directive are proposed in order to facilitate SME financing, limiting the burden that these companies have to take in order to enter capital markets. Secondly, it recognizes the need to facilitate infrastructure financing and securitization through changes in the solvency II Directive and the capital requirement Regulation. SME financing is a focal point of the plan given the importance of those enterprises in creating jobs in Europe. The Commission plan aims at: Financing for innovation, start-ups and non-listed companies Making it easier for companies to enter and raise capital on public markets Investing for long-term, infrastructure and sustainable investment Fostering retail and institutional investment Leveraging banking capacity to support the wider economy Facilitating cross-border investing These broad goals are not fully operationalised and from the text there seems to be some inconsistencies. While the proposed approach is bottom-up, removing barriers when encountered, the Commission action aims at harmonising practices while possibly (as stated in the 5 Presidents Report) central supervision. What has been done until now In December 2016 the Council has agreed on the revision of EuVECA and EuSEF[8] making it easier for investors to diversify funding sources. Prospectus directive has been amended in December 2016 and now awaits implementation (capital rising up to 1 million euro will not need a prospectus; EU prospectus only required for risings over 8 million; new EU growth prospectus for facilitating cross-border money rising; ESMA will maintain a European online prospectus database; prospectus will be shorter and less costly to produce). Amendments to Solvency II legislation regarding infrastructure projects took effects in April 2016, concerning the calculation of regulatory capital requirements for several categories of assets held by insurance and reinsurance undertakings. No legislative steps yet. Proposal on simple, transparent and standardised (STS) securitisations and revision of the capital calibrations for banks. Structural Reform Support Programme within the Commission to spread best-practice and suggest reforms to member states. No other legislative procedures already enacted. Critical analysis While aiming at promoting investments in Europe, Giovannini et al. (2015) argue that it is not clear what are the causes of low investments in Europe, whether it depends on fragmented financial systems or if it is due to a low demand for capital. This means that the presumed effect of the CMU cannot be yet fully quantified. In order to strengthen cross-border transaction one of the most pressing issue is to improve the quality of information flow in order to establish market mechanism. This would require actions to increase the quality and harmonization of company data across Europe, including accounting standards, credit information and ownership. Considering the legislative outcomes so far, the CMU project has relied mainly on technical adjustments on existing legislation, creating new layers in order to arrive at a European-wide rulebook. The reformed prospectus directive, combined with the agreement of banks all over the continent to give feedbacks to firms in the case funds are not granted is a positive step forward. SMEs, having feedbacks on the best way to raise money will now be able to more easily access capital market due to the more limited fixed costs related to it. The STS securitization regulation includes a list of 55 criteria that a securitization should comply with in order to qualify for the STS label. These criteria aim at mitigating the risks arising from the process of securitization itself, allowing the investors to focus their assessment on the credit of the underlying assets. A major critical point however is that such a regulation without a proper enforcement mechanism is deemed to be at best suboptimal. National supervisors will be tasked to control the respect of these standards and sanction non-compliance, undermining the role of these assets in being really European, and creating possible conflicts due to different applications of standards between national regulators. Conclusion and final remarks The CMU action plan do not promise to eliminate the deep structural barriers that stands in the way of fully integrated capital markets. Moreover, much of the CMUs success depends on whether financing instruments represent free choices by SMEs or whether they are mainly dependent on the domestic market structure. In the latter case reform of the regulatory framework without harmonisation of national legislation will not guarantee enhanced financing opportunities for enterprises, jeopardizing the success of CMU itself. If the deep structural barriers that prevent cross-border integration of capital markets are not tackled, financial centres that are already at a competitive advantage will be in a good position to increase their market share. On a side note, the effect of Brexit has a huge weight in the future of CMU, being London the most important financial hub in the continent. Brexit offers however also the opportunity to revise the governance system of the CMU, proposing the stepping up of ESMA competencies in supervising European instruments. The UK was against further centralisation of competencies at the EU level, but now such a possibility should be taken into consideration, in order to strengthen the common supervision same as happened within the framework of the Banking union. Reference: Black, B. S. (2000) The Core Institutions that Support Strong Securities Markets. Business Lawyer, 55, 1565-1607. Commain, S., (2016) The securitisation regulation: missing the target?. CEPOB, 16/16 Demary, M., Hornik, J., Watfe, G. (2016) SME financing in the EU: moving beyond the one-size-fits-all. Bruges European Economic Policy Briefings, 40/2016. ECB (European Central Bank) (2012) Financial Integration Report (Frankfurt: ECB). European Commission (2015a) Green Paper: Building a Capital Markets Union, COM(2015) 63 à ¯Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ nal. European Commission (2015b) Action Plan on Building a Capital Market Union, COM(2015) 468 final. Giovannini, A., Mayer, C., Micossi, S., Di Noia, C., Onado, M., Pagano, M., Polo, A. (2015) Restarting European Long-Term Investment Finance, CEPR Press. Quaglia, L., Howarth, D., Liebe, M. (2016) The Political Economy of European Capital Markets Union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54, 185-203. [1] A New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change, http://ec.europa.eu/about/juncker-commission/docs/pg_en.pdf [2] Chaired by the British Johnathan Hill and lately by Dombrovsksis after the Brexit vote. [3] Council Directive 93/22/EEC of 10 May 1993 on investment services in the securities field. [4] Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2004/39/EC [5] Historically in the USA from 1933 with the Glass-Steagall Act commercial and investment banking were separated until 1991, fostering a deepening of capital market financing in the country. [6] http://www.politico.eu/article/moving-money-a-capital-markets-union-primer/ [7] http://www.doingbusiness.org/data [8] Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 on European venture capital funds and Regulation (EU) No 346/2013 on European social entrepreneurship funds.

