Hamlet Characters Essays (917 words) - Characters In Hamlet

Hamlet Characters In Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the importance of characters Laertes and Fortinbras have been an issue that's discussed and analyzed by many literary critics. Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras are parallel characters in the play. Laertes and Fortinbras are often use by Shakespeare to compare the actions and emotions of Hamlet throughout the play. "They are also important in Hamlet as they are imperative to the plot of the play and the final resolution" (Nardo, 88). Shakespeare placed these three men: Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras into similar circumstances, which is, to avenge for their fathers' deaths. The main difference between the three is the way that each of them comes to grief of their fathers' deaths and the way they planned their vengeance. "Laertes is a mirror to Hamlet. Shakespeare has made them similar in many aspects to provide a greater base for comparison when avenging their respective fathers' deaths" (Nardo, 90). Both Hamlet and Laertes love Ophelia in different ways. Hamlet wishes Ophelia to become his wife, Laertes loves Ophelia as a sister. Hamlet is a scholar at Wittenberg; Laertes is also a scholar at France. Both were brought up under this royal family of Denmark. And both are admired for their swordsmenship. But most important of all, both of them loved and respected their fathers greatly, and showed great devotion when plotting to avenge their fathers' deaths. Hamlet's response to the grief of his father is very different from Laertes. Laertes responded immediately to the death. He showed his anger to others, he didn't hide it inside. He is also suspicious, it's evident in his speech to Claudius, he asked, "How came he dead? I'll not be juggled with. / To hell, allegiance" (Act 4, 5: 130)! Hamlet however is very private with his grief. He mourned long and hard for the death of Old King Hamlet, even two months after his father's death, after his mother's wedding to Claudius. He is still observed by Claudius and Gertrude to be wearing . . . Suits of solemn black" (Act 1, 2 : 78). Claudius and Gertrude noticed and commented on his unhappiness, however, Hamlet hides his feelings so well, it was not until his first soliloquy that we as audiences learned the depth of his suffering. We see the same contrast between Laertes and Hamlet again when they avenge their fathers' deaths. Laertes again is fast to action, he wants immediate revenge for Polonius. His immediate actions are based in anger and emotions, and therefore, rash. Also because of his immediate want for revenge, Laertes is easily drawn into the manipulation of Claudius. Claudius manipulates him into becoming an ally to kill Hamlet. Laertes is confident with his abilities, he says . . . my revenge will come; only I'll be revenged / Most throughly for my father" (Act 4 5:135). Contrasting to Laertes' quick response, Hamlet procrastinates. Although, Hamlet wants to gain honor by avenging his father's death, he is doubting and undecided of his abilities to do what he promised to the Old King's Ghost. For two months Hamlet procrastinates, he agonizes over what he has to do, and how he's going to avenge the murder of his father. While Laertes acts on impulse. However, despite the impulsive actions of Laertes in challenging of a duel with Hamlet, Laertes is without the cruelty and spitefulness of Hamlet. Hamlet not only wants to avenge his father's death, he wants Claudius to be eternally punished, just like the Old King Hamlet is tortured in hell. Therefore, Hamlet does not kill Claudius in the scene where Claudius is praying, when there is a chance Claudius might had a chance to confess all his sins. Laertes wants revenge, but he's not concerned with Punishment, he is concerned with physical and the present. Hamlet however, cares about Claudius' afterlife. Hamlet and Laertes the two extremes of the act of revenge: Hamlet thinks reason before action. Laertes acts on impulsion and without reasoning. Revenge was the driving force behind both characters' actions and it led to their eventual down fall. Fortinbras is the son of Old Fortinbras, King of Norway, killed during the battle with King Hamlet. Through a "Seal'd compact" (Act 1, 1:89), the lands of Old Fortinbras were forfeited to Denmark. Fortinbras, being the son of the Old King, vows to avenge his father's death and reclaim the lands that were lost. Fortinbras shares similarities and differences with Hamlet, "Fortinbras is a scholar, a soldier, the man of procrastination and the man of reason and action" (Nardo,

45 Idioms About Ordinal and Multiplicative Numbers

45 Idioms About Ordinal and Multiplicative Numbers 45 Idioms About Ordinal and Multiplicative Numbers 45 Idioms About Ordinal and Multiplicative Numbers By Mark Nichol The following is a list of idioms about ordinal numbers (first, second, and so on) and multiplicative numbers, or what the late English-usage expert Henry Watson Fowler called numeral adverbs (once, twice, and so on). (Because I have already devoted an entire post to idioms that include first, I’ve omitted them here.) 1. bottom of the ninth: the last minute, from the last segment of the last inning of a baseball game 2. break the fourth wall: speaking directly to the audience during a theatrical performance (or, by extension, a film or a television program) 3. cheap at twice the price: exceedingly inexpensive 4. don’t think twice: don’t concern yourself about it 5. eleventh hour: the last minute 6. even a stopped clock is right twice a day: someone who is usually mistaken can be correct on rare occasions 7. fifth column: collaborators supporting would-be invaders from within a country 8. fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me: a proverb expressing that one should be wary of the intentions of someone who has tricked one before 9. for once: on this particular occasion 10. Fourth Estate: journalists as a group (originally, a reference to the press in counterpoint to three other major demographic groups: the