The evaluation of the consequence to the UK economy for raising or Dissertation

The evaluation of the consequence to the UK economy for raising or lowering the inheritance tax rate - Dissertation Example Taxes are considered as the main revenue source of governments. The evolution of imposing taxes dates back during periods when most governments lack stability and structure. The main purpose of imposing taxes is to fund public spending and is supported by laws and statutes. In most countries, taxes are imposed on revenues obtained by firms and earning individuals. Other forms of taxes such as tariffs, and dues have further expanded the revenue generation activities of governments. The role that taxation plays is critical especially economies that are dependent on taxes. The imposition of taxes is also viewed as one of the ways that balances wealth inequity in countries and ensure better provision of social services. Income taxes serve as the main contributor to the total tax collections made by governments. But other forms of taxes such as sin taxes and estate taxes are also contributing to the coffers of governments. Inheritance taxes have become a popular form of tax in recent times because individuals have learned to invest in both properties and securities. The transfer of wealth because of death provides opportunities for the government to gain more revenues. The existence of inheritance taxes has been subjected to several debates in the United Kingdom. The past three administrations have been also contemplating on reforming the inheritance tax laws. The budget of the government is highly dependent on the amount of tax collected each year. There are countries that develop new taxes just to meet collection targets and prevent the states from running on a budget deficit. The succeeding discussions will tackle the impact of inheritance tax in an economy specifically focusing on macro-economic indicators and statistics. 1.1. Objectives of the Study The primary purpose of the dissertation is to explore on the effects of the increase

Poetry Explication Essay Example for Free

Poetry Explication Essay Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618) was called a â€Å"silver poet of his time because of the way he did not conform to the poet writing style of the Renaissance era. He became fairly popular with Queen Elizabeth I and was knighted in 1585. But he fell out of her good graces when he secretly married ladies without her permission. The queen locked him in the Tower of London for some time, and while he was locked up he was writing poetry. He was ultimately arrested and executed in 1618 to appease the Spanish government for some ransacking that his men did on one of their voyages through America. His works are everything from plain to somber and that is one of the main things that made him a great poet. The Nymph’s Reply  Ã¢â‚¬Å"The Nymph’s Reply to the Shepherd† by Sir Walter Raleigh has many themes and interpretations. The poem describes love and time, but the most important thing that I think it describes is â€Å"Carpe Diem† or seizing the day. The poem is a response to Christopher Marlowe’s â€Å"The Passionate Shepherd to His Love†. Marlowe’s poem describes a shepherd trying to win over the one he loves by promising her all of these earthly things, but Raleigh’s poem is the woman seemingly denying the shepherd’s advances and saying that all of the earthly things that he promised will all eventually pass away and be forgotten. The Nymph says that the only way we can be together is if youth lasted forever and their passionate love knew no time. I believe that the theme of this poem is carpe diem and the poetic elements that support that are alliteration, visual imagery, and situational irony. The first element that helps describes Carpe Diem is in the poem is alliteration. Raleigh’s use of alliteration really helps get his points across to the reader and helps the transactions be smoother. Like in the line, â€Å"These pretty pleasures might me move† (1224), Raleigh uses alliteration to almost mock the shepherd’s advances on the nymph. And also in the line, â€Å"Time drives the flocks from field to fold† (1224), Raleigh  uses alliteration to help to say that time changes everything. That is the reason why alliteration supports the theme of Carpe Diem. The only way the Nymph will accept the shepherd’s love is if they forever live in the present where they are young and passionate. The nymph does not want earthly things that will wither or sour throughout time, but rather she wants things to be eternal and stay fresh. These examples are a perfect form of Carpe Diem, and that is why alliteration helps get the main point across to the reader. The next poetic element that helps represent Carpe Diem in the poem is the imagery, more specifically the visual imagery. Raleigh uses imagery to help support Carpe Diem by showing the disadvantages of time. He shows the readers how moods change with the seasons, flowers will wither, and things grow old all through imagery. Like in the lines, â€Å"Thy cap, thy kirtle, and thy posies Soon break, soon wither, soon forgotten† (1224-1225), Raleigh helps the reader see the flowers withering through time. He even does so well as to put images in the reader’s mind of things fading away and being forgotten. When Raleigh uses imagery to diminish time he is also using it to uplift Carpe Diem at the same time. And that is how imagery helps support the theme of Carpe Diem. The final poetic element that helps support the theme of Carpe Diem is irony. And the specific irony used in the poem is situational irony. The sense of helplessness by the shepherd is apparent throughout the poem. The shepherd has to listen to the nymph deny all the things he promised her, and tell him that the only way that they can be together forever is if they can stay young forever. This is why it is situational irony because there is nothing the shepherd can do so that he and the nymph can live young forever. The best he can give her is Carpe Diem and try to live in the now while the passion is still fresh, but ultimately they could never be together forever. This sense of situational irony is why it is a perfect example of Carpe Diem. In conclusion the poem itself really displayed strong cultural values of its time period. It showed that during the time of romanticism Carpe Diem was a big thing back then. It was a great poem with many key points and I enjoyed  reading it.