Enigma :: history

Enigma What is an Enigma? Enigma â€Å"means a mystery† (Guynn). Although there are several alternative meanings, to the Germans this meant a thin line between victory and defeat. During World War II the allies not only intercepted encrypted messages, they broke them but not without the help of A.M. Turing. â€Å"In the early years of World War II,† (Sales), the airways in Poland were flooded with coded messages that created confusion with the â€Å"cryptanalyst working in the cipher bureau† (Maziakowski). Over a several years over Poland received thousands of messages but still hadn’t any luck. In 1930 they had found the source of their problem. Germany had hired, â€Å"Hans Schmidt, who invented the enigma machine†, (Sales). This machine enabled Germany to send messages effortlessly with the security of knowing the codes could not be broken. Initially there was only one machine that was to be used as a public machine, but soon the German military contracted Schmidt to build a machine that the German Military could only use. It wasn’t until 1932 that â€Å"the enigma code was broken by Marian Rejewski† (Maziakowski) that Poland started to feel the fear of an oncoming invasion by Germany. Without the knowledge of the break in security, Germany sent out a machine to every military outpost in preparations for war. The Polish government then listened closely to the airways, trying to pick up any information they could. They sent spies out to intercept messages in hopes of learning more about their neighbor’s plans. It was only by chance that the polish government was able to break the enigma code the first time. A man working at the Head Quarters in Berlin contacted a French operative in hopes of exchanging sensitive information for money. The French agreed and after exchanging money and information several times they found it of little use and then forwarded it to the Polish who you might say found the Holy Grail of information. Nearing the end of the exchanges between the French operative and the inside man, there was a particular document that was passed, its value would cost the French one hundred thousands dollars, an equivalent of 1 million dollars in today’s market, for a complete diagram of the enigma machine. This did little to help France and they once again sent the information right to the Poles. With this â€Å"Marian Rejewski† to â€Å"mathematically determine the wiring of one of the three routers† (Maziakowski).

