Lord Jenkins Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Lord Jenkins - Essay Example Sivaprakasapillai, and the fact that he was a member of the board of examiners and of the scrutinising committee. The third ground was to the effect that by reason of the first "the maxim that justice should not only be done but also appear to be done" had been violated. The fourth ground comprised the substance of the plaintiff's case and was to the effect that the evidence of the various witnesses who appeared before the commission of inquiry, including the evidence of Miss Balasingham, was taken in the absence of the plaintiff, who was not aware of what evidence was led against him, and that in the circumstances one of the essential elements of natural justice was not observed, inasmuch as the plaintiff was not aware of the case he had to meet. The fifth ground was to the effect that the evidence of the various witnesses was not taken entirely before all the three members of the commission of inquiry, and that such evidence was acted on by the commission, and that this circumstanc e was also a violation of the elementary principles of justice. The plaintiff further alleged that there was no evidence upon which the commission of inquiry could reasonably find the charge against the plaintiff proved, that the finding arrived at against the plaintiff was one which had not been arrived at in conformity with clause 8, and that the finding and decision were therefore void and of no effect. The allegations of bias or disqualification against Professor Mylvaganam as a member of the commission of inquiry were rejected in both courts as without substance. The allegation to the effect that there was no evidence upon which the commission could reasonably find the charge against the plaintiff proved was (so far as open to the court) clearly ill-founded. The allegation to the effect that the finding was not arrived at in accordance with clause 8 turned on the fact that the Vice-Chancellor appointed two other persons to sit with him as a commission of inquiry to investigate the matter, instead of proceeding to investigate it alone. It was held in both courts that this procedure was not open to objection, inasmuch as this was merely a method, which the Vice-Chancellor was free to adopt if he chose to do so, of satisfying himself of the truth or falsity of the charge, and the Report was a report by him for the purposes of clause 8 although signed by the two other members of the commission as well as himself. The plaintiff having taken no steps to appeal against *230 the decision of the court below on these matters of complaint, their Lordships need say no more about them. There remain the complaints to the effect that the evidence, including that of Miss Balasingham, was taken in the absence of the plaintiff who was not aware of the evidence led against him or of the case he had to meet; and that the evidence of certain witnesses was taken by the Vice-Chancellor in the absence of the other members of

The Great Inflation of the 1970s in the United States Term Paper

The Great Inflation of the 1970s in the United States - Term Paper Example From this research it is clear that the Great Inflation of the 1970s was a period that epitomized the United States’ struggle with double-digit inflation rates beginning early in the 1970s until early 1980s. As asserted by many authors and in many literatures, post World War II economists and politicians toyed with certain ideas proposed by Keynesian economics. According to this type of economics, it is possible to trade off inflation and employment to achieve some economic stability and growth, albeit for a short-term objective. According to this school of thought, small amounts of inflation could be allowed to help lower unemployment rates, thereby, attaining higher overall economic output. The main weakness of the Keynesian economics was that despite the fact that inflation may lead to increased employment; such a strategy only has short-term effects. For example, a lot of cash in circulation results in boosted demand for goods and services and a corresponding drop in inter est rates. Interestingly, people always mistake this influx in money supply with wealth, thus, increase their spending and demand for goods and services. Unfortunately, it would later require a higher rate of inflation to achieve the same economic effects. In the case of the Great Inflation of the 1970s, the United States was experiencing both high unemployment and inflation, a situation that the Keynesian economists would somehow consider impossible. ... ore, although a central bank may tirelessly try to formulate and implement monetary policies that would curb inflation, the immediate negative economic effects of these policies and political pressures force most central banks relenting and inflation returning (Bulkley, p135). Simply put, inflation refers to a general increase in the prices of goods and services and/or cost of living over a given period. Accompanying this increase in prices is the weakening of a currency, implying that such a currency buys fewer items than before the inflation. In other words, the purchasing power of a currency is reduced day by day, which is measured by the rate of inflation. The rate of inflation is the percentage change in the general price index, calculated as an annual figure. Although a high inflation rate is bad for an economy, a zero or a negative one is equally bad unlike a low inflation rate, which is beneficial to a country. For instance, a high inflation is found to interfere with the beh aviors of consumers who may want to buy their requirements in advance, fearing further increases in commodity prices (White, p10). This consumer behavior has an effect of stabilizing the market by way of creating preventable shortages. This paper explores the Great Inflation of 1970s in the United States concerning its background, effects, causes, and the monetary policies in the preceding and succeeding years. The Great Depression Most scholars, economists and historians have described the Great Inflation of the 1970s as one of the biggest economic gaps in the history of not only the United States but also of other countries around the world. Also described as the biggest domestic blunder ever for the United States, the Great Inflation of the 1970s played a rather central role in the

Huckleberry finn Essay Example for Free