Gay-Consumer-Capitalism :: Essays Papers

Gay-Consumer-Capitalism Politics of a subject-action-object formula have meaningful terms insofar as the terms relate to each other. This holds at several levels beyond the strict sense that the triad requires three parts. It can also be the case that the three parts are all expressions of one, or that all three are parts of some absent presence. In Nicola Field’s criticism of a Queer Valentine’s Carnival in London in 1993, and of gay identity and lifestyle as bases for politics in general, a Marxist analysis reduces the subject and action to properties of the object against which they act. At this level, the theoretical move has little justification but the strategy employed at a lower level. However, understanding an argument at this level opens the critical possibility of both disturbing the tendons holding together fixed relations to the object and exploring the ability of the object to bear the weight of the other two terms. I will deploy this criticism in the instance of Field†™s Over the Rainbow, specifically in â€Å"Identity and the Lifestyle Market†, but the argument presented therein exceeds the methodology I have identified and I intend to reinforce the constructive thinking that takes place, but still in the context of this paradigm for (counter)criticism. Field’s argument in â€Å"Identity and the Lifestyle Market† simultaneously takes ‘capitalism’ too seriously and fails to take constructed identities seriously enough, but still raises significant points for political encounters with capitalism, (homosexual) oppression, and identity itself. To begin with, Field’s argument runs a familiar Marxist course from capitalism as historical or present source of all problems to a tool of politics (used against that problem) back to the tool’s association with capitalism. Capitalism causes oppression and identities of sexuality, thus using identities of sexuality endorses capitalism because it is from capitalism. â€Å"The politics of identity are about bypassing the roots of oppression and concentrating on the symptoms† (Field 51). While the phrase ‘roots of oppression’ does not appear in every paragraph, a reference to the â€Å"real causes† of â€Å"the problem† is woven through every significant political argument of the article. This strategically obfuscates what â€Å"the problem† really is by seeming to refer so much to â€Å"it† that Field’s never elucidates a full understanding, except to mention those instances of oppression that support her argumen ts. What about cases of oppression, pain, and suffering other than worker’s exploitation?

Pros and Cons of a Military School Essay

By Jenna Brooklyn There are many positive benefits for your teenager should they attend a military school. But, like most things in life, there can be a downside as well. Here is a report explaining what’s good and bad about study in a military high school. To start with if your teen is in trouble with serious health issues or a major attitude problem, they stand little or no chance of being accepted. Military schools today set very high academic standards. They are not therapy centers for kids with problems. Two of their major goals are to produce students able to enter prestigious colleges and/or join the military. If your child is a clever but lazy student, a military school has much to offer. There is a packed academic program with compulsory and supervised homework and extra study sessions. But if your child is not strong academically they may struggle to match the high expectations. Discipline is a major part of a military environment. If your teen is lazy and disrespectful they will get a serious jolt in a military school. They will be out of bed at 0600 hours, they will make their bed and tidy their possessions, and they will be on the parade ground and exercising before breakfast. This type of lifestyle could change your teen’s attitude to life. Of course a military school is a residential facility and while students are allowed to attend approved activities in the local town, things like taking a part-time job in the grocery store are simply not an option. There is a full extra-curricula program at a military school with plenty of time for artistic pursuits and outdoor education. This means your child is getting an all-round education and enjoying their schooling at the same time. Opportunities for leadership roles are many and varied in a military education. If your child requires a challenge and enjoys being a leader, they will develop their talents and be truly extended in such a school. It is ideal for developing the total person. If as a parent you are looking to a military school to mollycoddle your child, you will be disappointed. It’s much more a shape up or ship out approach from the school. If your child chooses to disobey and fails to complete tasks, the school will not spend a great deal of time and effort in whipping them into line. The student may be expelled. A military school wants excellent results from its students and those who won’t or can’t perform are likely to be shown the door. Those who do work hard are sure to be well rewarded and for life. College entrance is likely and if a career in the military is required, this type of secondary education is perfect for such a move. A military school is a community where teamwork and bonding is part of every day life. If this suits your child, fine. If your child is a loner and doesn’t like a regimented and disciplined lifestyle, then a military school is not for them. If you’re looking to find more information about military school and its environment, do check out Military Schools for Boys. Or if you need expert advice on what is the best program for your teen fill out this online form.