clergy, the nobility, and the common people) 11. give (one) the once-over: examine with interest 12–13. if I’ve told you once, I’ve told you a hundred/thousand times: a phrase expressing, with exaggeration, that one has repeatedly referred to something 14. lightning never strikes (the same place) twice: an unusual occurrence that has happened before won’t happen again 15. once and for all: permanently 16. once bitten, twice shy: a proverb expressing that one’s inclination is to avoid people who, or things, that have hurt them 17. once in a blue moon: very rarely 18. once in a lifetime: said of something likely to occur only once during one’s life 19. once over lightly: quickly 20. once upon a time: once in the past (used often as the beginning of a fairy tale to express that the story occurred long ago) 21. opportunity knocks but once: a proverb expressing that one may have only one chance to take advantage of an opportunity 22–23. plead/take the fifth: said humorously in response to a request for provocative information when one does not want to reveal it (a reference to the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects citizens against self-incrimination) 24. second banana: someone who plays a secondary role (from show business slang for a supporting comedian) 25. second best: something not as good as the thing desired 26. second chance: another opportunity 27. second childhood: a period later in life marked by renewed interest in things of interest to a child or by reduced mental capacity 28. second class: inferior, as in references to travel accommodations or disadvantaged citizens 29. second fiddle: one who plays, or is perceived to play, a subordinate role (from an informal reference to violinists in a music ensemble who are not the principal violinist) 30. second-guess: predict another’s action or decision 31. secondhand: as an adjective, not original, or previously owned; as an adverb, indirectly, or obtained from another 32. second nature: said of a behavior or habit that one seems to have been born with 33. second sight: clairvoyance, or the supposed ability to see something happening elsewhere or in the future 34. second thought: a reference to changing one’s mind, as in the phrase â€Å"on second thought† or to be inclined to do so, as in the phrase â€Å"having second thoughts† 35. second to none: better than anyone or anything else 36. second wind: restoration of easy breathing after physical exertion, or a renewal or energy or strength 37. seventh heaven: a state of bliss 38. sixth sense: a perceptiveness that cannot be achieved with the five physical senses 39. think twice: carefully consider 40. the third degree: intense questioning 41. third rail: something dangerous, like the electrified third rail of an electric railway system 42. third time’s the charm: one will succeed on the third try 43. Third World: the undeveloped world, first used to describe countries not aligned with the world’s democratic and communist nations during the Cold War 44–45. third/fifth wheel: a person thought to be unwelcome in the company of a pair or quartet of people; usually a reference to a single person with one or two couples Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Vocabulary category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Good At, Good In, and Good With"Wracking" or "Racking" Your Brain?5 Examples of Insufficient Hyphenation

Social policy Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Social policy - Assignment Example The paper focuses on two policies that have the potential of solving problems created by welfare systems for single mothers with creation of sustainable employment opportunities and reduction of out of wedlock births being areas of concern. The number of children being raised by single mothers has continued to increase over the years with data indicating the ratio of children living in families headed by women at all-time high (Fang and Keane 2). Introduction of welfare programs for single mothers is informed by existing challenges they go through in being the only parent in the family. These mothers have to deal with increased demand for attention from their children, despite the fact that most of the mothers work in low paying jobs with few or no benefits (Deily 135). Apart from low income that is not sufficient to support the families, single mothers also have to work longer shifts to meet family needs. This implies that they have less time to take care of the children yet they cannot afford to employ a capable substitute housekeepers and caregivers (Albelda 200). Due to the continued rise in the number of single mother, there has been increased scrutiny of programs seeking to support single women with children. The program has been accused of not only improving the economic position of these women but also ensure they remain dependent on welfare. There is now a split in opinion over the best approach to tackle the situation especially when assessing the importance of welfare programs to economic stability of such families against the need to enable these women through polices that will make them economically independent in future. As a result of the arguments on the effectiveness of assistance to single mothers, there has been increased argument in support of polices that would empower women through job creation as opposed to focusing on welfare (Garfinkel and McLanahan). Due to the inherent challenges within

