Foreign Direct Investment & Exchange Report Research Paper

Foreign Direct Investment & Exchange Report - Research Paper Example The paper tells that control in the host country is usually acquired through increasing active company operations. It can also be done by purchasing a company in the host country. In this case, foreign investors may want to extend business and offer Redbox to Brazil since Brazil does not invest in Redbox. Alternatively, Brazil can invest in manufacturing and marketing of Redbox. Considering various factors, FDI offers stable economic gain especially for countries that are focused on growth. The reason FDI for Redbox in Brazil is necessary is because FDI has been proved to be sustainable and stable even when other capital flows such as equity portfolio are faced with major hitches. This trend has evidently existed for many years and has contributed to the shift of capital inflow from portfolio investment and bank loans to FDI. On the contrary, Brazil can invest in Redbox if there is assurance that it will exceptionally contribute to growth and development. Brazil can also take advanta ge of its financial stability to invest since FDI takes advantage of the financial crisis. Brazil will also have the advantage of control over its resources. The flow of capital to other nations other than the investor’s country also has the advantage of giving high rates of return. This is because the flow of capital internationally reduces risks that are faced by capital owners hence enabling investors to diversify investment. Moreover, the integration of global capital markets helps in the spreading of best economic practices in areas such as governance among other areas.

Analysing Britains Role In The European Union Politics Essay

Analysing Britains Role In The European Union Politics Essay It was only on January 1, 1973 that Britain became an official member of the European Union. Ultimately, what was seen through this was twenty-two years of little participation from Britain in the affairs of Europe. Twenty-two years before its entrance, Britain was given the opportunity in 1950 to participate in the negotiations that paved the path for the emergence of the European Coal and Steel Community; nevertheless, when an invitation was extended to the Labour Government of the time, Prime Minister Clement Attlee declined to participate in these discussions. Later, when the ECSC and its six member-states passed consensus to expand the ECSC, Britain was invited to the negotiations but Prime Minister Anthony Eden ultimately withdrew his Conservative party from the discussions. By 1974, a year after its official membership, Britain had become regarded as an awkward partner to the European Union, a standing that continues to be seen between Britain and the EU as a result of the pol icies that Britains respective leaders have taken towards the European Union. Conservative Government Strained Relations of 1973 1974 Edward Heath, who took the reins of Britain in 1970, was at the helm of building a stronger relationship with the European Union. His pro-European attitude led to the ultimate admittance of Britain into the EU. Nevertheless, admission came at a time when Britain and the rest of Europe began to see a strain to their economies. The success that the EEC had seen prior to Britains admission was not shared; instead, Britain entered during a period of recession which led its membership to not have positive connotations with Britons. While Edward Heath and Georges Pompidou had started to build a close relationship after Britains entrance, Britains attempt at increasing the quality and size EECs institutions and proposing the concentration of its activities in Brussels angered the Commission because, through it, Britain continued to imply that the Commission was ineffective. When it came to the Economic and Monetary Union, Britain once again earned a reputation of being an awkward partner in the EU. Britain disappointed its EU partners when it declared that it would not enter the sterling into the joint float unless certain agreements were reached by the EEC to underwrite the sterlings value. While the rest of the member-states had agreed to place the bank in Luxemburg, Heath insulted the EU by pressing for centralization of the European reserve bank to be located in Brussels, which fared negatively for him as a result of member-states believing that Britain was meddling in issues that they have no involvement in. As Britain continued to slowly integrate into the EU, the British government continued to strain its relationship with the other EEC members. Instead of acting in a diplomatic manner, British officials openly voiced their opinions of the incompetence seen within the EEC, which often angered the original six. Heaths push for what he believed were necessary changes to the external energy policy of the EU was often seen as conflicting with the positions of the other member states; France had continued to insist that an internal policy would need to be first established before the EU could even consider the feasibility of an external policy. The British, on the other hand, did not believe that internal energy policy was as crucial as the EUs external policy on the matter. Unfortunately, the start of the Arab-Israeli war brought about oil shortages that brought many EU nations down to their knees; the Dutch and the Germans, who at first supported Britains argument in preventing an interna l policy, began suffering heavily from the shortages in oil and shortly after began supporting the creation of an internal European oil/energy policy. In a show of their awkward partnership, Britain decided that not back down from their original position of rejecting an internal energy policy for the EU, which led the continuing of European oil shortages. Britain focused on its own domestic interests, feared that the establishment of internal energy policy would give the EU an opportunity of obtaining access to Britains oil reserves in the North Sea. As a result, Heath would not concede to EU pressure and refused to consolidate and distribute energy resources equally amongst EU member-states. What started as a constructive and optimistic entry into the EU