Freedom Of Press

Freedom of Press Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication and expression through mediums including various electronic media and published materials. While such freedom mostly implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state, its preservation may be sought through constitutional or other legal protections.With respect to governmental information, any government may distinguish which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of information as sensitive, classified or secret and being therwise protected from disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. Many governments are also subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation which are both used to define the extent of national interest.The Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares: â€Å"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers† This philosophy is usually accompanied by legislation ensuring various degrees of freedom of scientific research (known s scientific freedom), publishing, press and printing the depth to which these laws are entrenched in a country's legal system can go as far down as its constitution.The concept of freedom of speech is often covered by the same laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to spoken and published expression. Beyond legal definitions, several non-governmental organizations use other criteria to Judge the level of press freedom around the world. Some of those organizations include the following: Reporters Without Borders The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) Freedom House Many of the traditional means of delivering information are being slowly superseded by the increasing pace of modern technological advance.Almost every conventional mo de of media and information dissemination has a modern counterpart that offers significant potential advantages to Journalists seeking to maintain and enhance their freedom of speech. A few simple examples of such Satellite television Web-based publishing (e. g. , blogging) Voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a ranking of countries in terms of their freedom of the press.The Freedom of the Press index, an annual survey of edia independence in 197 countries and territories, is based on responses to surveys sent to Journalists that are members of partner organizations of the RWB, as well as related specialists such as researchers, Jurists and human rights activists. The survey asks questions about direct attacks on Journalists and the media as well as other indirect sources of pressure against the free press, such as non-governmental groups.The annual index contains the most comprehensive data set available on global media treedom and i s a key resource tor scholars, policymakers, international institutions, media, and activists. The index assesses the degree of print, broadcast, and internet freedom in every country in the world, analyzing the events of each calendar year. It provides numerical rankings and rates each country's media as â€Å"Free,† â€Å"Partly Free,† or â€Å"Not Free. Country narratives examine the legal environment for the media, political pressures that influence reporting, and economic factors that affect access to information As of 2013, the United States is ranked 32nd in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index. There was a fall from 20th in 2010 to 42nd in 2012, which was attributed to arrests of Journalists covering the Occupy movement. In 2011-2012, the countries where press was the most free were Finland, Norway and Germany, followed by Estonia, Netherlands, Austria, Iceland, and Luxembourg.The country with the least degree of press freedom was Eritrea, followe d by North Korea, Turkmenistan, Syria, Iran, and China. Freedom of the press in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, says that â€Å"Congress shall make no law†¦. abridging (limiting) the freedom of speech, or of the press † Freedom of speech is the liberty to speak openly without fear of government restraint.It is closely linked to freedom of the press because this freedom includes both the right to speak and the right to be heard. In the United States, both the freedom of speech and freedom of press are commonly called freedom of expression. This clause is generally understood as prohibiting the government from interfering with the printing and distribution of information or opinions, although freedom of the press, like freedom of speech, is subject to some restrictions, such as defamation law and copyright law. The Constitution's framers provided the press with broad fre edom.This freedom was considered necessary to the establishment of a strong, independent press sometimes called â€Å"the fourth branch† of the government. An independent press can provide citizens with a variety of information and opinions on matters of public importance. However, freedom of press sometimes collides with other rights, such as a defendant's right to a fair trial or a citizen's right to privacy. In recent years, there has been increasing concern about extremely aggressive journalism, including stories about people's sexual lives and photographs of people when they were in a private setting.The framers' conception of freedom of the press has been the subject of intense historical debate, both among scholars and in the pages of Judicial opinions. At the very least, those who drafted and ratified the Bill of Rights purported to embrace the notion, derived from William Blackstone, that a free press may not be licensed by the sovereign, or otherwise restrained in a dvance of publication. And, although the subject remains a lively topic of academic debate, the Supreme Court itself reviewed the historical record in 1964 in New York Times Co. . Sullivan and concluded that the central meaning of the First Amendment embraces s well a rejection of the law of seditious libel i. e. , the power of the sovereign to impose subsequent punishments, from imprisonment to criminal fines to civil damages, on those who criticize the state and its officials. To a great