Huckleberry finn Essay Huckleberry Finn is a boy about thirteen or fourteen. He has been brought up by his father, the town drunk, and has a hard time fitting into society. Tom Sawyer and his friends occasionally call him Huck Finn. Widow Douglas is the kind old lady who has taken Huck in after he and Tom come into some money. She tries her best to civilize Huck, believing it is her Christian duty. Miss Watson is the widows sister, a tough old spinster who also lives with them. She is fairly hard on Huck, causing him to resent her a good deal. Samuel Clemens may have drawn inspiration for her from several people he knew in his life. [4] Jim is Miss Watsons big, mild-mannered slave to whom Huck becomes very close in the novel, when they reunite after Jim flees Miss Watson to seek refuge from slavery, and Huck and Jim become fellow travelers on the Mississippi River. Tom Sawyer is Hucks friend and peer, the main character of other Twain novels and the leader of the town boys in adventures, is the best fighter and the smartest kid in town. [4] Pap Finn, Hucks father, is the town drunk. He is often angry at Huck and resents him getting any kind of education. He also returns to Huck whenever he needs more money for alcohol. Judith Loftus plays a small part in the novel — being the kind and perceptive woman whom Huck talks to in order to find out about the search for Jim — but many critics believe her to be the best female character in the novel. [4] The Grangerfords, an aristocratic Kentuckian family headed by the sextagenarian Colonel Saul Grangerford, take Huck in after he is separated from Jim on the Mississippi. Huck becomes close friends with the youngest male of the family, Buck Grangerford, who is Hucks age. By the time Huck meets them, the Grangerfords have been engaged in an age-old blood feud with another local family, the Shepherdsons. The duke and the king are two otherwise unnamed con artists whom Huck and Jim take aboard their raft just before the start of their Arkansas adventures. They are featured prominently throughout the novel, duping many local townspeople with their various get-rich-quick schemes. The middle-aged duke claims to be the long-lost Duke of Bridgewater (though he mistakenly says Bilgewater and is sometimes called this by the king), while the elderly king claims to be the long-lost Dauphin of France, and so is sometimes called Capet by the duke. Mary Jane, Joanna, and Susan Wilks are the three young nieces of their wealthy guardian, Peter Wilks, who has recently died. The duke and the king try to steal the inheritance left by Peter Wilks, by posing as Peters estranged brothers from England. Aunt Sally and Uncle Silas Phelps, are the two people whose nephew Huck poses as, after he abandons the duke and king. She is a loving, but high-strung lady, and he a plodding old man, both farmer and preacher. Many other characters play important but minimal roles in the many episodes that make up the novel. They include slaves owned by the various families they meet, supporting townspeople, rafts-men, a doctor and a steamboat captain. Plot summary[edit] Huckleberry Finn, as depicted by E. W. Kemble in the original 1884 edition of the book In Missouri[edit] The story begins in fictional St.  Petersburg, Missouri (based on the actual town of Hannibal, Missouri), on the shore of the Mississippi River, sometime between 1835 (when the first steamboat sailed down the Mississippi)[5] and 1845. Huckleberry Huck Finn (the protagonist and first-person narrator) and his friend, Thomas Tom Sawyer, have each come into a considerable sum of money as a result of their earlier adventures (detailed in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer). Huck explains how he is placed under the guardianship of the Widow Douglas, who, together with her stringent sister, Miss Watson, are attempting to civilize him and teach him religion. Finding civilized life confining, his spirits are raised somewhat when Tom Sawyer helps him to escape one night past Miss Watsons slave Jim, to meet up with Toms gang of self-proclaimed robbers. Just as the gangs activities begin to bore Huck, he is suddenly interrupted by the reappearance of his shiftless father, Pap, an abusive alcoholic. Knowing that Pap would only spend the money on alcohol, Huck is successful in preventing Pap from acquiring his fortune; however, Pap still gains custody of Huck and leaves town with him. In Illinois and on Jacksons Island[edit] Pap forcibly moves Huck to his isolated cabin in the woods on the Illinois shoreline. Due to Paps drunken violence and habit of keeping Huck locked inside the cabin, Huck, during one of his fathers absences, elaborately fakes his own death, escapes the cabin, and sets off down river. He settles comfortably, on Jacksons Island on the Mississippi. Here, Huck reunites with Jim, Miss Watsons slave. Jim has also run away after he overheard Miss Watson planning to sell him down the river (to presumably more brutal owners). Jim plans to make his way to the town of Cairo in Illinois, a free state, so that he can later buy the rest of his enslaved familys freedom. At first, Huck is conflicted about the sin and crime of supporting a runaway slave, but as the two talk in depth and bond over their mutually held superstitions, Huck emotionally connects with Jim, who increasingly becomes Hucks close friend and guardian. After heavy flooding on the river, the two find a raft (which they keep) as well as an entire house floating on the river. Entering the house to seek loot, Jim finds the naked body of a dead man lying on the floor, shot in the back. He prevents Huck from seeing the corpse. To find out the latest news in town, Huck dresses as a girl and enters the house of Judith Loftus, a woman new to the area, thinking she will not recognize him as a boy. Huck learns from her about the news of his own supposed murder; Pap was initially blamed, but since Jim ran away he is also a suspect. A reward for Jims capture has initiated a manhunt. Mrs. Loftus becomes increasingly suspicious that Huck is a boy, finally proving it by a series of tests, such as noticing how well he throws and catches various items, and how he is terrible at sewing. Once he is exposed, she nevertheless allows him to leave her home without commotion, not realizing that he is the allegedly murdered boy they have just been discussing. Huck returns to Jim to tell him the news and that a party is coming to Jacksons Island that very night, so the two hastily load up the raft and depart. After a while, Huck and Jim come across a grounded steamship. Searching it, they stumble upon two thieves discussing murdering a third, but they flee before being noticed. They are later separated in a fog, making Jim intensely anxious, and when they reunite, Huck tricks Jim into thinking he dreamed the entire incident. Jim is not deceived for long, and is deeply hurt that his friend should have teased him so mercilessly. Huck becomes remorseful and apologizes to Jim, though his conscience troubles him about humbling himself to a black man. In Kentucky: the Grangerfords and Shepherdsons[edit] Travelling onward, Huck and Jims raft is struck by a passing steamship, separating the two. Huck is given shelter on the Kentucky side of the river by the Grangerfords, an aristocratic family. He befriends Buck Grangerford, a boy about his age, and learns that the Grangerfords are engaged in a 30-year blood feud against another family, the Shepherdsons. The Grangerfords and Shepherdsons go to the same church and act peaceably inside, though both families bring guns, despite the churchs preachings on brotherly love. The vendetta finally comes to a head when Bucks older sister elopes with a member of the Shepherdson clan. In the resulting conflict, all the Grangerford males from this branch of the family are shot and killed. Huck is particularly devastated by the brutality of Bucks murder, which he witnesses, but declines to describe. He is immensely relieved to be reunited with Jim, who has recovered and repaired the raft. In Arkansas: the duke and the king[edit] Near the Arkansas-Missouri-Tennessee border, Jim and Huck take two on-the-run grifters aboard the raft. The younger man, who is about thirty, introduces himself as the long-lost son of an English duke (the Duke of Bridgewater). The older one, about seventy, then trumps this outrageous claim by alleging that he himself is the Lost Dauphin, the son of Louis XVI and rightful King of France. The duke and king then become permanent passengers on Jim and Hucks raft, committing a series of confidence schemes upon unsuspecting locals all along their journey. To