Pfizer Stock Analysis Paper Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Pfizer Stock Analysis Paper - Coursework Example At the same time, the real disposable income has shown a positive trend and indicates that the personal income of the US citizens is increasing but still it remains below the former level. With particular reference to the health care, the sector has received the boost as the average life span and median age of the US citizen and around the globe has improved. This has resulted due to the advancements in the pharmaceutical sector and indirectly impacted its revenue growth over the years. "A global depression has been averted. The world economy is recovering, and recovering better than we had previously thought likely1." The economy is expected to perform to better in the near future with a growth rate of 3.1% expected in the current year. The economists and investors around the globe have shown the optimism in their acts. However, the future still remains uncertain as most of the governments are running in huge deficits due to the fiscal stimulating programs. The governments have injected billions of dollars to revive the economy and to keep the business cycle in continuum (Schuman, 2010). The two giants of the US drug sector, Pfizer and Merck, beat the estimate of the financial analysts for the quarterly result. These companies were supported by reduced costs as a result of the recent merger activity. This will also boost their revenue activity in the coming years. (Pierson, 2010) Based on above information, Pfizer is the market leader in sales generation due to its sheer size, workforce and global operations. At the same time, it is not able to curtail its increasing expenses and has low efficiency. Pfizer contributes 17 cents to the final income for every $1 transaction as compared to Merck contributing 47 cents to the net income for every $1 transaction. As a result, it has a very low profit margin as compared to its rival. The lesser earnings as a

European Union’s Democratic Deficit: A Critical Assessment

European Union’s Democratic Deficit: A Critical Assessment Introduction The European Union is in a middle of a crisis. The worst part of its economic crisis has passed but it still faces even more severe issue: a trust crisis. People do not feel represented by the European Union and have turned their support towards populist and radical movements. What is the basis of this crisis? Some authors incline to say it is the EU’s democratic deficit. Thus, since there is a wide gap between what EU citizens want from their politicians and how the EU bureaucrats and institutions act. This leads to a situation where the public’s opinion and desires are not taking into account by the body that should represent them[1]. Yet, first we need to analyse in detail what a democratic deficit means to then address this problem. Democratic deficit is a tricky issue as it does not have a widely accepted definition between politics and law scholars. Depending on the author and its background, the term can be used with different connotations and meanings; hence, the results of the analysis tend to depend on the notion of democratic deficit the author uses[2]. Therefore, first, we shall develop our own democratic deficit conceptual approximation. Then, we will be able to lead a critical assessment on representation and participatory actual problems of the European Union. Afterwards, we will have all the tools necessary to address in detail if there is a true democratic deficit problem in the European Union and to propose some possible alternatives to solve it. The European Union and Democratic Deficit If a hyperbole is permitted, democratic deficit may have as many meanings as authors have discussed it. It is not an easy issue to address or to encompass in a single-simple definition. First of all, especially because, even though we can agree on some basis for democracy, in wide terms it is an ambiguous subject. So, what an author considers a democratic deficit will be highly influenced by what he considers to be a democracy. One of the first scholars to use this term was British David Marquand. He used it to define the democratic legitimacy faintness of –then- European Community. He suggested direct elections for representatives before the European Parliament. When this was adopted, the issue around European Community democratic legitimacy arose even further, as for the European Parliament represented the voice of the European Community citizens but the Community was not ready to give more powers to the Parliament, causing more tension. After the approval of the Maastricht treaty, the problem grew. Two pillars were added to the Union (common Foreign and Security Policy and Home Affairs), and in none of them the Parliament had any control[3]. Other authors propose the democratic deficit problem in the terms of a backwards Hume’s is/ought as they consider there is a discrepancy between is and ought/ should in the European Union[4] institutions and democracy as the transfer of substantial amounts of political decision-making towards the supranational level on non-elected institutions has diminished the democratic influence and the basic control the citizens have on their political institutions. It is obvious that at the first stages of the European Community it was reasonable and necessary to keep citizens away from decision-making as it was initially designed to be an economic community and not a political institution[5], but its goals mutated in time. The Community passed from a purely economic institution to a political one. As it was a community formed by democratic countries, one could expect that the supranational body they formed would also have democratic and participatory channels. Nonetheless, European Union turned into a bureaucratic and political giant that has slowly diminished the national entities and directly-elected supranational bodies -European Parliament- and passed it to its hands. Yet, other approaches[6] suggest that, even though the democratic deficit issue is real, it has to be attributed to the Union’s member states, rather than the Union itself. Integration between European states was responding to a series of already-existing democratic legitimacy issues within the states. They argue that the Union is not democratic enough because the member states have not been able to democratise their integration. The issue of the lack of democracy within European Union institutions is not considered as the cause of the problem, but the natural consequence of the democratic deficit of European Union members. This perspective must be necessarily rebuked. Even with their flaws, most of the European Union members have developed and stable democracies. If an institution