extent, however, what we mean by freedom of the press today was shaped in an extraordinary era of Supreme Court decision-making that began with Sullivan and concluded in 1991 witn Conen v. Cowles Media Co.During that remarkable period, the Court ruled least 40 cases involving the press and fleshed out the skeleton of freedoms addressed only rarely in prior cases. In contrast, although the Court in the early part of the last century had considered the First Amendment claims of political dissidents with some frequency, it took nearly 150 years after the adoption of the Bill of Rights, and the First Amendment along with it, for the Court to issue its first decision based squarely on the freedom of the press.Over the course of the quarter-century following Sullivan, the Court made it its business to explore the ramifications of the case on a virtually annual basis. During that period, the Supreme Courts elaboration of what we mean by a free press focused on the nature of the official restraint lleged to compromise that freedom as well as the extent to which the First Amendment protects the press from a given species of governmental action or inaction. Thus, in cases such as Near and the Pentagon Papers case (1971 ‘s New York Times Co. . United States), the Court established that freedom of the press from previous restraints on publication is nearly absolute, encompassing the right to publish information that a president concluded would harm the national security, if not th e movements of troopships at sea in time of war. In 1974's Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, the Court embraced the analogous proposition that the overnment has virtually no power to compel the press to publish that which it would prefer to leave on the proverbial cutting room floor.In that regard, however, it must be noted that not all media are created equal when it comes to entitlement to the full protections of the First Amendments press clause. Most significantly, because of a perceived scarcity of the electromagnetic spectrum, the Court has held that Congress and the Federal Communications Commission may regulate the activities of broadcasters operating over public airwaves in a manner that would surely violate the First Amendment if applied to newspapers.Compare Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC (1969) with Tornillo. ) The Courts reasoning in Red Lion, in which it upheld the Commissions Fairness Doctrine and personal attack rule i. e. , the right of a person criticized on a broadcast station to respond to such criticism over the same airwaves licensed to that station has never been disavowed, although the Justices have expressly declined to extend it to other, later-developed communications media, including cable television (1994's Turner Broadcasting v.FCC) and the Internet (1997's Reno v. ACLU), to which the scarcity rationale for regulation is plainly napplicable. Sullivan and cases that followed also hold that the First Amendment protects the publication of false information about matters of public concern in a variety of contexts, although with considerably less vigor than it does dissemination of the truth.Even so, public officials and public fgures may not recover civil damages for injury to their reputations unless they were the victims of a reckless disregard for truth in the dissemination of a calculated falsehood. Indeed, private persons may not collect civil damages for reputational harm caused by falsehoods relating to a matter f public c oncern unless the publishers conduct violates a fault-based standard of care. And although expressions of opinion are not always immune from legal sanction, in its 1990 decision in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. the Court held that statements not capable of being proven false, or which reasonable people would not construe as statements of fact at all, but rather as mere rhetorical hyperbole, are absolutely protected by the First Amendment. Indeed e ou nas rejected arguments advanced by the institutional press that, because of its structural role in nsuring the free flow of information in a democratic society, it ought to enjoy unique protections from otherwise generally applicable laws that inhibit its ability to gather and report the news.Thus, in 1991 in Cohen v. Cowles Media Co. , the Court effectively concluded the treatise on the freedom of the press it began in Sullivan; it did so when it emphasized that the press is properly subject to liability under the generally applicabl e law of contracts when it breaks a promise to keep a sources identity confidential, even when it does so in order to report truthful information about the ources involvement in a matter of public concern.In the decade following Cohen, the Court again fell largely silent when it came to the First Amendments application to the institutional press. As the 21st century dawned, however, the Court interrupted that silence, at least briefly, to revisit the extent to which a generally applicable law such as the federal wiretap statute can constitutionally impose criminal penalties and civil liability on the dissemination by the press of the contents of unlawfully recorded telephone conversations, at least when the information so disseminated is the truth about a matter of public concern.While it is undeniable fact that freedom of press is essential ingredient of democracy, it does not mean it will advance the goals of democracy. A free press plays a key role in sustaining and monitoring a healthy democracy, as well as in contributing to greater accountability, good government, and economic development. Most importantly, restrictions on media are often an early indicator that governments intend to assault other democratic institutions. According to the Freedom of the Press index, only 14. 5 percent of the world's citizens live in countries that enjoy a free press.In the rest of the world, governments as well as non-state actors control the viewpoints that reach citizens and brutally repress independent voices who aim to promote accountability, good governance, and economic development.