allow for Jims presence, they first print fake bills for an escaped slave that will divert suspicions, but later paint him up entirely blue and call him the Sick Arab so that he can move about the raft without being tied up when in public view. On one occasion, the swindlers advertise a three-night engagement of a play called The Royal Nonesuch. The play turns out to be only a couple of minutes worth of an absurd, bawdy sham. On the afternoon of the first performance, a drunk called Boggs is shot dead by a gentleman named Colonel Sherburn; a lynch mob forms to retaliate against Sherburn; and Sherburn, surrounded at his home, disperses the mob by making a defiant speech describing how true lynching should be done. By the third night of The Royal Nonesuch, the townspeople prepare for their revenge on the duke and king for their money-making scam, but the two cleverly skip town together with Huck and Jim just before the performance begins. In the next town, the two swindlers then impersonate two brothers of Peter Wilks, a recently deceased man of property. To match accounts of Wilkss brothers, the king attempts an English accent and the duke pretends to be a deaf-mute, while starting to collect Wilkss inheritance. Huck decides that Wilkss three orphaned nieces, who treat Huck with kindness, do not deserve to be cheated thus and so he tries to retrieve the nieces stolen inheritance. In a desperate moment, Huck is forced to hide the money in Wilkss coffin, which is buried the next morning. The arrival of two new men who seem to be the real brothers throws everything into confusion, so that the townspeople decide to dig up the coffin in order to determine which are the true brothers, but, with everyone else distracted, Huck leaves for the raft, hoping never to see the duke and king again. Suddenly, though, the two villains return, to Hucks despair. When Huck is finally able to get away a second time to return to his raft to flee with Jim, he finds to his horror that the swindlers have sold Jim to a family that intends to return him to his proper owner for the reward. Defying his conscience and accepting the negative religious consequences he expects for his actions—All right, then, Ill go to hell! —Huck resolves to free Jim once and for all. On the Phelps farm[edit] Huck learns that Jim is being held at the plantation of Silas and Sally Phelps. The familys nephew, Tom, is expected for a visit at the same time as Hucks arrival, so Huck is mistaken for Tom and welcomed into their home. He plays along, hoping to find Jims location and free him; in a surprising plot twist, it is revealed that the expected nephew is in fact Tom Sawyer. When Huck intercepts the real Tom Sawyer on the road and tells him everything, Tom decides to join Hucks scheme, pretending to be his own younger half-brother, Sid, while Huck continues to pretend to be Tom. In the meantime, Jim has told the family about the two grifters and the new plan for The Royal Nonesuch, and so the townspeople capture the King and the Duke, who are then tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail. Rather than simply sneaking Jim out of the shed where he is being held, Tom develops an elaborate plan to free him, involving secret messages, a hidden

The Salmonella Outbreak In Usa Commerce Essay

The Salmonella Outbreak In Usa Commerce Essay The Peanut Corporation of America was formally a family-owned peanut processing business and maker of peanut butter for bulk distribution to institutions, food service industries, and private label food companies. The company was founded in 1977 by Stewart Parnell along with his father, Hugh, and two younger brothers, Hugh, Jr. and Mike (Business Yellow Page, 2009). The company was headquartered in Lynchburg, Virginia, where they started the business working out of their home (Business Yellow Page, 2009). By 1994 the family turned a slow growing peanut roasting operation into a company with sales that surpassed 30 million dollars and employed over 95 permanent employees (Business Yellow Page, 2009). In 1995 the business was sold to a large commodities corporation while Parnells father, Hugh, retired from the peanut industry (Business Yellow Page, 2009). Stewart Parnell and his two brothers were kept as management consultants by the companys new corporate owner (Business Yellow Page 2009). The company manufactured roughly 2.5 percent of the nations processed peanuts (Chapman Newkirk, 2009). Stewart Parnell served as a peanut-quality adviser to the U.S. Department of Agriculture until he was removed from the board Februay of 2009 (Chapman Newkirk, 2009). PCA operated processing facilities located in Blakely, Georgia; Suffolk, Virginia; and Plainview, Texas (Business Yellow Page, 2009). As indicated by Layton and Miroff (2009), PCA supplied ingredients to some of the biggest names on supermarket shelves: Kellogg, Sara Lee, Little Debbie. The federal government was a customer, too, buying his peanuts for poor school children, disaster victims and military troops. PCAs products were not sold directly to consumers, but shipped to other manufactures that used their products as ingredients to make cookies, crackers, pet treats, energy bars, ice cream, and other products (Consumer Affairs 2009). Products ranged from peanut butter, peanut paste and peanut oil (msnbc, 2009). Peanut Corporation of Americas scandal began when the company allegedly shipped its peanut butter products knowing they could be contaminated with salmonella which resulted in the outbreak of 2008 (McCormick, 2009). According to Mundy (2009), who interviewed Ron Simon a criminal trial Lawyer for victims of PCA negligence, remarks that PCA knowingly shipped contaminated products which were positively tested for salmonella by two independent labs the company hired. These contaminated shipments were sent to nursing homes, school cafeterias, grocery stores and wholesale outlets. Since the beginning of the peanut salmonella outbreak in September 2008, more than 714 people became ill in 46 U.S. states and one Canadian province, which contributed to at least 9 deaths (Lawyers and Settlements.com, 2009). Its among the largest recalls that weve had, said Stephen Sundlof, director of the FDAs Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (msnbc, 2009). The illness was traced back to the Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) processing plants in Blakely, GA and Plainview, TX according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Lawyers and Settlements.com, 2009). PCA was no stranger to of selling contaminated products; its Blakely plant was discovered with salmonella in 2006 as a possible result of imported organic peanuts from China according to a letter released by the committee on Nov. 2, 2006 (Zhang and Jargon, 2009). Mr. Parnell was also informed via letter by Darlene Cowart, President of JLA USA testing service that it was likely that the organic peanuts imported from Chinese could be a source for microbial hazards based on the type of fertilizers that was used on the organic product (Zhang and Jargon, 2009). Ms. Cowart also testified that Peanut Corp. samples were tested positive for salmonella between 2007 and 2008 (Zhang and Jargon, 2009). FDA requested a recall for all products containing peanut butter, peanut paste and peanut oil manufactured since January 1, 2007, at the Blakely, Georgia processing center (msnbc, 2009). Federal inspectors found mold, roaches and a leaking roof at the Georgia peanut factory, Dow Jones Newswires reports (Rubenstei, 2009). There