poses itself as the supranational ruler of a continent and its legitimate representative, it must follow the same form of government that those national units it intends to rule, which is democracy. Where could European Union legitimacy come if not from its citizens? The Union’s decisions directly impact its citizens, as much as a national government decision, or even more. It also breaks citizens’ capacity to rely on the regular channels of influence –voting- to ensure they are being listened and to participate in political process[7]. The lack of democracy of the Union and is tightness to evolve and accept citizens demands only causes further disgust and loss of legitimacy. European Union is a sui generis institution, as it is not a state but it represents them and takes decisions in their name, therefore it should be held accountable for its decisions in direct elections. One cannot fail to notice that there is a deep democratic deficit in the European Union from the turnout in its elections. Ever since legislative powers were transferred to the Council of Ministers of the European Union from the national governments, the setup of the European Union shifted from that of an economic block to that of a political one. The lack of democracy in the Union has been evident in the voter turnout. From the first vote in 1979, the turnout has been going lower and lower with the 2014 election having a disappointing turnout of 42.54%. Compared to the individual member nations where the average voter turnout is 68%, this is a sign that the members of the European Parliament have noted something wrong with the setup and are thus silently revolting. This has led to the debate as to what ought to be done to get the Union back on track. While one side states that reforms are enough to make the Union serve its needs, others think the European Union should be simply debunked. The fact that the European Union has a lot of benefits for its member states and the world in general, however, means that its abolishment is not the best solution. To get the best solution for the case, therefore, requires an in-depth analysis of how the Union works and where it is failing. The Origin of the Democratic Deficit of the European Union Looking at the origins of the European Union, it is easy to make the conclusion that it was primarily meant to be purely economic and the introduction of the political aspects only complicated issues. The Treaty of Paris in 1951 saw to the formation of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) which was meant to provide a trading bloc for coal and steel in Europe as suggested by its name. In 1957, the Treaty of Rome saw to the establishment of the European Economic Community (EEC). The EEC’s original members were known as the European Communities. In 1993, the Maastricht Treaty would see to the establishment of the European Union. With the European Union came the introduction of European citizenship. The latest of the treaties in this regard is the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon. While a lot has changed in the structure and function of the European Union to the present moment, some of the problems that plague the Union are the same.   The Manifesto for the Young European Federalists by Richard Corbett first raised the issue of the lack of democracy in the European Union in 1977 where the term democratic deficit was first used. David Marquand would later use the term in reference to the workings of the European Economic Community. The coining of the term primarily focused on the European Parliament, which was previously referred to as the European Assembly, and why it had a deficit of democracy. The primary argument behind this assertion is that the Parliament was made up of members who had not been directly elected by the citizens of the European Union. As such, the European Union was not serving the needs of its citizens but those of a few people. Effectively, the European Union is thus not democratic enough given that it does not meet the definition of a democracy where there is a government for the majority. The fact that the majority is not represented through free and fair elections of the members of the European Parliament is one point to the fact that there is a deficiency of democracy in the Union. The European Constitution The European Union prides itself in democratic legitimacy through various aspects of the constitution. The first of these aspects is the European Parliament. The Parliament is subject to the electorates of the member states. The other organs are the Council of the European Union also called the Council of Ministers, and the European Council made up of the heads of national governments of the member states. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union appoint the European Commission members. This system of making decisions is supposed to give the European Union democratic legitimacy in the same way the US House of Representatives and the US Senate give democratic legitimacy to the United States. Decisions are thus to be reached by both bodies agreeing, and a third organ in this case the European Commission. The intended democratic legitimacy has, however, not been entirely attained by the European Union. The construction of the Union itself has occasioned what the German Constitutional Court called a structural democratic deficit in the Union. This court established that the process of making decisions for the European Union was primarily those of an international organisation rather than those of a government. The difference is that, as an international organisation, the European Union based its democracy on the equality of the member nations rather than the citizens of these countries. It is thus difficult to reconcile the needs of the citizens and those of the member nations of the European Union provided its operation as an international organisation rather than a government. Similarly, the British Electoral Reform Society filed a report in 2014 to the same issue of the EU constitution having a structure which focused on the needs of the member