ended with conflict and stress between Britain and the EU member-states. While Heath was genuinely interested in strengthening the European Union, his actions were seen as Britain being uncooperative as a result of its desire to benefit from the EU for the sake of its own national interests. Regrettably, the Labour party that took office in 1974 would continue Britains role as an awkward partner. Labour Government of 1974-1979 The Labour party that succeeded Heaths government in 1974 began to take a backseat in international politics as it attempted to repair the country. Domestically, Britain had become plagued with economic and political problems caused by both the oil crisis and by Heaths inability to control British trade unions (Guido, 1984). As a result of the oil crisis, inflation hit British society hard and was predicted to remain on the rise, while the balance of payments saw a deficit in the billions by the end of 1974. While Prime Minister Harold Wilson had to work with hung Parliament, he also found himself, at the same time, being forced to deal with the problems of his divided country. Britains membership in the EU continued to be an issue to many Britons, which allowed Wilson to unite Britain in a campaign against the European Union (Bilski, 1977). Wilson, in seeing the negative opinion Britons had of the EU, decided to become a protector of Britains national interests by pressing for British membership in the EU to be renegotiated with acceptable terms. What began as peaceful negotiations that aimed to adapt and reshape the terms of Britains membership in the EU soon turned harsh by April 1974; at the renegotiations held in April, Britain demanded to have the right to withdraw itself from the EU if any future negotiation led to terms that Britain would not agree to (Ernst, 1974). While the Commission was disappointed with Britains tone, it felt obligated to sit down with Britain to renegotiate its terms of membership. After Wilson strongly campaigned for his government against the EU on CAP; cash rebates; and Britains membership terms, domestic polls showed that a higher percent of Britons supported EU membership. While the referendum produced high support for membership from the public, Wilson continued to see hostility towards the EU from within his own party. As such, Britain found itself again as an awkward partner to the EU based on the negotiations of pollution control and Britains claims from the ERDF. When the EU proposed changes to emission limits, Britain quickly rejected the proposal and claimed that the standards were unsuitable for Britain. While the EU suspected that Britain was influenced by its chemical industry, West Germany argued that the lax standards that British chemical plants had gained by not accepting the emission limits would give British companies a price advantage over European competitors. In continuing the souring of its relationship with the EU, Britain was accused of making claims from the ERDF for projects that were supposed to be funded by British funds. The ERDF was established with the mindset that only projects that were not funded through national money could be claimed. Instead, Britain had decided to put in only claims that would allow it to recover the money it had itself put into the ERDF fund. To the EU, this attempt at recovering its own funds showcased Britains inability to have a community-based mentality. Finally, when it came time to look into energy policy again, Britain once again took the steps to make it an awkward partner with the EU. Britain continued to object the proposal of placing controls on the production and distribution of oil energy even when the EU attempted to accommodate each and every demand by the British government. Nevertheless, Britain continued to argue that it needed more time to look into the effects of such proposal, which angered all the member-states who wanted to obtain an accord on an outline of the policy. In discussing the upcoming conference of 1975, Britain showed again showed its disinterest in cooperating with the EU when it announced that it would not agree to be represented by a single EC seat at the Paris conference. Annoyed, Germany sent out a letter to the member-states that expressed anger at the lack of community within the EU as a result of Britains position on the seat allocation. Germany argued that with its weak economy, Britain was in no position to negotiate on these issues without any consequences (Davidson, 1975). Members-states continued to argue that the negative attitude of the British government hindered their ability to develop a common policy. While the Wilson administration tarnished Britains reputation within the EU, the emergence of James Callaghan as the next Prime Minister did little to make the EU hopeful of a better relationship with Britain. While Callaghan took a peaceful approach towards the EU early on, domestic hostility towards Britains membership in the EU continued to remain high; which led Callaghan to remain cautious in his relationship with the EU. The letter from Callaghan to Labour Secretary Ron Hayward, while positive at first, continued Britain on its negative relations with the EU. Callaghan claimed that the EU was not working in the interests of Britain and that the only reason for not withdrawing from the EU was that it would tarnish Britains relations with the United States. Callaghans statement in regards to the US angered member-states who complained that Britain was providing more attention to the United States than to its partners in the EU. A prominent theme in Callaghans government, US-Briti sh relations did little to lift Britains reputation within the EU, and its relations would continue to spiral downward with the rise of the Thatcher government. Rise of Thatcher: 1979 to 1990 Elected in 1979, the Thatcher government that rose to power following Callaghans Labour government became quickly aligned to the U.S. government, much to the anger of Britains EU partners who were against influence stemming from the United States. Nevertheless, by 1981, the European Union was suffering an economic downturn and was facing bankruptcy. In order to counter this problem, the EU proposed increasing the VAT