are two forms of stakeholders in business ethics, specifically, primary and secondary stakeholders which the Peanut Corporation of Americas case affected. Primary stakeholders are necessary for a firms survial and include employees, customers, investors, shareholders, as well as, businesses, large or small (such as small businesses that used PCAs product as raw material to make product and later market to consumers) (Ferrell, Fraedrich, Ferrell, 2008, p. 32). Whereas, secondary stakeholders are not essential for a companys survival; these include the media, trade association and special-interest groups (for example, the American Association of Retired People AARP) (Ferrell, Fraedrich, Ferrell, 2008, p. 32). Two primary stakeholders at PCA were Stewart Parnell, president and CEO, and Sammy Lightsey, the plant manager of the Blakely, Georgia plant . Several email were exchanged between Parnell, Lightsey (plant manager of Blakely, GA) and Mary Wilkerson (employee at the Blakely plant) regarding batches of peanut products that tested positive for salmonella by two independent laboratories, J. Leek Associates being one company and Deibel being the other and ignored (Committee on Energy and Commerce 2009). Because of this many stakeholders, both primary and secondary were affected by Peanut Corporation of Americas unethical decision-making. The medias impact on the Peanut Corporation of America brought awareness to members of the community by revealing incidents of PCA as it become known, brought awareness to consumers about the actions of PCA. Managers should be mindful of secondary stakeholders and express thoughtfulness in making ethical decisions. In general, both primary and secondary stakeholders embrace specific values and standards which govern anything that is deemed acceptable or unacceptable corporate behaviors (Ferrell, Fraedrich Ferrell, pp.32-33). Peanut Corporation of America was sued by American Candy Company after the FDA discovered in 1990 that Peanut Corporation of Americas peanut butter exceeded the FDA tolerance level for aflatoxin, a toxic mold (Blackwell, 2009). Another lawsuit against Peanut Corporation of America was brought by Zachary Confections, Inc. of Frankfort, Indiana in 1991 after a 40,020-pound shipment of nuts from Peanut Corporation of America was found to have an unacceptably high l evel of aflatoxin (Blackwell, 2009). Because of the unethical decisions made by PCA in January of 2009, all but three of the 46 employees at the Blakely plant were laid off (wsbtv.com 2, 2009). And on February 12, 2009 the Plainview, Texas plant, which employeed approximately 30 employees, was ordered to shut down by the state health officials (Relative, 2009). These employees, because of their assocation with PCA, lost their jobs. On Janaury 10, 2009, another primary stakeholder, the Solon, OH based King Nut Company, recalled its King Nut and Parnells Pride peanut butter brands that were manufactured by PCA to a distribution chain involving institutions such as hospitals, schools, restaurants and nursing homes (Ashcraft Gerel, LLP, 2009). Now PCAs insurer, Hartford Insurance has filed a lawsuit against PCA to determine if they are responsible for claims filed by victims of this nationwide salmonella outbreak and has asked the court to determine whether the terms of the companys policy exclude coverage for salmonella c laims, along with its obligation to Peanut Corp. (Lindsey, 2009). Peanut Corporation of Americas dishonest behavior seriously affected the primary stakeholders because of the unethical decisions made by the companys leaders and partners of the corporation. The unethical decisions as stated earlier by PCA negatively affected the lives of their employees by the loss of their jobs and the disgrace of being previously employed by PCA put employees in an insecure situation with potential employers. In this situation the people that were sicken, the people that died, the states that were affected, and the companies that had to recall products were all stakeholders in one form or another. Investors and shareholders who gave out money to PCA were also affected by the indiscretions of PCAs mismanagement. Executives and managers of PCA shared in a large gamble which impacted and changed the lives of many individuals and corporations both large and small. Peanut Corporation of America, the company at the center of the nationwide salmonella scare, filed for Chapter 7 in February 2009 (Miroff and Lyndsey, 2009). The filing of bankruptcy negatively affected its investors and shareholders. Others affected by the bankruptcy are secondary stakeholders; government, management agencies and the media. The government was negatively impacted in taxation because of plant closures in the form of income tax and lost sales tax because of lost product sales. The Peanut Corporation of America had its general liability insurance with The Hartford Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut. According to Simon (2009),  PCA has $24 million dollars in insurance from The Hartford Casualty Insurance Company which is specifically dedicated to  covering  the food poisoning claims. The insurance coverage is broken up into two policy periods, 10/1/07 9/30/08 and 10/1/08 9/30/09 (Simon, 2009). The The Hartford Casualty Insurance Company rushed to court to limit what it might have to pay on lawsuits (Levick, 2009).They asked a federal court in Virginia to determine what the responsibility is on three years of policies that was issued to PCA (Levick, 2009). Legal analysis The Peanut Corporation of Americas lack of respect and nonconformity for the consumer protection laws was one of the key legal issues relating to the salmonella outbreak. That was one of the contributing factor that led them to be non-compliant with the law. Another, the corporations primary focus was that of making profit and showing complete disregard for consumers and the law thereof. According to Mundy (2009), PCA avoided taking necessary safety measures in safeguarding its facilities which resulted in leaking roofs. Not only did that PCA spend $60,000 in August 2008 to repair a leaky roof in the plant, Ron Simon a trial lawyer stated that the roof was already leaking bird feces before it was repairedà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦, a clear indication that PCA allegedly failed to maintain proper conditions and practices conducive for managing safety protocols at their facilities (Mundy, 2009). Consumer Protection is government regulations to protect the interests of consumers (Lawyers.com, 2009) . The law refers to state and federal consumer protection and product safety statutes and regulatons that restrict or prohibit deceptive trade practices such as the Consumer Protection Act (Lawyers.com, 2009). The Federal Trade Commission is the main agency enforcing consumer protection statutes (Lawyers.com, 2009). It was established in 1914, for the purpose of supporting consumer protection to drive and control unfair or harmful business practices; it exercises consumer rights and prevents them from being swindled and aids against fraud and deception and enables consumers to make well-informed decisions about products and how they spend their money (www.ftc.gov). The state courts (and some federal courts) in the 1930s placed restrictions on the freedom-to-contract doctrine by establishing rules of public policy and doctrines of unconscionability and fundamental breach that allow the courts to interfere in contractual relationships (Brennan, Browne