states rather than the citizens. The r eport stated that, while the European Union has focused on upholding the principles of democratic engagement, accountability and representativeness, there is the need to focus on the needs of the minority in any democracy. The European Union, being mostly made up of minorities, thus needs to have a focus on serving the needs of the citizens rather than those of the member governments[8]. Democratic Deficit and the European Commission One of the main structures put in place by the European Union in support of democracy is the European Commission. First, there has been criticism concerning the legitimacy of the European Commission and its role in the initiation of legislation in the European Union. However, this criticism does not have the backing of facts as similar bodies within national governments have yielded similarly poor results. However, its position as a body that legitimises the European Union and its take on democracy has failed by a large extent. The main weakness with such a body, as also noted in the case of the United States government, is that the regulations may be so detailed that the member states have little freedom in making their decisions on legislation[9]. While the issue of a democratic deficit was noted as far back as the 1970s when the idea of a united Europe was still in development, democratic legitimacy has always been an issue the Union has been dealing with ever since. When the Treaty of Lisbon was put in place, its primary aim was to provide room for better democracy in the region. The Treaty of Lisbon required that the President of the European Commission ought to take account of the results of the European Union parliamentary elections. This simply means that the President of the European Commission should be nominated by the   most dominant group in the parliament. This step effectively makes the European Union a political body rather than the economic one meant for the over watch of the economic activities of Europe. In fact, the European Union, owing to this kind of structure, has become partly a federation and also an international organisation[10]. The President of the European Commission would thus be partly elected and partly appointed. This position gives the president less power than is needed to win the confidence of the population, and too much power to earn the trust of the governments of the member nations. The resulting model is one where little democracy is accorded to the citizens of the European Union and their governments as well. The European Parliament and Democratic Deficit When the European Parliament was set up, a lot of people were ready to voice its weaknesses in seeing to the implementation of legislation. However, political scientists would come to the rescue of this organ by stating that, first, the European Parliament is different from the parliaments of single countries due to various factors such as the lack of a divide between the government and the opposition, the presence of a divide between the executive and the legislature, the presence of political parties that are decentralised, bipartisan voting, and the roles of the various committees. For this reason, the European Parliament has been compared to the US House of Representatives but with the advantage of not having a governing body over it like the latter house. The fact that the majorities in the European Parliament have to be built each time while depending on negotiations, persuasions, and explanations ought to make it better in function than the US House of Representatives. This is true given that the lack of interference between the executive and the legislature has made the European Commission and the European Parliament more effective. For instance, the member states of the European Union have less than 15% of their legislative initiatives becoming the law. This is largely due to the lack of support from the executive. The executive bodies, on the other hand, rarely require the input of the legislature in the same nations to pass amendments. The role of the European Parliament is the propositioned amendments to the existing laws. The success rate of these amendments is as high as 80% with the lowest levels recorded (mostly for the hotly contested topics) is at 30%. To an extent, however, the structure of the European Parliament allows for a level of lack of accountability and weakness when it is compared to parliaments with an overwatch body like the case of the US House of Representatives. Voter Turnout in European Elections and the Impact on Democratic Deficit With any democracy, the legitimacy of the leaders in power heavily relies upon the turnout of the voters during elections. The European Parliament has had some of the lowest levels of elections voter turnout hence the reduction in its democratic legitimacy. This is based on the fact that the turnout of the European Parliament elections has been declining consistently since its formation. However, the President of the European Union, Pat Cox, said that the 1999 European Parliament elections and a far much better turnout than the presidential elections in the United States. Compared, the voter turnout for the presidential elections in the United States in 1996 was 49%. However, the voter turnout in the European Parliament elections for 1999 was at 49.51 percent. For both types of elections, this turnout was among the very lowest. While both are at their lowest, it is difficult to use this as an excuse for the lack of democracy in the European Union. As a matter of fact, the case of the United States is very different from that of the European Union and the reasons for the low voter turnouts. For the European Union, the people have an option of whether to belong to the Union or not. And the way they can show their willingness to belong or not belong to the Union is through participating (or not participating) in its activities such as elections. The social aspect of the European Union, that of being accepted or rejected by the people, has been observed in the way the people have turned out in low numbers