Econimics Questionnaire

Name: Registration Number: Program: Total Marks: [20]   Weight: 5% †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. Qs. 1 a. Why do economists include only final goods in measuring GDP for a particular year? Why don't they include the value of the stocks and bonds bought and sold? Why don't they include the value of the used furniture bought and sold? [4] b. What are the four phases of the business cycle? [3] Qs. 2 Recent figures showed the CPI at 210. , while one year earlier it was 202. 2. [3] a. What was the rate of inflation over the previous year? b. At this rate of inflation, approximately how long will it take for the price level to double? Qs. 3 A hypothetical economy's consumption schedule is given in the table below. GDP=DI| C| 6600| 6680| 6800| 6840| 7000| 7000| 7200| 7160| 7400| 7320| 7600| 7480| 7800| 7640| 8000| 7800| Use the information to answer the following: [5] a. If disposable income were $7400, how much would be saved? b. What is the â€Å"break-even† level of disposable income? . What is this economy's marginal propensity to consume? d. What is the average propensity to consume when disposable income is $7000? When disposable income is $8000? Qs. 4 a. Suppose a $100 increase in desired investment spending ultimately results in a $300 increase in real GDP. What is the size of the multiplier? [1] b. If the MPS is . 4, what is the multiplier? [1] c. If the MPC is . 75, what is the multiplier? [1] d. Suppose investment spending initially increases by $50 billion in an economy whose MPC is 2/3. By how much will this ultimately change real GDP? [2] Econimics Questionnaire Name: Registration Number: Program: Total Marks: [20]   Weight: 5% †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. Qs. 1 a. Why do economists include only final goods in measuring GDP for a particular year? Why don't they include the value of the stocks and bonds bought and sold? Why don't they include the value of the used furniture bought and sold? [4] b. What are the four phases of the business cycle? [3] Qs. 2 Recent figures showed the CPI at 210. , while one year earlier it was 202. 2. [3] a. What was the rate of inflation over the previous year? b. At this rate of inflation, approximately how long will it take for the price level to double? Qs. 3 A hypothetical economy's consumption schedule is given in the table below. GDP=DI| C| 6600| 6680| 6800| 6840| 7000| 7000| 7200| 7160| 7400| 7320| 7600| 7480| 7800| 7640| 8000| 7800| Use the information to answer the following: [5] a. If disposable income were $7400, how much would be saved? b. What is the â€Å"break-even† level of disposable income? . What is this economy's marginal propensity to consume? d. What is the average propensity to consume when disposable income is $7000? When disposable income is $8000? Qs. 4 a. Suppose a $100 increase in desired investment spending ultimately results in a $300 increase in real GDP. What is the size of the multiplier? [1] b. If the MPS is . 4, what is the multiplier? [1] c. If the MPC is . 75, what is the multiplier? [1] d. Suppose investment spending initially increases by $50 billion in an economy whose MPC is 2/3. By how much will this ultimately change real GDP? [2]

High School Cliques Essay

The school environment causes natural polarization of peoples with similar backgrounds, attitudes, or any other factors that would form certain peer groups, or ‘cliques’. This is particularly observable in the High School setting, as the predominant social groups are composed of adolescents who are beginning their socialization process. This socialization forms various groupings or factions that are highly noticeable in High School. The modern media, who continually builds on and establish the perceived cliques and groups in movies, shows, and other media venues, is repeatedly echoing the reality. This has created stereotypes of High School cliques, such as: (1) the popular group, (2) athletes, (3) nerds, (4) racial segregation, (5) pop-culture groups like rockers and hip-hop, (6) outcasts, and (7) other groups. The converging elements of a particular faction can be varied and numerous. These cliques can be students who eat together, or hang out with each other after class. Racial profile can also be a strong factor, as with the social class and background. Even personal preference and culture can bring together different kinds of peoples. High school youth converge because of the reason that they find something in common with the group that they are with. The first clique in High School is the popular student. Usually they are the student leaders or even cheerleaders and well-known members of the student body. They can be socially advantaged as they are driving newer cars or organizing fancier parties. They can be part of the group on the merit that they are simply popular in the batch. These students are usually the first ones remembered and recalled in reunions or gatherings. They are seen as role models, or at the other extreme, a source of jealousy and hatred. The second group, the athletes, can overlap with this first group, because basketball and football players can be highly popular in High School. Another High School clique are the nerds, who are the most participative in class or gets the highest grades in any subject. They would congregate in the canteen and converse about math or politics or any other academic topic. They are stereotyped as being shy and wearing big glasses, and are very grade conscious and studious. Apart from this group, other cliques can be divided according to culture lines, like rockers or hip-hops. They are usually secluded and non-conventionalists, and would gather on their own parties and gatherings. Another notable group are outcasts, who are usually the but of jokes, and would have severe emotional and psychological problems. Some would also note that racial background would be a strong determinant in formation of cliques. Asians or African Americans or Caucasians would most likely hang-out with each other, which does not imply discrimination, but merely cultural identification. They also form different and very distinguishable cliques in High School. High School is the stage of life wherein social interaction is at its most dynamic, as young adolescents are placed in a social environment outside their homes, and forced to polarize into different groups. Although these High School cliques can be regarded as mere stereotypes that may not always necessary be apparent in a social context, there is a ring of truth in the observations. Since the school is a hodgepodge of different backgrounds and cultures, it is natural for the youth to find people they are familiar and comfortable with. This reality, coupled with media hype, reinforces the perception that different High School cliques do exist.