ceiling by an additional one percent, which Britain strongly refused to accept. Relations between Britain and the EU continued to sour during this financial crisis because Britain continued to hold up any compromises and refused to agree on any proposals set forth by the EU. As the EU member-states grew irritated with Britains reservations on agreeing to new agricultural prices, member-states decided to call for a majority vote on the price levels. In retaliation, Britain protested this action, stating that it breached Britains right to utilize a veto on the topic. Never theless, already weary with Britains inability to compromise, member-states rejected Britains complaint because they believed that agricultural price levels were not of national interest for Britain. As a result of Britains lack of cooperation, France proposed removing Britain as a member of the EU and making it a nation with special status in the EU (Hansard, 1982). When the EU finally ran out of money in 1984, it proposed adding an additional budget of two billion to aid them for the rest of the year. As usual, Britain became an awkward partner by announcing that it would reject a supplementary budget, asserting that the EU should learn how to operate with the budget it had been already been given. Hearing this, member-states grew weary with the already unpopular British government and labelled Thatcher as being counter-productive to the success of the Union (The Economist, 1984). Member-states were disappointed with Britains primary concern over the budget rather than on the wellbeing of the EU partnership. Already blacklisted as a hardliner, Thatchers strong cooperation and identification with the U.S. did little to help her image with the EU. The Reagan Administration, on a hunt for terrorists in Syria and Libya, was set on placing restrictions on these two countries and urged Britain to join its cause. Britains involvement in urging EU sanctions against Syria left many EU member-states troubled by Britains strong partnership with the United States. While the early 1980s saw a more peaceful and relaxed time for the interactions between Britain and the EU, Britain did appear again as an awkward partner by the end of the 1980s. When proposals for a single European currency were suggested at the 1988 meeting in Hanover, Thatcher quickly responded that she would not take any steps of integrating the sterling pound into the EMS. Additionally, Thatcher rejected any ideas of creating a European central bank, stating that a central bank would require a central government to succeed, to which she argued that her government was not ready to accept a centralized European government. Nevertheless, frustrated by Britain, the EU decided to proceed without the British and establish a committee to look into the possible ways to strengthen the EMS (Hansard, 1988). Concerned at the route that the EU began taking, Thatcher publically denounced the committee and proclaimed that Britain would never agree to the establishment of a European Central Ba nk, a statement which continued to strain relations between Britain and the EU (Ibid, 1988). When discussing a European technological cooperation budget in 1986, Britain once again was labelled as the EUs awkward partner in its refusal to accept the amount of funding proposed by the other member-states. The EU believed that it would be giving Britain more value for its investment in research and development; nevertheless, Britain would not budge from its original budget proposal (Peel, 1987). Once Britain backed down and agreed to fund the program in 1987, member-states had become frustrated with the termination of the program as a result of lack of funding from the British (Sharp, 1987). When the EU expressed interest in reviving the plans for the European Defence Community in 1987, Thatcher warned against the idea in fear that the establishment of such defence policy would counter the links that the EU and Britain had established with the United States. These strong views from Thatcher made Britain seem to be uncooperative with the goals set forth by the EU. While some member-states were also unwilling to establish an EDC, the tone that Thatcher used which made her sound more concerned with Britains relationship with the United States made Britain an awkward partner for the EU. Her focus on preserving ties with the United States rather than worrying about European interests greatly hindered her ability to work with her EU partners. At home, Margaret Thatcher began facing attacks from the Labour party, who accused her of attempting to slow the development of the European Union (Independent, 1989). They argued that the EU would continue its development with or without Britain and that it would be dangerous for Britain to be left as a second-class member (Independent, 1989). The public was further enraged by Thatchers tone against the EU; numbers in the country showed that the public had become more pro-Europe since the referendum in 1975 (Independent, 1989). As a result, Thatcher saw herself being forced to become much more neutral and conciliatory towards the EU. While members of her cabinet continued to attack the EU on monetary policy, Thatcher decided to accept only the first condition of the Delors proposal for the creation of a monetary union. Thus, throughout 1989 and 1990, the proposal for a monetary union became a primary theme for both the EU and Britain. Due to the fact that Thatcher personally opposed Britains membership in the ERM, government officials quickly grew angry with her stance and many subsequently resigned from their posts. Officials argued that Thatchers views were not consistent with the views of the British government and that by remaining out of the ERM, Britain would be unable to take part in the discussions surrounding a monetary union. With a government pressing for entry into the ERM, Thatcher eventually agreed that Britain would become a member of the ERM on October 5, 1990 (Elliott, 2005). While Thatcher agreed to enter the ERM, her partnership with the EU once again became awkward when she refused to allow the EU to move to the second stage of the Delors report. Much to the anger of Parliament and her cabinet, Thatcher