at each European Parliament vote[11]. The massive lack of knowledge for the common citizen of the European Union has led to the lack of participation by the voters. On the other hand, the United States electorate can have a low voter turnout for many other reasons none (or very little) of which is being against the union that is the United States. As it is, the European Union is not a very effective and efficient democracy given that its workings are not in line even with the developing democracies of the world. First, it is torn between being a government, and an international organisation. Secondly, the citizens, having seen that the democracy of the Union does not work (and it is too complex to understand), are increasingly ceasing to buy into the idea of the European Union being there to improve their lives through fostering democracy. Democratic Deficit and the Council of the European Union Another organ of the European Union is the Council of the European Union. This Council is also part of the efforts of the union to foster democracy among the member states. Its primary role is acting as the voice of the member governments of the EU while adopting the laws European Union and coordinating the polices of the union as well. Depending on the policies of the union, the government ministers of the members states are the members or the Council of the European Union. The presidency of the Council is held on a rotating basis (among the states) with each president holding the office for 6 months only. The Council carries out voting on legislation and discussions with both exercises being held in public. The decisions are based on a qualified majority whereby at least 55% of the countries (which is about 65% of the total population of the European Union) are required. In blocking a decision, 4 nations are needed (being the equivalent of 35% of the European Union population). For issues that are of an administrative and procedural nature require a simple majority while a unanimous vote is needed for the very sensitive topics such as taxation and foreign policy. While the structure of the Council of the European Union seems to read democracy all through it, the same weaknesses that plague the European Parliament plague it hence it is just another example of democratic deficit in the EU. For one, own-initiative reports from either the European Parliament or the Council of the European Union do not have legal consequences as such to the member states. Also, both bodies cannot play major roles in the amendment and repealing of legislation that is already in place. Lastly, and most importantly, the bodies do not address the needs of the citizens of the member nations. Looking at the structure of the European Union, it is easy to conclude that the reason it has not met the needs of the citizens is because there is too much bureaucracy between the top organs of the Union and the common citizens for the member states. The organs are too separated from the citizens in that the decision made take a very long route to reach the citizen. The representatives also have to make decisions which serve the needs of the Union and those of their respective countries; an issue which often introduces a conflict of interest. What the European Union has Done to Better Democratic Legitimacy All the concerns expressed here about the democratic legitimacy of the European Union have been expressed before by various persons and bodies and they have been heard by the people at the helm of the Union. For this reason, the Union has put in place various changes to the constitution with the focus being on doing away with the noted weaknesses in the laws and constitution of the Union in general. Among the changes made include the introduction of the Maastricht Treaty. This was a landmark treaty which is credited with the introduction of citizenship of the European Union. This citizenship would grant EU citizens voting rights to the European Parliament in each of their countries. Even municipal elections of the European Union were also included in the treaty. The treaty would also introduce co-decision procedure in which the European Parliament was given powers that gave it an equal footing to the Council of the European Union in making legislative decisions[12]. These steps would make the European Parliament much more functional and powerful but not powerful enough to overcome the issues of being a purely democratic entity.   The other change made to the constitution of the European Union is the Treaty of Lisbon. Becoming effective from the 1st of December 2009, the treaty saw to better representation of the EU citizens both directly in the European Parliament and indirectly through the Council of the European Union. This was meant to foster democracy and representation. The treaty would also see to the implementation and acceptance of the co-decision procedure as the primary procedure for the legislative dealings of the Union. The Treaty of Lisbon is also credited with tremendously increasing the powers of the European Parliament by a large extent[13]. One of the main areas in which the Treaty of Lisbon helped focus on the EU citizens was in giving the citizens the right to make petitions to the European Parliament concerning any matters of material effect[14]. This increased the powers of the citizen and their levels of participating in the making of decisions. Further on, the treaty would ensure th at Council of the European Union meetings which discussed public matters are made public for all to see. In this way, the citizens can better understand the debates and the workings of the European Union. The Treaty of Lisbon also receives credit for improving on the role played by the national parliaments of the member nations in putting in place the laws and legislations of the Union[15]. Lastly, the Treaty of Lisbon is credited with giving the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union full legal effect. This meant that various steps taken by the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, and the European Parliament would have full legal