Kubasek, pp.772). Likewise, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) established in the 1930s, as a part of the U.S Department of Health and Human Services to regulate products which accounted for approximately 25% of the U.S gross national prod uct. As stated by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. The companys actions can only be described as reprehensible and criminal, not only did this company knowingly sell tainted products, it shopped for a laboratory that would provide the acceptable results they were seeking. This behavior represents the worst of our current food safety regulatory system (KDKA2, 2009). The company had previously told the FDA that some lots of peanut butter had initially tested positive for the bacterium, then were retested and found to be negative before they were shipped. But further investigation showed that the company actually shipped some of the lots before the second tests were completed. Other lots were shipped without testing and, in some cases, no second test was performed even after the first one came back positive (Maugh and Engel, 2009). The company did not initially disclose that to investigators trying to solve the current salmonella outbreak (KDKA2, 2009). The FDA did not formally announce the new findings about the companys testing, but rather made small revisions Thursday to an online report about the investigation (Maugh and Engel, 2009. It was only when a Washington Post reporter discovered the changes and the news become more widely known (Maugh and Engel, 2009). Ethical Analysis The Peanut Corporation bottom line was to make a profit and not care about social responsibility to the public. The company continued to ship product they knew was contaminated. T he ethical behavior of the company and Stewart Parnell was to keep production going no matter at what cost. This transmitted a lack of morals and value by upper management by keeping their employees working and meeting their shipping demands. The company also continued to run his plants in an unclean manner which put consumer food safety at risk. There are three ethical perspectives that I will focus on as they exhibit both ethical and unethical behavior. The first being consequential theory, this theory brings out questions of moral issues. Under the consequential theory acts are judged ethically good or bad based on whether the acts have achieved their desired results and the acts are looked at as right or wrong on whether the results can be rationalized (Kubasek, Brennan Browne, 2009, p. 223). When examining the scandal of the Peanut Corporation of America the consequential utilitarianism school of thought can be applied. Stewart Parnell thought process can be viewed as being both ethical and unethical. The main issue in this case study was Parnell shipping products that were tainted. For the argument of ethics it could be assumed that Parnell was seeking the best interest of his company to obtain a profit. Parnells rational included keeping and production flowing and employees working while, the unethical can be argued that a desired outcome was not obtained as a result of the deaths and illnesses of consumers and inability for Peanut Corporation of American to remain in business. Parnell should have had a strategy in place that should have been customers first then his employees. The second ethical perspective is the deontological theory which is derived from the Greek word meaning ethics refers to moral philosophies that focus on the rights of individuals and on the intentions associated with a particular behavior rather than on its consequences (Ferrell, Fraedich, Ferrell, 2008, p.153). Deontological theory is also from the Greek word duty, in which actions can be judged ethically good or bad based on rules and principles arrived at by human reason regardless of the action and whether net happiness is reached (Kubasek, Brennan Browne, 2009, p. 225). Based on email that Mary Wilkerson sent to Stewart Parnell on June 6, 2008, Peanut Corporation of American used two outside laboratories for testing (Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2009). Because Peanut Corporation of American testested and re-tested their producted until they received the results they needed, this could be considered ethical or unethical. Ethical because Mr. Parnell needed to receive a neg ative result so that he could continue his production and shipping of his product. It also could be a means of the company double checking results for consumer protection. On the other hand because Parnell sent samples to multiple laboratories until they found their desired results of the product testing to be negative for salmnella poisioning could be considered unethical. An facet of the deontological theory is that a person should engage only in acts that he or she could see becoming a universal standard (Kubasek, Brennan Browne, 2009, p. 225). Another email sent to Sammy Lightsey from Parnell also shows Parnells unethical behavior. According to the email Parnell sent to Sammy Lightsey, he instructed Sammy to ship the tainted product by stating, okay, lets turn them loose then (Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2009). The third school of thought, humanist theory, where actions are evaluated as ethically good or bad based on whether they contribute to improving inherent human capacities as it pertains to intelligence, wisdom, and self restraint (Browne, Brennan, Kubasek, p.226). According to the USDA, Parnells previous position on the U.S. Department of Agricultures Peanut Standards Boards, which sets the quality and handling standards, intended to assure that satisfactory quality and wholesome peanuts are used in the domestic and import peanut markets (Keefe, 2009). Parnell was first appointed to the USDAs Peanut Standards Board in July 2005 and was reappointed for another term that would have expired in 2011 (Keefe, 2009). On February 5, 2009, the USDA announced that the new Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack had removed Parnell from the board (Akre, 2009). Mr. Parnells ethical behavior based on the humanist theory put him in a great position to help improve quality and handling standards for pea nuts grown and marketed domestically and imported. Parnells unethical behavior could be considered as a conflict of interest because he did not follow those standards within his own company, which caused his own plants to suffer miserably in unsanitary and unhealthy conditions. It is obvious that Parnell didnt have the understanding, Knowledge, intelligence or even discipline to run a processing plant. Contributing Factors The companys culture encouraged unethical behavior and did everything to undermine anything ethical, stemming from sanitation conditions from the beginning because of the history of the overall business operation and that of Mr. Parnells upbringing. David Brooks, a former buyer for a snack company who was familiar with the conditions of PCAs business operation (Layton Miroff, 2009, p.2). Brooks also noted that on three occasions in the mid 1980s, he inspected PCAs Gorman plant to determine whether to buy its peanut products and each time, he gave the plant a failing grade (Layton Miroff, 2009, p. 2). According to Brooks, It was just filthy; Dust was all over the beams, the braces of the building. The roofs leaked, the windows would be open, and birds would fly through the building . . . It was just a time bomb waiting to go off, and everybody in the peanut industry in Georgia, Virginia