argued that national interests could not allow her to hand over the sterling to the EU (Hansard, 1990). As a result of her stubbornness, the EU saw Britain as an awkward partner and Thatcher lost her Deputy PM, who resigned in frustration. Her Deputy PM argued that the uncooperative tone that Thatcher had taken with the EU would make it more difficult for Britain to hold influence over the future of the monetary union. Additionally, he blamed Thatcher for the inflation that Britain was suffering as a result of her disinterest in joining the ERM (Independent, 1990). The resignation of Geoffrey Howe slowly gave way to the end of Thatchers reign as Prime Minister and rise to the government of John Major in November 1990, which hoped to build better relatio ns with the European Union. Conservative Government of 1990 to 1997 While the Major administration that took over tried to mend relations between Britain and the EU, it constantly found itself returning towards the hostile relationship found under the reign of Thatcher. In 1991, President Delors provided Britain an opportunity to accept an opt-out clause in regards to accepting a single currency. While Thatcher still argued against the concept of accepting any compromise on monetary union, Major felt that an opt-out clause in the Maastricht Treaty would help Britain overcome its hesitation on the topic. Nevertheless, because only Britain was given this opt-out opportunity, it was again placed as an awkward partner as a result of its unwillingness to completely cooperate with the union. By 1992, Britain had assumed the EU Presidency and now found itself strongly on the defence of the Maastricht Treaty. Major believed that standing in complete support of ratification of the Treaty would show the EU that Britain was dedicated to its role within the EU. At the same time, he believed that the treaty would hinder attempts at centralizing the EU. Nonetheless, Delors interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty as an opportunity for the EU to become a federalist state upset both Britain and many of the EU member-states. As a result, Denmarks referendum led to a defeat of the treaty, which shocked many nations, including Britain. Consequently, Major now found himself advocating the ratification of a treaty that every other member-state had wanted to renegotiate. Thatcher condemned Majors support for the Maastricht Treaty and called for a British referendum on the treaty. With trouble at home, Major faced anger and criticism from member-states who claimed that Britain continued t o remain focused on her self-interests and ignored the problems facing the EU as a whole. Fear that France would vote against the Treaty gave way to a loss of confidence in the ERM, which led to the pound sterling being forced out of the ERM as a result of Britain being able to maintain the sterling above its set lower limit (Hansard, 1992). This latest development in the problems during the British presidency only served to fuel Britains role as the EUs awkward partner. As a result of resentment towards the EU within Britain, Major struggled to maintain positive relations with the EU; the nominations for the President of the Commission in June 1994 showcased Britains struggle and awkwardness as a partner. At the meeting, Major vetoed the appointment of Jean-Luc Dehaene, announcing that he would never agree to his nomination (Barber, 1994). EU member-states grew angry by Britains stance, claiming that Britain was driven by its domestic interests rather than its interests with the EU. Britain became the awkward partner when the Council was forced to agree on the nomination of Prime Minister Jacques Santer of Luxemburg instead of their original nomination. Majors actions against Germanys nomination of Dehaene quickly deteriorated Britains relationship with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl. What started as a desire for complete EU cooperation ended with Britain having a tarnished reputation amongst its EU partners. Majors actions against the EU, through his threats, vetoes, stances and public speeches, led to his government being isolated from the politics of the EU. While a large portion of the problems with the EU emerged as a result of influence stemming from domestic policy at home, Majors angry tone towards the EU over the election of a new commission President, and over the mad cow crisis of 1996 only served to further distance Britain from the EU. Britains Present Day Status Though this report only discusses the governments of Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, and Major, it is important to note that despite the fact that relations have somewhat improved between Britain and the EU, there still remains tension between the two partners to make Britain continue its path as an awkward partner. While the Blair and Brown administrations have improved Britains relationship with the EU, there still exists an awkward relationship between the two partners. Though political parties have change, Britain continues to maintain its position as the EUs awkward partner as a result of the domestic fear in accepting the EUs role and influence in British politics; the strong sense of maintaining national pride and through the rejection of European federalism; and finally, as a result of the continued focus on maintaining a strong relationship with the United States. Nevertheless, while domestic uncertainty towards European Union has remained prevalent in Britain, one can say that the EU has indeed had an impact on British politics and Britains foreign policy. Once known for its dominant decision-making role in international affairs and in its own domestic policies, Britain has shifted its view of global politics to that where it has realized that its relationship with the United States and the EU are equally important for the success of the nation. Thus, while Britain still remains an awkward partner to the EU, the steps and actions that Britain has taken in the two most recent administrations and with any luck in the upcoming administration can be claimed as an attempt by the British nation to take slow and calculated steps towards ultimately embracing its membership within the European Union.

