Global Competitiveness Essays -- Economics Business Essays

Global Competitiveness As the world becomes a smaller place, economies are shifting away from national economies to global economies. Robert Reich, Ira Magaziner, and Michael Porter each offer a different view of how a company remains competitive in this global economy. Reich stresses the difference between American-owned corporations and American competitiveness. Magaziner highlights the growing need of innovation and the avoidance of national complacency. Porter focuses on his diamond of national competitiveness. While Whirlpool is an American owned company—the company’s headquarters and upper management all operate out of America—the majority of the company’s factories and production lies overseas in South America and Asia. Similarly, while Toyota is a Japanese owned company, it has increasingly manufactured its cars within US borders. Whirlpool is an American company but does not benefit American competitiveness. Reich maintains that â€Å"foreign-owned businesses that benefit national competitiveness most are those that commit their engine of competitiveness to the host country.† Whirlpool may be American run, but Toyota’s factories in America create American jobs and train an American workforce, both commodities in national competitiveness. Reich further emphasizes the importance of a skilled work force: â€Å"A nation’s most important competitive asset is the skills and learning of its work force†¦[and]†¦National policies should reward any global corporation that invests in the American work force.† Stressing the skilled work force, as Magaziner has noticed, is not just an American necessity. Magaziner gives two examples of countries who take national pride in training the work force: Korea and Singapore. Bo... ...ompanies cannot compete, Tonelson gives two credible reasons for trade barriers. First, infant industries will have a chance to develop and one day be able to compete on a global arena. Second, hurting industries will have a chance to revamp their productions, regain efficiency and once again compete with the foreign product. On the other hand, Krugman believes that most nations use trade deficit and international competitiveness as a political ploy to impose trade barriers. Each country’s economy depends on the population within the country, not on what other countries are doing. Nations should thus not impose any trade barriers so that the foreign competition could both stimulate and replace inefficient companies. Meanwhile, nations should upgrade their workforce to efficiently produce goods that ship to other countries, creating a mutually beneficial cycle.

The British Politics

Structural-Functionalism in politics states that the political system is composed of different institutions which includes interest groups, political parties, government bodies and a bureaucratic machinery. In nature, this political model is conservative as it is not responsive to political changes. It’s first objective is to ensure its own survival (London). In British politics, its root for survival had been visible over time.Its parliamentary development over the centuries, and the emergence of the two-house parliament is a way of coping to the changing political calls intended for survival. Interest articulation and aggregation in this light has been effective because the citizens of the country and the parliament as well is anchored on the basis of their â€Å"shared sense of justice†. One which is believed that they are accountable for the laws that are being enacted. The parliament system has gone through many changes over time.A strength in the system can be att ributed to the fact that since it has gone through many eras, changes has occurred and in a way, those changes have improved the system as a whole. The system is now well-established and it since leadership in the higher level goes from generation to generation, it is stable and the government form and leaders will not change as often as other political systems do. However, its weaknesses lie on the same thing that its governance is being inherited.It may be the case that the next heir for the position will not suit perfectly to become a leader. Or that the leaders shall use their powers and family prestige in pursuit of their own interest. Thus it is inevitable that future leaders may make a mistake due to incapacity or selfishness that the hereditary process of leadership entails. Works Cited A Parliament for England. October 9, 2007 London, Scott. On Structural Functionalism. October 9, 2007