effect in areas where they apply[16]. Conclusion The workings of the European Union in seeking democracy have been so far ineffective on various levels as observed above. While there is intention from the leaders of the European Union to remedy these weaknesses in the workings of the Union, the fundamental reason why there have been low levels of success when it comes to attaining democracy for all citizens is its structure. It aims to operate like a government yet at its basic form it is an amalgamation of governments. Each of these governments have different needs, goals, histories and fundamental principles. The rest is that the leaders of each country first take care of their countries’ needs before those of the European Union. Also, its structure makes it difficult to make laws that will lead to better governance as each piece of legislation needs to have the needs of the many member states at heart. With time, it can be hoped that better legislation will be enabled for all the democracy to be attained. References Avbelj, M. 2005. Can the New European Constitution Remedy the EU Democratic Deficit?. EUMAP.org Campbell, M (2012) The Democratic Deficit of the European Union. Claremont-UC Undergraduate Research Conference on the European Union, p. 25. Castro, C. (2015). Assessing the Democratic Deficit in the EU: towards a Participatory Approach. RIPS, 14 (1), p. 63. Craig, P; Grainne De; P. P. Craig (2007). Chapter 11 Human rights in the EU. EU Law: Text, Cases and Materials (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 379. Dilek, K. (2011). The Problem of â€Å"Democratic Deficit† in the European Union. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1 (5) p. 244. Electoral Reform Society — Close the Gap — Tackling Europes democratic deficit. European Parliament: Relations with National Parliaments. Innerarity, D (2015). The Inter-Democratic Deficit of the European Union: The Governance of Europes Economic, Political and Legal Transformation. Pp. 173-174. Kelemen, R. (2012). The Rules of Federalism: Institutions and Regulatory Politics in the EU and Beyond. Harvard University Press. pp. 21–22. Milev, M. (2004) A ‘Democratic Deficit’ in the European Union? Master Thesis, I.H.E.I. p. 10. Schà ¼tze, R (2012). European Constitutional Law. Cambridge University Press. p. 99. [1] Castro, C. (2015). Assessing the Democratic Deficit in the EU: towards a Participatory Approach. RIPS, 14 (1), p. 63. [2] Milev, M. (2004) A ‘Democratic Deficit’ in the European Union? Master Thesis, I.H.E.I. p. 10 [3] Milev (2004), pp. 11-12. [4] Dilek, K. (2011). The Problem of â€Å"Democratic Deficit† in the European Union. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1 (5) p. 244 [5] Castro, C. (2005), p. 66. [6] Innerarity, D (2015). The Inter-Democratic Deficit of the European Union: The Governance of Europes Economic, Political and Legal Transformation. Pp. 173-174 [7] Campbell, M (2012) The Democratic Deficit of the European Union. Claremont-UC Undergraduate Research Conference on the European Union, p. 25. [8] Electoral Reform Society — Close the Gap — Tackling Europes democratic deficit. [9] Kelemen, R. (2012). The Rules of Federalism: Institutions and Regulatory Politics in the EU and Beyond. Harvard University Press. pp. 21–22. [10] Charlemagne. 2013. A democratic nightmare: Seeking to confront the rise of Eurosceptics and fill the democratic deficit. The Economist. [11] Avbelj, M. 2005. Can the New European Constitution Remedy the EU Democratic Deficit?. EUMAP.org [12] Schà ¼tze, R (2012). European Constitutional Law. Cambridge University Press. pp. 31–32. [13] Schà ¼tze, R (2012). European Constitutional Law. Cambridge University Press. pp. 43–44 [14] Schà ¼tze, R (2012). European Constitutional Law. Cambridge University Press. p. 99. [15] European Parliament: Relations with National Parliaments. [16] Craig, P; Grainne De Burca; P. P. Craig (2007). Chapter 11 Human rights in the EU. EU Law: Text, Cases and Materials (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 379.

Compulsory Education Essay

Many may argue education is at its finest since things seem to get better with time; but is this the case when speaking of compulsory education? Compulsory education in the United States today has come a long way from original ideas concerning education. There are some satisfied with the way schools are constructed; yet there are others who are not. Much like anything else, compulsory education can be improved. According to Paul Goodman, requiring students to attain two years for maturing between high school and college can improve compulsory education (Goodman 2012). The history of compulsory education dates back to before the medieval era. As one may guess, compulsory education has been changed drastically since it was introduced. By the year 1918 all of the United States and territories had laws governing compulsory school attendance. Executing compulsory schooling allowed a more productive means of solidifying national school attendance. At this time, compulsory education is a form of progress setting the stage for more jurisdictions in state legislation regarding these attendance policies (Richardson 1994). Compulsory education has significant advantages and disadvantages. Compulsory education has great effects on enforcing children to go to school. Sadly enough, not all families want their children to go to school or be educated beyond a certain point; or for that matter, some children do not desire to continue their education. Fortunately, these attendance policies make children attend school up to a certain point, which depends on the state. The major disadvantage of compulsory education is that not everyone is â€Å"classroom material†. Some people prefer a being employed and establishing a steady income at an early age rather than going to school. A prime example of this is about a teenage boy, Charlie, was bored with school so he started skipping class for weeks at a time. Even then, Charlie proved to be successful in the landscaping business despite the substantial amount of time he lost in school (Inson 