An Analysis of the First Paragraph of O’Connor’s The Artificial Nigger

An Analysis of the First Paragraph of O’Connor’s The Artificial Nigger ?In â€Å"The Artificial Nigger,† Flannery O’Connor commingles characteristic Christian imagery with themes evocative of her Southern setting. In this essay, a close reading of the first paragraph of this story elucidates the subtle ways in which O’Connor sets up these basic themes of redemption and forgiveness. An additional paragraph will examine the ramifications of this reading on the intertwined racial aspects of the story, which are connected by a common theme of master/servant imagery, which is integral to the first paragraph. In this story, the key character is named Mr. Head, which immediately signals to the reader that this character is suggestive of rationality and perhaps especially pride (as in the expression â€Å"having a big head†). This is appropriate given that Mr. Head’s change throughout the story will emphatically revolve around his spiritual and Christian-oriented awareness of the plight of man and the problem of pridefulness. Mr. Head â€Å"awakens† (indeed, the whole story regards his awakening) in the night to a room â€Å"full of moonlight.† From the very beginning, elements of light and dark are vying in the story’s background, and in this case, it is a light that shines through the darkness. O’Connor, through the uses of dashes, alerts the reader to the moonlight being â€Å"the color of silver,† the first of many silver/gray references throughout the story. It is hard not to equate this references to the thirty pieces of silver that Judas received for betraying Jesus. Such a reference is consistent with the story’s themes of betrayal and forgiveness (even though Mr. Head’s denial of his grandson Nelson is perhaps more reminiscent of Pete... ...nship between blacks and whites exist without such interchangeability. Such a reading suggests that African Americans are often the vehicle through which Southerners experience powerful lessons of hatred (as in Nelson’s first experience with the black man on the train), pride (when Nelson witnesses his grandfather’s witty rejoinder to the stuffy black waiter), sexuality (Nelson’s run-in with the black temptress in the Atlanta ghetto), and even redemption (as they witness the statue in the story’s penultimate moment). No matter that Nelson has only recently learned what a â€Å"nigger† is, never mind that the statue itself is plaster and one eye is â€Å"entirely white† – the overturning of the master/servant relationship is only possible when firmly on the white side of the segregated line; this reality ensures that all the â€Å"niggers† in this story remain â€Å"artificial.†

