School Uniforms Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Schools today aren't in the best condition. There is teasing, violence, discrimination, cliques, and poverty. There is much to say about how having mandatory school uniforms will help these problems. My question is, will uniforms help these problems enough to dismiss the hurt that they would cause? I say the uniforms do little to help.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Having uniforms would stop the teasing and discrimination about clothing, but there is more to tease or discriminate someone about rather than just clothing. Such as hygiene, looks, personality, intelligence, race, and the list goes on. So unless people somehow find a way to be perfect in everyone's opinion, teasing and discrimination won't stop.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  As for violence, it's the same story. Uniforms would only stop the smallest percentage. In some ways uniforms actually make violence less preventable by eliminating one major warning sign. For example the black trench coats that were worn in by the murderers at Colorado's Columbine High School shooting. Of course I'm not saying we should arrest anyone who wears a trench coat, but the way that someone dresses can say a lot about their personality.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  If you're thinking that uniforms will end symbols of being in a gang such as gang colors, think about how many other ways that a gang member could symbolize that they were in a gang such as rolling up your sleeve or leaving out the tag on y...

Introduction to Economics Essay

The variation in the price of the houses from various cities can be attributed to many different economic factors that could affect the price of the commodity or merchandise. There are sometimes other indirect factors that affect the price of a commodity or merchandise, like the rising of the price of crude oil. Crude oil serves as an input for most of the industries in our economy, and thus, if the price of the crude oil increases, commodities that use crude oil as a part of the production costs would also have to increase so as not to affect their revenue. Well of course in this paper; we are going to give more attention on the reason behind the differences in the prices of houses on every city as well as finding the root of the problem. Based from realtors. com, I observed that houses with the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms differ in terms of prices (realtor. com, 2007). As I analyze the given data on the site, I come up with the following possible answer to the problem. The reason behind the differences in the prices of houses from city to city is based on the type of living that the city has. The higher the standard of living would mean that the citizens there are more capable of buying expensive houses or appliances. Whereas, those cities that has lower standard of living denotes that the person living in those place has a lower â€Å"willingness to pay† than with the higher standard of living. Because of this, the firms in the city with lower standard of living would be forced to set their prices reasonable to maintain their market share. Another reason would be, those cities with lower standard of living has only a simple design for their houses as compared to those people living in the â€Å"rich† city and because of this, only those â€Å"rich† cities can afford to buy such beautiful house. With this, raw material in making the house become expensive to match the kind of living the citizen has. 2] The Effects of Supply and Demand If we are going to graph demand and supply, we could see that the demand is downward sloping and supply is upward sloping. Refer to appendix page, at first when there are no distortion in the economy happens, the supply and demand for houses are in the equilibrium [the intersection of Po and Qo. Now suppose that the demand for houses increased due to higher incomes of the citizen, then, the demand curve will shift to the right while maintaining the original supply curve. With this, we now arrived at a higher price level (Zilberman, 2002). It is logically for the house producers to increase their prices because people demand more of houses and they can afford to buy houses even if you raise your charge. Now let’s go back to the equilibrium position, as for the effect of supply on prices, suppose that the firms can now produce more houses because they become more competitive and efficient, with this, the supply curve will shift to the right while maintaining the original demand curve. As we can see in the graph, the prices now decreased due to the inverse relationship of demand to supply (Zilberman, 2002). According to the law of supply, if the supply of a certain commodity increased, its demand would go to fall. This is the reason why demand is downward sloping while supply is upward sloping (investopedia. com, 2007). Well, it is rational for the producers to lower down their prices to attract more customers to purchase their surplus in the production since they produce more than the needed number in the market. In short, the effect of demand to prices would be positive and negative for supply; this is based on the producer’s point of view most of the relationships here would be reversed if we would use the point of view of the consumers. REFERENCES investopedia.com. (2007). Economics Basics: Demand and Supply [Electronic Version]. Retrieved August 19, 2007 from http://www. investopedia. com/university/economics/economics3. asp. realtor. com. (2007). Home Plan HPG-1855 Details [Electronic Version], 1. Retrieved August 19, 2007 from http://www. homeplans. com/exec/action/plans/browsemode/details/filter/PlnID. 24346/hspos/hsnet/page/1/planid/24346/section/homeplans. Zilberman, D. (2002). Market Policies and Incentives [Electronic Version], 1. Retrieved August 19, 2007 from http://images. google. com. ph/imgres? imgurl=http://are. berkeley. edu/courses/PMB10/fall2005/Lecture19files/Lectur17. gif&imgrefurl=http://are. berkeley. edu/courses/PMB10/fall2005/Lecture-19. htm&h=487&w=576&sz=6&hl=en&start=18&tbnid=5Ht0lrADVcB2LM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=134&