2006). Whether the effects of compulsory education are essential to one’s success or not, it plays a key role in today’s schools. Like anything else, compulsory education can and should be refined and enriched. Some of these ideas of improvement are shared by many but have not yet been enforced. The government should be more responsible for setting goals within the system and providing the infrastructure to do so. Also, the government should be responsible for analyzing the outcomes from students once these provisions are set (Yasuhiko 2005). Going further as to say, raising the age of compulsory education, which is an idea shared by many. This enforces students to continue their education for longer periods of time, which in turn, would ultimately provide more productive citizens to the American society (NASSP 2010). Certainly, compulsory education is a significant part of the history and present day schools. Education is everything in today’s society. There are immense advantages as well as disadvantages concerning this subject. Compulsory education is essential to schools in the United States and will continue to be. Continuous reform and amendments will be made along with new laws and policies governing compulsory education and attendance. Learning is a ceaseless process. Works Cited National Education at the Beginning of 2001. â€Å"Innovations and Developments in Education System†. 2002. Richardson, John G. â€Å"Compulsory School Attendance†. 1994. Inson, Peter. â€Å"The Guardian†. November 2006. Yasuhiko, Torii. â€Å"Redesigning Compulsory Education†. October 2005. < http://www. mext. go. jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo0/toushin/06051511. pdf>

Automated Highway System

As described and depicted in Sci-fi futuristic films like I, Robot, Minority Report and Star Wars, the Automated Highway System (AHS) features an automatically controlled transportation system that is meticulously interlaced with the highway system.   The principal idea of AHS is to remove the driving operation from human control and assign it to the vehicle, which in turn collaborates with the highway system to perform such function.Thus, the concept of AHS involves technology that can be classified into three groups namely, intelligent technology on board the vehicle, intelligent technology in the road, and communication technologies that link or connect the vehicles to road.   Communication facilitates interactivity and information exchange between vehicle and highway infrastructure and action is undertaken by user/ vehicle in an automated fashion.   (Ioannou, p183)AHS technology for vehicle auto-control accentuates on how automobiles can routinely detect road driving barrie rs especially other vehicles, the track course, traffic management rules, as well as internal engine problems so that the vehicle can instinctively make the proper steering, turning, braking, lane changing, stopping and other related movements involved in driving.The current trend under this heading is the blending of car and computer technology.   On-board PC promises latent flexible innovations which include internet communications, car operation (sound, air-conditioning and navigating through voice) and paging, etc. (The Economist)Current technology leading towards this end includes the intelligent cruise control system which use radar or laser to sense vehicles along its driving path that commands vehicle to decelerate or accelerate as needed or allowed; the driver status monitoring which reveals driver status i.e. consciousness levels, stare direction, driving skill, etc. in another vehicle to warn other drivers on the road; collision notification that forewarns or notifies d rivers for potential crash or collision accidents with other cars; navigation assistance systems such as traffic and traveler information and on board diagnostics system that detects potential vehicle malfunction in advance, among others. (Cheon)AHS technology for highway control include traffic monitoring for traffic management, highway and incident surveillance technologies of which there are intrusive (pneumatic road tube, inductive loop detectors, piezoelectric sensors, magnetic sensors and weight in motion) and non intrusive technologies (video image processor, microwave radar, infrared, ultrasonic and passive acoustic array sensors (Vehicle Detector Clearing House), and lane tracking and positioning, among others.Finally, technology for the seamless communication of the vehicle and road infrastructure is necessary for the integration, collaboration and connectivity of the system’s operations. The focus of research on communications technology is the improvement in the p rovision of real time, reliable data communications among vehicles and between vehicles and highway infrastructure.The global positioning system (GPS) is a promising technology for transportation communications for the fulfillment of AHS. It utilizes satellites rotating around the earth that pick up radio signals from users to calculate and determine their exact position including latitude, longitude and altitude. (Helms)The multifaceted potential benefits of AHS to the ordinary citizens, the transportation sector, and the general economy are both vast and profound. By removing the human component in driving and its penchant to errors, driving safety will be significantly improved. Factors such as fog, darkness and other severe weather conditions that can disturb visibility and directly impact driving performance can be eliminated.Since driving is automated, it affords people free time for productive activities during travel such as studying and reading as well as leisure for playin g, sleeping or relaxing.     For the elderly, the disabled and other people who do not know how to drive, driving skill is no more a hindrance to travel and mobility.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Travel time is also expected to be reduced because of free flow travel conditions as the traffic management system will control and balance the speed of cars depending on the congestion of highway used at that time. (Ferlis)