Is Aristotle the Father of Logic

I believe so. Aristotle became known as the Father of Logic by demonstrating that logic was more than just an equivalent to verbal reasoning but an important tool of investigation, a way to learn everything about everything. He was the first to introduce scientific thought into daily processes. Even today, with hundreds of advances in technology and available resources, scientists find that observations he had documented two-thousand years ago are correct. For twenty years Aristotle studied with Plato and became a prominent figure at his academy. But yet after so many years of collaboration between the two, many people including Plato’s nephew Speusippus believed that Aristotle’s ideals varied greatly from Platos and indeed they did. Plato presumed that the â€Å"ideal† form of an person or animal is the result of a â€Å"sensory† world and that every man knew and understood his place in life. Whereas Aristotle believed that the â€Å"form† consisted of several characteristics together as a whole, which eventually was proven and known as DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) as well as believing that a man should create his own place in the world. Consequently, Aristotle left the academy after Plato’s death. Several years later he developed his own school known as the Lyceum at which he taught for thirteen years in a rather peculiar fashion. His lectures were offered to those that were willing to listen as he paced up and down the peripatos outside the school. His works included a vast array of subject matter including physics, biology, psychology, politics and more. In the subject of Logic, he developed the foundation of categories, a way to classify each element of an argument. He further demonstrated that the core of logical thought is a sequence of three propositions in which the first and second imply the last, known as a syllogism. These thoughts have stood the test of time and have only been slightly revised throughout the centuries. It is believed that Aristotle wrote four-hundred books in his lifetime. However, his work was hidden from the world for many, many years when he died in 322BC. Only a portion of them were discovered in 100BC, unfortunately ruined by dampness and moths. Originally taken to Athens and then to Rome, his works gained interest and were used as textbooks by Roman scholars and are still an important influence in learning today. References http://philosophy.sean.tripod.com/id17.htm http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/aris.htm http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/syllogism.aspx#1E1-syllogis

Horror Story Example Essay

The girl stumbled and rolled down the grassy hill, pulling her fiance with her. For a few minutes they fell, rolling on top of each other before landing in a heap on the soft sand below. The woman looked at the man below her, affection filling her eyes as she smiled subconsciously. â€Å"What are you smiling at? † He inquired flipping her over so he was on top of her. â€Å"Just wondering if why on earth I’m marrying someone as ugly as you; do you think it’s too late to pull out? † The girl answered giggling. â€Å"Oh really!† Her fiance answered standing up, grabbing the girl’s waist and spinning her around. â€Å"And yes, it is too late to pull out. The wedding is in two days whether you like it or not. † He added defiantly, placing the dizzy woman on the ground. She hiccupped, trying to gain her balance. Her fiance let out a thunderous laugh, she glared at him. â€Å"Don’t laugh at me! It’s your fault! † She groaned, folding her arms across her chest. â€Å"The alcohol’s got to your head then? Oh well, more fun for me! † He said, waggling his eyebrows suggestively. She rolled her eyes and ran in the direction of the sea. â€Å"Race you to the water! † She called over her shoulder childishly. She heard her fiance chuckle from behind her as she reached the water. She started walking further out to sea; her heart skipped a beat as her fiance tackled her to the ground. She yelped, a sudden spark of pain running through her foot. â€Å"Ow! Adam, you’ve made me cut my foot! Thanks! † The woman complained, playfully slapping Adam’s chest. He looked at her, a mischievous glint in his eye. â€Å"Oh, I’m sorry Nicky. Should I kiss it better?† Her fiance asked, grabbing her leg with tender hands. â€Å"No you should not! Help me up and let’s swim! † Nicky said excitedly. Adam lifted her out of the shallow water and carried her the rest of the way out, before very carefully dropping her back into the water. Together they swam around in the salty, inky black sea. Nicky felt a strong force knock her left foot from below her. â€Å"Adam, did you just knock my foot? † She asked him, worried something was under her. â€Å"Nope wasn’t me! I wouldn’t worry about it my love. Nothing out here can hurt you.† He swam over to her, grabbing her hand in his. All thoughts and worries disappeared from thought as they kissed passionately in the moonlight. â€Å"I love you Nicky foster. † Her fiance stated truthfully, gazing into her eyes. â€Å"I lo-â€Å"Suddenly they were pulled under water. Nicky let go of Adams hand and swam to the surface, looking around her frantically for her fiance. She quickly regained her breath before going back under water but he couldn’t see a thing in the murky, dark depths of the sea. Nicky resurfaced. Panic clouding her mind. Unexpectedly a hand rose out of the water, she let out a gasp of shock as she pulled at the hand and screamed, pure horror now coursing through her veins. The object in her hands belonged on her Adam’s arm. The bone was exposed, muscle and flesh was ragged and torn, fresh warm blood was dripping onto Nicky’s hand. Salty tears ran down her face, mixing with the gentle current. She threw the hand into the sea and tried to swim for shore, but her left leg was searing with pain. A wave of nausea passed over her as Nicky, teary eyed and heartbroken felt down her leg. To her utter terror, her leg had been ripped to shreds, blood pulsing from the stub. She panicked, thrashing around in the cold water. Swiftly a great force pulled her under. She could feel her bones being crunched, her organs being squished. The sea around her turned red with her blood. She screamed, only small bubbles of precious oxygen escaping her bloodless lips. She closed her eyes and tried to imagine Adam, the sweet loving man she was going to marry. Instead all she could think of was images of his ripped, lifeless body. These images haunted her to her death.