and Texas they all knew (Layton and Miroff, 2009). According to two former Blakely employees, one recalls opening a tote of peanuts at the processing plant in this small Georgia town and seeing baby mice in it. It was filthy and nasty all around the place, (Glover, 2009). Unethical behavior of upper management and Stewart Parnell were more concerned about profits instead of the lives of the consumers who were vulnerable to harm and the employees who were deliberately deceived about the true results of the contaminated products. The PCA Georgia Plant contributed to the sanitation problem. There were ethical issues throughout the plant that lead to the tainted products. There were peanuts stored next to the finished peanut butter (Smalley, 2009). The roaster they used was not calibrated to kill deadly germs (Smalley, 2009). Dispirited workers on minimum wage, supplied by temp agencies, donned their uniforms at home, potentially dragging contaminants into the plant, which also had rodents (Smalley, 2009). The roof of the PCA plant in Georgia leaked when it rained which is a big risk; given that salmonella thrives in water and the facility should have been dry (Smalley, 2009). The Federal officials in Texas did not even know PCAs Plainview facility existed until after they started investigating the Blakely plant (Layton Miroff, 2009). It was unlicensed and had been uninspected by the government for four years (Layton Miroff, 2009). This company has shown a manner of disrespect for the consumer right laws and obvious disregard for consumer safety that filtered from the top of the corporation down through management. The impatience of not waiting on the results of the test and conducting several re-test to obtain a favorable result was in poor judgment and a sure sign that problems were being ignored and standardized procedures were not being followed by these leaders. They were comfortable wallowing in filth and infestations within their food processing plants for thirty years. Thats a culture that will and did breed all types of legal and unethical problems that was bound to catch up with them. It seemed that they all lacked insight and did not think thoroughly about the results of their actions or to make ethical decisions. They may not have cared about the Consumer Protection Law but they should have been worried about Murphys Law. Ethical decision factors to consider There are three factors to be addressed relating to the ethical theories previously discussed in this case analysis. Based on perspectives of consequential theory where acts are judged as ethically good or bad based on whether the acts have achieved their desired results (Brennan, Browne, Kubasek, 2009, p. 223-224). Under the consequential theory this ethical issue reiterates Parnells actions for shipping products that he knew was contaminated, to keep production flowing and their plants making a profit. The company also had a lack of concern for the consumers health and management continued filling orders with tainted products. The golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, is the hallmark of the deontological theory (Brennan, Browne, Kubasek, 2009, p. 225). Under the deontological theory the ethical issue was lab shopping. Parnells persistence of conducting multiple tests in order to obtain results pleasing to his satisfaction without thought of the unforeseen consequences. The ethical decision factor to be considered in this situation is the need for ethical policies for quality control checking. All companies should have this process in place for products we consume. This way it wont be misinterpreted as lab shopping. And the third school of thought, humanist theory evaluated actions s good or bad depending on whether they contribute to improving inherent human capacities such as intelligence, wisdom, and self-restraint (Brennan, Brown, Kubasek, 2009, p. 226). Under the humanist theory the ethical issue was Parnells conflict of interest based on his previous held position on the U.S. Department of Agricultures Peanut Standards Boards. The ethical decision factors to be considered in this situation are showing little intelligence, wisdom or self-restrain, sitting on the board that he was clearly not qualified for. Recommended corrective action Outbreaks of salmonella are not unfamiliar to the FDA and Peanut Corporation of America was not the first company to be confronted with this issue. In 2005, a ConAgra Foods factory in Georgia was inspected by the FDA due to complaints about a salmonella contamination (Glover, 2009). Spinach contaminated with salmonella followed by peppers and tomatoes was the big scare of 2006 (Shvartsman, 2009). In June, 2009, Nestle Toll House cookie dough and 380,000 pounds of beef produced by JBS Swift Beef Company were recalled due to E. coli contamination (Shvartsman, 2009). Peanut Corporation of America filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection and closed its doors and is now in legal proceedings (Miroff Layton, 2009). ConAgra can be considered the industry leader in setting examples for what should be done when product may be tainted. Therefore, there should be no reason why Peanut Corporation would not know how what to do in a situation such as this. PCA like ConAgra could have voluntarily issued recall voluntarily upon learning about the products which were tested positively for salmonella. PCA could have prevented this tragic end to its business and the lives of those lost if they had attempted to rectify the situation properly and address the root of the problems which were many. It may be too late for implementation of a corrective action for Peanut Corporation of America, but not too late for a corrective action for the remainder of the food processing industry. Food processing plants and warehouses should base their policies and procedures off the guidelines for food safety set forth by the Food and Drug Administration. As part of a new regulation, Obama administration is working on toughening food safety standards. A bill that recommends a proactive stance in preventing food contamination was approved by the House (Shvartsman, 2009). The bill will step up inspections of high risk facilities every six months, or at least once a year (Shvartsman, 2009). This change will dramatically lower food recalls. The final regulation will come in the fall when the Senate votes on the bill (Shvartsman, 2009). The House voted to empower the FDA to order recalls (Shvartsman, 2009). Food safety advocates have been lobbying Congress to give the FDA more regulatory power over the food supply, a vast and growing network crossing state lines and international borders (Shvartsman, 2009). As stated earlier PCA had plants in Georgia, Texas and Virginia. This new bill will provide the FDA the power to police companies that have locations in multiple states (Shvartsman, 2009). PCA was unlikely to remain in business given Mr. Parnells inherent behavior along with those who were a part of his management. PCA was unlikely to remain in business under the direction of Stewart Parnell. Parnells inherent behavior along with those who were a part of his management did not act in an ethical manner towards the community. Mr. Parnell consistently put profits ahead of public safety and acted in a manner that proved to be detrimental to society. Therefore, it can be concluded that PCA lacked business ethics and morals and how they portrayed the companys image and conveyed disregard for their employees and members of the community.