How to Use a Colon - Proofeds Academic Writing Tips Blog

How to Use a Colon - Proofeds Academic Writing Tips Blog How to Use a Colon The colon (Â   :Â   ) can be a tricky punctuation mark to use. As such, it is often used in the wrong places. If you want to make sure you are using it correctly in your documents, read on for a comprehensive explanation! When to Use a Colon: Lists You can use a colon to show the reader that a list of items will follow, like so: I went shopping and bought three things: a pen, a dress and a hat. This also applies if the list is bullet pointed or numbered. Its also important to note that you shouldnt use a colon if the list follows a verb or preposition that incorporates the list into the sentence (a common example is including): I went shopping and bought various things, including a pen, a dress and a hat. Correct I went shopping and bought various things, including: a pen, a dress and a hat. Incorrect To Introduce an Example or Clarification A colon can also be used when introducing a new independent clause (i.e., something that could be a sentence by itself) than clarifies or explains the previous sentence. For example: Punctuation is still important: Using a colon in the wrong place can be confusing. To Introduce a Quotation This punctuation mark is common in academic writing, where it is used when introducing a quote. For instance: Moore (1997, p. 86) makes strange claims about the heavens: A sunspot will be carried slowly across the Earth-turned disk, and eventually it will vanish over the limb. Note that a colon should only be used to introduce a quote like this when it follows from a full sentence. They can also be used to introduce block quotes, which start on a new line indented from the main text. Shorter quotes can be incorporated into the flow of your sentence and signaled with quote marks. Capitalization and Colons There are no hard and fast rules for whether you should use a capital letter after a colon, so it is important to check your style guide if youre not sure. A good rule of thumb is to capitalize the first word after a colon if it is part of a complete sentence that could be written separately (especially if the clause preceding the colon is quite short). Its not necessary to capitalize the first item in a list following a colon unless it is a proper noun. If you are in any doubt over your use of punctuation, you can send your paper to the professionals at Proofed. They will provide a full proofreading service and show you clear ways to improve your writing.

John F Kennedy essays

John F Kennedy essays a) John F. Kennedy: raised in a wealthy and political family, whose mother was the daughter of the congressman and mayor, John F. Fitzgerald and gather was an ambassador to Great Britain from 1937-1940. Kennedy enrolled into the navy during WW2, won a seat in congress and won a Pulitzer Prize for Profiles in Courage. He suffered from back pain and Addisons disease, which had to be treated with cortisone everyday. He promises many citizens of the United States a leadership to get America moving again b) Flexible response: President Kennedy really wanted to set his mind and plans on changing the nations nuclear strategy. So. Kennedy didnt want to use the nuclear weapons for a minor problem between the Soviets, Kennedys consultants developed a policy called the flexible response. In the nations view this meant that the nations conventional forces had been mistreated during the building of the nuclear arms. This policy increased the defense spending and produced a branch called the Special Forces. Kennedy hoped to liver the risk of any nuclear war, which almost came close over the island of Cuba. c) Fidel Castro: a revolutionary leader in Cuba, which declares himself as a communist who greeted the Soviet Union with open arms. Castro wanted more power, which in 1956-1959, led to a guerrilla movement to trample down the dictator, Bastista. Many Americans portrayed Castro as a freedom fighter, but as the US and Cubas relationship became troubled. Castro took action by uprooting trade barriers against Cuban sugars. In which instantly, Castro relied on Soviets help for aid and political tyranny. d) Berlin Wall: Kennedys willpower and Americans advantage for nuclear striking power wanted to stop Khrushchev from closing down from the air and land between West Berlin and East Germany, On August 13, 1961, East Germans decided to build a concrete ...