Also, by stating the asyndeton, “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty,” he all but defines Americas wish for liberty. By stating these words, he inspires his listeners to join in America’s determination in helping humankind achieve unity and liberty. Kennedy then shifts to insisting that powerful nations should join forces for the bettering of the world. He supports this by using parallelism in the words, “Let both sides explore what problems unite us…”, “Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms…”, “Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors.”, “Let both sides join in a new endeavor – not a new balance of power, but
Isolationism sounds like the right choice, staying out of other countries business’ and protecting its own country but on the other hand, seeing as America is superpower and has a powerful military, why should it not help out other countries in need of political reinforcement and aid? Although there are many great points in favour for interventionism as the policy for the United States, a more peaceful and “keep to itself” nation is the more favorable policy. The United States could worry about its own problems, keep to the original policy of President George Washington, “the great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations to have as little political connection as possible...” and other countries may respect America more because of their seclusion from international issues that are unimportant to it. In regards to the famous campaign speech of Albert Beveridge in 1898, a senator from Indiana, he believed in a nation that should rein the world, saying things like, “shall the American people continue their resistless march toward the commercial supremacy of the world?”(Beveridge,)ical e United States, I believe in a more pea, he believed in an imperialist nation, he
In an attempt to reduce the uncertainty of Krispy Kreme’s stock recommendation 2 suggests that Krispy Kreme make a firm commitment to issue financial statements on a feasible date. Many of the firm’s problems stem from inaccurate accounting data. A confident and prompt restatement of earning would go a long way in resolving the agency problem that plagued the firm under former CEO Livengood. The sooner accurate statements can be made available, the better. Long run success is dependent on honest financial reporting and resolving other components of the agency
The requirement was to buy fewer foreign products but sell more of their own goods in order to achieve the purpose of maximizing the accumulation of precious metals. However, with the development of commercial economic, the worldwide economic exchanges and the merchandise trade are growing prosperity, but the trade expansion of the competition is increasing. Thus the mercantilists began to promote “Trade Surplus Differential theory” they thought they only need to ensure the sufficient trade surplus in order to increase in national currency. This is the late mercantilism. The center of the late mercantilist is Britain.
'International aid brings both benefits and problems for a country trying to develop its economy' with the aid of named examples evaluate this view. (30 marks) International aid can bring many problems to a country in need of development, this is usually through the ill-use, ill-deployment and abuse of International aid by both the donor countries and the recipient countries. However, effective aid brings more benefits to developing countries than problems is the aid is properly allocated to the area most in need and the aid is not ties so that it benefits the donor. International aid can bring problems to a developing country as it can be an obstacle to development and can provide other problems put forward by the political right. Aid can become an obstacle to development because of the tied nature of much aid, which benefits the donor country more than the recipient, in economic terms.
Many experts feel that the West must learn from India’s much tougher patenting system where patents should be given “sparingly only for genuine innovations where the public benefit clearly exceeds the monopoly cost.” The Novartis decision might be spearheading a world where judicial decisions from countries such as China, India and Brazil have an increasing global reach and contribute to shaping global approaches to intellectual property. It is also more generally reflective of the growing assertiveness of developing countries, particularly emerging economies, in the current global intellectual property landscape. However, caution is warranted and sweeping generalizations need to be avoided. It is not clear if the Indian SC ruling will induce countries such as China and Brazil to change their current practices in the area of patenting incremental pharmaceutical innovations. The supreme Court through this decision, has also attacked the prevalent industry practice of “ever-greening” where drug manufacturers seek fresh patent for minor modified versions of patented drugs so as to extend the patent period just
What is more, a company may choose to pay dividend as the consideration for their investment, because high dividend payout is important for investors as dividends provide certainty about the company's financial well-being. Dividends are also attractive for investors looking to secure current income. In addition, some analysts indicate that how the decrease and increase of a dividend distributions from Champion can affect the price of its security. Companies like Champion that have a long-standing history of stable dividend payouts would be negatively affected by lowering or omitting dividend distributions. So it would be positively affected by increasing dividend payouts or making additional payouts of the same dividends.
When the recipient countries have good policy, they will use the aid for investing in new technology, capital, and education that can increase the productive capacity and labor productivity. However, foreign aid can raise the consumption level if recipient countries have the bad policy. If consumption is high, the price of commodities will also high. It can cause inflation and higher interest rate which will decrease the investment. On the other hand, recipient countries with good macroeconomic policy enforce the investment directly, through the government spending (Gomanee et.
One major point made during the session was that the government should have invested in a larger, more stable company, rather than small startups who lacked the capability to compete with China’s large-scale operations and massive subsidies. However, I think the U.S. government’s decision can be defended using the Infant Industry argument and the Strategic Trade policy. The Infant Industry argument states, “An industry should be protected until it can develop and be viable and competitive internationally”. Clearly, the government was just trying to protect the industry. However, if the U.S. was ever to compete, the companies they selected should have already been capable of raising the funds.
Third, the argument could be misused because there are too many uncertainties, as indeed the industry could grow up, or not. And its cost could decrease, for sure or increase. This is too speculative. 2- Questions #6, What is the national defense argument for putting up barriers to imports? Why is import protection probably not