Should You Take Both the SAT and ACT

Taking a college admissions exam like the SAT or ACT is nerve-wracking enough without having to figure out if you should be taking  both  the SAT and ACT. There are schools of thought on both sides. Some people advise taking both exams, while others eschew that idea completely, stating you should take just one.   Well, to which advice should you listen?   To help make matters a bit clearer, here are the basic arguments for both sides and some questions to ask yourself at the end to help you make your decision.   Why You SHOULD Take Both the SAT and ACT Clearly, many people believe that you should take both of these college admissions exams, and the folks recommending both arent just test prep companies. (I think we can agree that any recommendation to take both tests from a test prep company comes from a group with a vested interest in you doing so.) Here are some unbiased reasons it makes sense to take both the SAT and ACT. If you take both, you will have more test date options. Since the ACT and SAT are operated independently of each other, they are offered on different test dates. If you have double the opportunities to take a college admissions exam, then you wont have to cancel important plans you may have like a college tour, a tournament game, or that much-anticipated great-Aunts birthday party if those plans happen to fall on your test date. Plus, ACT and the College Board schedule test  dates within just a few weeks of each other (The SAT is on June 3 and the ACT is on June 10, for example), so you wont miss an admissions deadline if you need a retake. Instead of retaking the same test, you can take the other test much sooner.  If you take both, you will give the college admissions office  more info about you. And lets hope that its good, right? If you should decide to take both the SAT and ACT and score well on both, you have demonstrated that youre capable of high-level reasoning across a variety of different question types, which is an admirable quality.  If you take both, you have a backup plan. Lets say you decided to take the ACT and something terrible happened on  test day: you bombed it, spectacularly. You woke up feeling woozy, so you couldnt think about anything else during the test except your upset stomach. Or you got an eyelash in your left eye and it bothered you. Or you were just out of sorts because of a fight you got into with your mom. If youve signed up to take the SAT a few weeks later, then no sweat. Your terrible performance on the ACT can be a bad memory and you can move on (with all the first-time tester jitters out) to a new test, with hopefully, better results.   Why You SHOULD NOT Take Both the SAT and ACT There is always a flip side to every coin, isnt there? Those reasons above are pretty great for taking both the SAT and ACT. However, if you read below, you will see that there are also some stellar reasons for just choosing one or the other and giving it a go.   If you DONT take both, you can master one exam.  Each college admissions exam is different from the other. There are different test strategies to master for the SAT and entirely different test strategies to master the ACT. The essays are significantly different. Dont even get me started on the science sections. Oh wait. The SAT doesnt even have a section devoted entirely to science. See what we  mean? Mastery of one test takes time; if you spend part of your time mastering one test and part of your precious study time mastering another, then you are reducing the total mastery time for one of the tests by half. Thats just math. Pick your battle and dive into the fray with both guns blazing. Not just one.  If you DONT take both, you will spend less cash. Face it. Signing up for a class for the ACT or buying books for the SAT takes money. It just does. Yes, there are tons of free places for test prep, but many of you will not opt for the free stuff. You will buy the books and hire the tutors and take the classes. Think of the cash. Then double it. If you try to master both exams with costly test prep aids, then you will be spending a significant amount of money to do so. At  last check, some of the test prep classes can run up into the thousands. Private tutors cost even more. If you focus on one test, youll reduce the expense.  If you DONT take both, you will spend less time preparing. As a high school student, you are probably pushed to the max with your time. Maybe you are holding down a job while trying to make good grades. Maybe you play sports, participate in clubs, volunteer, and spend time at church or with friends on the weekends. Preparing for two separate exams would really double the amount of prep time you would need for an exam that is just designed to show college admissions officers how you might fare in their colleges one day.   How to Decide Since there are positives and negatives to both options, how do you decide which option is best for you?Ask yourself the following questions to help you decide whether or not you should take both the SAT and ACT or just one.   How much time and cash do you have to pour into two tests? If youre on the short end in one or both of those areas, perhaps just focusing on one is better for you.How well do you typically perform on standardized tests? If you typically tend to do well on multiple choice tests, no matter the content, then taking both could work to your advantage.  How willing are your parents to fork out the registration fees for both tests? If your parents are on the heck to the no party bus, then perhaps youd better take this easy, 10-question ACT vs. SAT quiz to see which college entrance exam suits you best and go with it. You dont want to upset your parents!  How competitive is the college or university to which youre applying? Heading to Harvard? Yale? Columbia? Cal Tech? MIT? Then perhaps youd better take both tests. Nearly a third of all college applicants going to big-name schools take both exams. You want college admissions officers to be able to compare apples to apples when considerin g your application, dont you? Yes, you do.   The Bottom Line No matter which option you go with - both or just one - you  must  take preparing for the SAT and/or the ACT a priority in your life during your junior and senior years. These exams are not tests to waltz into unprepared. You can get cash for your college admissions scores via scholarships and admittance into schools that may have been out of your reach otherwise.