The Defeat Of The South - 1429 Words

Many historians offer various reasons for the defeat of the South (Confederacy) in its battle against the North (Union) during the Civil War. Some of the theories historians offer include the overriding Union power in people, manufacturing, raw material and other reserves; financial failure, due to the Union blockade of ports and ruining the railway structure; political infighting among the Confederacy; and persistent loyalty to states’ rights causing opposition between the government in Richmond and the assorted Southern states. This paper’s purpose is to espouse a theory that a combination of these factors provides a thorough explanation as to why the South lost the Civil War (1861-1865). The North maintained staggering strength throughout the Civil War; the North had the advantage of numbers and skilled generals in regards to overriding Union power in people. Civil War historian, William C. Davis, suggests that the South possessed only one good army general, Robert E. Lee; whereas the North nurtured along people like Ulysses S. Grant, William T. Sherman, Philip Sheridan and George H. Thomas (Zebrowski, 1995). The North also benefited from the leadership of Abraham Lincoln who became president of the United States in 1860. Due to the deluge of immigrants pouring into the North, the population in the North enormously outnumbered the Confederacy population. The Union army called 2.1 million Northerners to arms to fight; whereas the South rallied 880,000 men to serve in theShow MoreRelatedCommunist Leader Joseph Stalin : The Death Of One Man1661 Words   |  7 PagesCivil War, a four year strife over sectionalism. While both sides suffered heavy losses, the Union was ultimately able to defeat the Confederates States of America in 1865 after the Confederates surrendered. Nonetheless, such defeat could have been avoided in the case that the South held true to their values and exhibited the resilience which many believed characterized the South. All in all, the Civil War could have become a victory for the Confederate States of America, in retrospect, on the basisRead MoreSouth Vs. The South By William Freehling1461 Words   |  6 Pages The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These â€Å"anti-Confederates,† as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southernRead MoreWilliam Freehling, The South Vs. South1476 Words   |  6 PagesSurname 1 Parler S/s 04/20/2015 William Freehling, The South Vs. The South The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These ?anti-Confederates,? as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the ConfederacyRead MoreOld Man and the Sea A Man Can Be Destroyed but Not Defeated627 Words   |  3 Pageswhen it looks like hope is lost, but is never defeated. Destruction means to completely ruin or spoil. Santiago experienced this destruction. It started with 84 days of not catching anything. He was being crushed but his spirit and pride prevented defeat. During the fight with the marlin, he physically was being destroyed. He had a choice to spare his life and let the fish go but he knew he had to overcome his destruction so he kept at it and caught the fish. And finally, the fight with the sharksRead MoreCommunist Leader Joseph Stalin : The Death Of One Man1246 Words   |  5 PagesCivil War, a four year strife over sectionalism. While both sides suffered heavy losses, the Union was ultimately able to defeat the Confederates States of America in 1865 after the Confederates surrendered. Nonetheless, such defeat could have been avoided in the case that the South held true to their values and exhibited the resilience which many believed characterized the South. All in all, the Civil War could have become a victory for the Confederates St ates of America, in retrospect, on the basisRead MoreThe Battle Of Gettysburg As A Turning Point Of Civil War1048 Words   |  5 Pagesfor the Union who had the lower hand in the war and he conventionally considered this battle to be a turning point in Civil War (pg.147). He also stated that Gettysburg was the northern most offensive marching point for the Confederate and after the defeat, never again they were able to get the strength to carry the war due to the huge loss in manpower (pg.148). He also constantly reminded of how formidable the Confederate’s army was in comparison to the Union’s yet at the end, the battle is believedRead MoreWhy the North Won the Civil War by David Donald: Reflection on the economic, military, diplomatic, political, and social reasons the South lost.1314 Words   |  6 PagesWhy the North Won the Civil War Historians have argued inconclusively for years over the prime reason for Confederate defeat in the Civil War. The book Why the North Won the Civil War outlines five of the most agreed upon causes of Southern defeat, each written by a highly esteemed American historian. The author of each essay does acknowledge and discuss the views of the other authors. However, each author also goes on to explain their botheration and disagreement with their opposition. The purposeRead MoreThe Confederate War : How Popular Will, Nationalism, And Military Strategy1360 Words   |  6 Pagesextraordinary scholarly work entitled The Confederate War: How Popular Will, Nationalism, and Military Strategy Could Not Stave off Defeat. Throughout the course of his work, Gallagher takes issue with the model put forth by many contemporary historians that the collapse of the Confederacy was more a case of internal decay on the Southern home front rather than military defeat on the field of battle. As a persuasi ve alternative, Gallagher contended that these historians are guilty of failing to realizeRead MoreThe Unions Ability to Conduct Total Warfare and Confederate Defeat931 Words   |  4 PagesThe Unions Ability to Conduct Total Warfare and Confederate Defeat The American War for Independence was a successful struggle of a smaller nation fighting a larger, more powerful force. However, in the case of the American Civil War, the larger more powerful Union defeated the southern Confederacy. The Union won the Civil War because the Confederacy could not sustain a war of attrition in the Napoleonic style that evolved into Total War. This paper will briefly explain what Napoleonic warfareRead MoreThe Battle Of The War1498 Words   |  6 PagesConfederates enter the war with a belief that would also sustain them during war years and ultimately shape the south after the war, a durable belief in their invincibility. Even after major turning points of the war, diehard Rebels continued to express a resilient belief in their invincibility. They were unconquerable and they truly stuck it about because they expected to win. Their ethos; beliefs of being highly favored children of God, attitudes of invincibility (homegrown and those spread