Gertrude as an Innocent Victim or a Sexually and Morally Corrupt Woman

Gertrude as an Innocent Victim or a Sexually and Morally Corrupt Woman in Hamlet Shakespeare’s character Gertrude is one of much mystery; in relation to this there are many questions that need to be answered to establish Gertrude’s innocence through out the play. Some examples of these questions are, was Gertrude in some kind of relationship with Claudius before the murder of her late Husband and did she know about the murder before or after it was committed? Does she love Claudius or is it just her status that she is protecting? And did she ever love the late King Hamlet? At the beginning of the play when we learn about the late King Hamlet’s death and Gertrude’s hasty marriage to his brother Claudius, we are faced with a question on the audience’s awareness. It can be assumed that the marriage to her brother- in-law is purely because of Gertrude’s weak personality, resulting in a dependency on men and the means of protecting her status and her power. We also question the love between the Gertrude and Claudius; this is because there is no suggestion of a resemblance between the late King and his brother. The description that we are given about late King Hamlet maybe slightly distorted, as it is Hamlet who tells us this, and he is noticeably loyal to his father. It is also possible to argue that the love that the late King and Gertrude shared was not that strong as the only evidence to suggest this has been told to us by Hamlet and he maybe slightly bias. First we notice that Gertrude does not display her grief for her dead husband, and suspicions mount when she also tells Hamlet that he should stop his mourning as well.... ...unishment upon death. She does not show any untoward hatred towards Claudius showing that she may not be aware of his cruel deed. In the end Gertrude drinks the poison which can suggest many things; that she has no knowledge of the poison or that she feels guilty of her late husband’s death, and cannot carry on with the corrupt behaviour between her husband and her son, or that she is protecting her son and saving his life. When she attempts to consume the drink she is stopped suddenly by Claudius, but she replies â€Å"I will my lord, I pray you pardon me†, is this the request of someone who is guilty, someone who is tired of the fighting between her two dearest or of someone with no awareness of what was going to happen? This for many readers is the critical part of the play in determining her innocence or guilt.

The Success of the Simpsons Essay examples -- essays papers

The Success of the Simpsons The Improbable Long-Term Success of The Simpsons When examining the history of modern prime-time television, there is a certain pattern that virtually every successful show inevitably falls into. After a period of initial success, perhaps lasting three or four years, the writing on the show becomes stale by using the same format and same jokes over and over. The viewing audience becomes bored, and eventually, the show fades into television oblivion. Or, as Jeff MacGregor states in The New York Times, â€Å"Historically†¦(successful shows) collapse under the weight of their own complacency, hanging on for a few lifeless seasons while the producers wait to cash out their millions and move to Maui.† Based on this premise, it would seem that â€Å"The Simpsons,† an animated series that debuted in 1987 as thirty second segments on â€Å"The Tracey Ullman Show,† should have worn out its welcome long ago. However, â€Å"The Simpsons† is still going strong today. The secret to the show’s success lies in its producers’ ability to understand the expectations of the television audience and the culture that surrounds them. This understanding, combined with â€Å"wry sarcasm, topical themes, and superb scripting that puts most other comedies to shame,† as well as some old-fashioned slapstick comedy, makes â€Å"The Simpsons† one of the most popular programs in television history. The show is often complex and highly intellectual, while remaining funny at the most basic levels. As Jim Gleeson states in The College Tribune, â€Å"The show is rare in rewarding attention to detail, with especially obscure references that†¦ even if you had never heard of†¦you would still laugh, giddy with the crafted sleight of it all.† This fact that the show works on several levels at once draws a generationally diverse fan base. The adults are attracted by the surprisingly sophisticated dialogue, while the children enjoy the clumsy antics of Homer and the traditionally â€Å"cartoonish† aspects of the program. An example of a multidimensional scene occurs in the episode where Marge, the mother of the Simpson family, starts a crusade against campaign violence. Maggie, the baby, is mesmerized by an â€Å"Itchy and Scratchy† cartoon show in which the mouse pummels the cat over the head with a sledgehammer. Later in the episode, Maggie imitates the actions of the mouse by hitting her fathe... ... theory suggests that the success of â€Å"The Simpsons† is a consequence of television history, and could not have taken place if the show had originated twenty years earlier. The medium of television needed time to build up complexity and diversity, so that the show could virtually redefine what is expected of a television program. Based on this theory, â€Å"The Simpsons’† effect on television is similar to the Beatles’ effect on music. The theory predicts that the show will continue on until, just like the Beatles, they have nothing left to do. At its current pace, â€Å"The Simpsons† seems like it could go on forever. The show is continually progressing and perhaps funnier than ever. The writers are further developing the characters with each passing episode, and the show’s possibilities, for the time being, seem limitless. It is difficult to explain exactly what the allure of the show is, but at the core its most appealing characteristic is that it is simply funny. From the simple pleasure of watching Homer fall flat on his face to the most obscure reference imaginable, â€Å"The Simpsons† continues to entertain over a decade after its conception and shows no signs of slowing down.