Political Unrest in Colombia essays

Political Unrest in Colombia essays When most people think of the problems in Colombia, they believe they are drug related. The truth, however, is that Colombia has more problems than that. Over the last 38 years, the country has been involved in a civil war in which leftist rebels have been pitted against the government and other paramilitary groups. However, the paramilitary groups are now leaning towards peace talks and a cease-fire. It is possible that the last thirty-eight years of violence are about to come to a close. Back in the 1980s, The United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, a paramilitary group that called themselves the AUC, arose to defend the government against rebel kidnappers. This right-wing group was composed of drug traffickers and ranchers, and became increasingly brutal to both rebels and civilians as time progressed. These people have even been labeled as terrorists by the United States government, and are wanted on charges of drug trafficking. The leftist rebels groups, The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and The National Liberation Army (ELN), began focusing their attention on attacks directed at the AUC. Thirty-eight years later, they are still fighting that same fight. All of that could change within the next few weeks, though. Carlos Castano, who commands about 70 percent of all paramilitary fighters including the AUC, has declared a cease-fire against the rebel groups. He claims the cease-fire is due to the fact that the government of President Alvaro Uribe is serious about cracking down on the rebels, and the paramilitary groups are no longer necessary. The only stipulation to the cease-fire is a request to the government for a guarantee that the AUC members will be protected from attacks by the rebels. Castano also holds that if attacked, the members will defend themselves. Castano claims that the AUC leaders are ready to sit down with the rebels and discuss a peace treaty. As a second leader of th...

John Deere Invented a Better Plow

John Deere Invented a Better Plow John Deere was an Illinois blacksmith and manufacturer. Early in his career, Deere and an associate designed a series of farm plows. In 1837, on his own, John Deere designed the first cast steel plow that greatly assisted the Great Plains farmers. The large plows made for cutting the tough prairie ground were called grasshopper plows. The plow was made of wrought iron and had a steel share that could cut through sticky soil without clogging. By 1855, John Deeres factory was selling over 10,000 steel plows a year. In 1868, John Deeres business was incorporated as Deere Company, which is still in existence today. John Deere became a millionaire selling his steel plows. History of Plows The first real inventor of a practicable plow was Charles Newbold, of Burlington County, New Jersey, to whom a patent for a cast-iron plow was issued in June 1797. But the farmers would have none of it. They said it poisoned the soil and fostered the growth of weeds. One David Peacock received a patent in 1807, and two others later. Newbold sued Peacock for infringement and recovered damages. Pieces of Newbolds original plow are in the museum of the New York Agricultural Society at Albany. Another inventor of plows was Jethro Wood, a blacksmith of Scipio, New York, who received two patents, one in 1814 and the other in 1819. His plow was of cast iron, but in three parts, so that a broken part might be renewed without purchasing an entire plow. This principle of standardization marked a great advance. The farmers by this time were forgetting their former prejudices, and many plows were sold. Though Woods original patent was extended, infringements were frequent, and he is said to have spent his entire property in prosecuting them. Another skilled blacksmith, William Parlin, at Canton, Illinois, began in about 1842 making plows that he loaded upon a wagon and peddled through the country. Later his establishment grew large. Another John Lane, a son of the first, patented in 1868 a soft-center steel plow. The hard but brittle surface was backed by softer and more tenacious metal, to reduce the breakage. The same year James Oliver, a Scotch immigrant who had settled at South Bend, Indiana, received a patent for the chilled plough. By an ingenious method, the wearing surfaces of the casting were cooled more quickly than the back. The surfaces which came in contact with the soil had a hard, glassy surface, while the body of the plow was of tough iron. From small beginnings, Olivers establishment grew great, and the Oliver Chilled Plow Works at South Bend is today [1921] one of the largest and most favorably known privately owned. From the single plowit was only a step to two or more plows fastened together, doing more work with approximately the same manpower. The sulky plow, on which the plowman rode, made his work easier, and gave him great control. Such plows were certainly in use as early as 1844, perhaps earlier. The next step forward was to substitute for horses a traction engine.