Irony and satire are prominent themes throughout Anthony Burgess’s

Irony and satire are prominent themes throughout Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange, Virginia Woolf’s To the Lighthouse and Joyce Cary’s The Horse’s Mouth. Burgess’s novel satirizes the world as Burgess viewed it in the mid to late 16th century. It was a world in which individuality copped out to societal norms. Wolf attempts to illustrate the irony of the tenuous connection between the age of reason and the modernization in her work To the Lighthouse which was published in 1984. Like Woolf and Burgess, Cary too takes an entirely satirical approach to the early twentieth century in his work The Horse’s Mouth.Each work published at different junctures in the twentieth century offers unique parodies of the times and the direction each author saw society following. A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess Irony, is perhaps the cornerstone of A Clockwork Orange. It is most frequently demonstrated through Alex who prior to his government mandated t reatment repeatedly refers to violence as a thing of beauty. For example, after hitting Dim Alex goes on to note that his victim â€Å"is singing blood to make up for his vulgarity.† (Burgess, 28) In another example of irony, prior to his treatment, Alex looks upon those things that most people deem desirable such as religion, education and reason as purely undesirable. In other words, Alex sees things in reverse until the government reforms him. After his treatment he adapts an entirely passive outlook manifested by the following excerpt: â€Å"And what, brother, I had to escape into sleep from then was the horrible and wrong feeling that it was better to get the hit than give it. If the veck had stayed I might even have like presented the other cheek.† (Burgess, 121) This turn in Alex’s attitude toward violence comes as a result of a rigorous two week treatment in which Alex while incarcerated for crimes of violence is injected with a drug. The drug makes Alex ill and during the effects he is forced to watch tapes containing excessive violence. The technique known as associative learning forces Alex to become ill at the thought of violence. Ironically, following the treatment, Alex who was an ardent admirer of classical music cannot stand to listen to classical music since he associates it with violence.Irony and satire is further illustrated by the name attached to a cottage where Alex and his gang members, called droogs, entered and committed crimes of rape and assault. This was prior to Alex’s arrest, incarceration and eventual associative learning treatment. The cottage is named Home and Alex describes it as â€Å"a gloopy sort of name. † (Burgess, 19) The word home is associated with comfort and safety and naturally an escape from the abrasive outside world. At Home, Alex and his droogs turn the concept around by beating the man of the house and raping the mistress.Ironically the master had written a manuscript in prot est against the treatment that the government used to reform Alex. While at Home committing violent crimes, Alex burnt the manuscript which is the very thing that might have spared him the treatment that he received in prison. In the final analysis, the government, by brainwashing Alex for the collective good of society had ironically dehumanized him. This dehumanizing took the form of robbing Alex of free will and free choice.He had not elected to abstain from violence he had been programmed to do so and as such was no more than an animal or a thing. The greatest irony of all is that the very violence that Alex perpetrated had been regarded as non-human. His treatment did no more than suppress his desire for violence leaving no less human than before his treatment. Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange therefore offers a satirical indictment of modern approaches to order in society. Virginia Woolf’s To the Lighthouse Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey represent the gap between realism and mod ernity with an ironic undertone.While Mr. Ramsey is apt to rely upon his intellect and Mrs. Ramsey relies on her emotion, both characters are keenly aware that their existence is profoundly transient. For instance Mrs. Ramsey is weighed by concurrent thoughts of her sons’ growth and the inevitable dangers in the outside world. Mr. Ramsey is constantly obsessing over his inevitable demise. In many ways this approach to modern day chaos is reflected in Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange. Man’s attempt to modernize and grow threatens the very essence of humanity.In A Clockwork Orange the dehumanizing impact of technological progress was epitomized through Burgess’s Alex. Woolf’s approach is slightly different but is nonetheless satirical. Despite the advances in technology humanity is characterized by its flaws. A flawless society is impossible despite the perfection offered by modernity. Woolf highlights this satirical approach in a scene where Mr. Ramsey is observing Mrs. Ramsey and James, (their son) through a window as he strolls through the lane. Woolf writes the following:â€Å"Who shall blame him? Who will not secretly rejoice when the hero puts his armour off, and halts by the window and gazes at his wife and son, who, very distant at first, gradually come closer and closer, till lips and book and head are clearly before him, though still lovely and unfamiliar from the intensity of his isolation and the waste of ages and the perishing of the stars, and finally putting his pipe in his pocket and bending his magnificent head before her—who will blame him if he does homage to the beauty of the world?† (Woolf, Ch. VI) Obviously, Woolf is demonstrating that humanity is flawed and no amount of science can prevent the inevitability of mortality. For Burgess humanity is endlessly flawed by free choice and no amount of scientific procedure can correct that flaw without substituting one problem with perhaps a larger proble m. For instance the treatment given to Alex only robbed him of human traits while attempting to make him more human by eliminating his desire to commit acts of violence.While Burgess uses Home as a symbol of irony in that it typifies a place of order and peace yet becomes a place of great violence and upheaval, Woolf takes a more traditional approach. At her dinner party, Mrs. Ramsey poignantly observes that despite the outside chaos and the turmoil of the outside world there is some peace at home. Reflecting on the dinner party Woolf write: â€Å"It partook . . . of eternity . . .there is a coherence in things, a stability; something, she meant, is immune from change, and shines out (she glanced at the window with its ripple of reflected lights) in the face of the flowing, the fleeting, the spectral, like a ruby; so that again tonight she had the feeling she had had once today, already, of peace, of rest. Of such moments, she thought, the thing is made that endures. †(Woolf, Chapter XVII) Although this aspect of the home can be distinguished from Burgess’s satirical approach to the home the message is nonetheless vastly similar. Certain elements of humanity cannot be usurped by modern technology.As advanced as the sciences may become, human nature remains sacred and necessary for a cohesive society. As collective as society has become at the heart of society there are individuals with human desires, the hub that successfully turns the wheel of humanity. As Mrs. Ramsey observes, some things cannot change and that is human nature. For Alex, human nature required free choice. For Mrs. Ramsey human nature required peace and rest. Ironically, free choice, peace and rest are all compromised in Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange and Woolf’s To the Lighthouse.For Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange, humanity was threatened by modern technology as evidenced by Alex’s treatment. For Woolf, humanity was likewise threatened by modern technolo gy at a time when the world was at war and the industrial revolution was in full swing. The Lighthouse in Woolf’s To the Lighthouse can be compared to the Home in Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange in that they both represent the irony of contradictory nature of things. As previously observed the Home, traditionally a place of refuge became the scene of heinous crimes in A Clockwork Orange. A similar, yet not so dramatic contradiction and irony surrounds Woolf’s Lighthouse.For instance, James observes as the Ramsey’s boat approaches the Lighthouse: â€Å"The Lighthouse was then a silvery, misty-looking tower with a yellow eye, that opened suddenly, and softly in the evening. Now— James looked at the Lighthouse. He could see the white-washed rocks; the tower, stark and straight; he could see that it was barred with black and white; he could see windows in it; he could even see washing spread on the rocks to dry. So that was the Lighthouse, was it? No, th e other was also the Lighthouse. For nothing was simply one thing. The other Lighthouse was true too. † (Woolf, Chapter VIII)