International Trade Essay Example for Free

International Trade Essay Free trade is an agreement between two or more countries to eliminate tariffs on all trade transactions that are taking place between them. The recent kinds of agreements do not only curtail the interference of governments that are responsible for levying the various tariffs and taxes, but there are more commitments included in the agreements such as customs co-operation, the protection of intellectual property, foreign direct investment and other factors that will enhance commerce between those that sign the freed trade agreement (FTA) (Groomsman and Helpmate, 1995). Among many advantages such agreements usher in, it had been possible to integrate the economies of the participants of the free trade agreements that will avail mutual benefits such as increased export choices. Importing countries will also have more choices of products to import. Furthermore, the law of co-operative advantage states that participants in FTAs always attain mutual gain from exchanging goods and services (Krugman, 1991). When there is a free trade agreement between two or more countries, what takes place is the price the members of the participant countries are paying are the outcome of real supply and demand, in their turn they would be responsible for determining what kind of resource allocation should be employed. One thing that distinguishes free trades from other kinds of trades is none of the participants are allowed to introduce any kind of artificial pricing because of protectionism tendency, where governments cannot intervene to adjust supply and demand by introducing restrictions that could raise or bring down the price of goods and services. The main aim of free trade is to eliminate such protectionism tendencies so that what will determine what should be bought and sold and at what price would be demand and supply (Landsburg, 2005). When that is not the case governments can always intervene by introducing subsidies, tariffs, taxes, and non-tariff barriers where they can introduce legislation or quotas, or it is possible for two or more governments to come up with bilateral or multilateral agreements that allow a preferential treatment for the participants only, by disallowing others to take advantage of what such agreements entail. When there is a bilateral or multilateral agreement between countries the first step is eliminating all taxes and tariffs (Hoda, 2002). However, bilateral agreements that take place between two countries do not apply for other countries where if the two countries could agree among themselves about what kind of tariff and tax to introduce, those agreements apply only to those two countries. If the agreement is multilateral and between three or more countries the agreed upon tariffs and taxes apply only to those participating countries, whereas others whether it is a bilateral or multilateral agreement are not participants will always pay the regularly required tariffs and taxes. The governments of such countries that have FTA between them are free to introduce any kind of trade barriers on others for any reason that serves them a purpose. Therefore, it is possible to look at many bilateral and multilateral agreements around the world where for example the US and Canada used to have a bilateral agreement between them before Mexico was added and the agreement called NAFTA came into the picture which was a multilateral agreement between the three countries. This does not mean other traders that are trading with these three countries will get similar kind of preferential treatment such as no barriers on trades and services between the three countries, the implementation of trade distorting policies such as the introduction of taxes, subsidies, laws and regulations that will avail special advantages for the members of one of the traders. These three trading partners have free access to each other’s market, which does not mean others will have a similar access. It does not mean the multilateral agreements between the three countries will prevent them from creating another bilateral or multilateral agreements with other countries since for example the US has many bilateral and multilateral trade agreement with countries that do not have any geographical proximity to it showing that bilateral and multilateral agreements are not limited by region (Reizeman, 1999). Other amenities such trading partners have at their disposal, whether they are bilateral or multilateral, in addition to having free access to each others’ markets, purely based on demand and supply they could also allow each other to have access to a free market information, which is vital to making informed decisions. Governments of trading members are not allowed to engage in a government-imposed monopoly or oligopoly power, although private sectors can have a monopoly or oligopoly according to what the anti trust laws allow. Other development among such countries is there is a free movement of labour, as well as capital. Therefore, when looking at the dissimilarities of bilateral and multilateral agreements there are many factors that play roles, because most of all, what kind of preferential treatment the participants are allowing each other is the deciding factor (Goyal and Joshi, 2006). This means that two bilateral countries could deprive that preferential treatment to other countries, but if they are in multilateral agreement, they cannot differentiate among the member no matter how much their number is. If a country is a member of the World Trade Organisation that requires all its members to allow each other a preferential treatment in order to facilitate trade has no choice other than to allow to all members similar preferential treatment. However, the exception is that for example based on geographical region or otherwise if there is a bilateral agreement they could give special preferential treatment for the trading partner if they found it beneficial to do so without availing the same preferential treatment to their other bilateral, multilateral or WTO members partners. This means that both bilateral and multilateral agreements based on any mutual benefit for the participants are allowed by WTO for its members, the only requirement being a voluntary notification of the existence such an agreement so that some kind of transparency of what is taking place will prevail. Consequently, there are bilateral agreements that take place between two countries, multilateral agreements that usually require more than two countries and the membership of WTO is also multilateral since the obvious number of the participants is many. This means that except that a bilateral agreement is a very simple form of such free trade agreements, there is nothing that makes it different in complexity than similar multilateral agreements (Friedman, 1997). A good example to cite is price where in a bilateral agreement the available demand and supply determine the price of goods and services. The only problem with such an agreement is if there is another country that sells what a given country buys from a bilateral partner much cheaper. In a situation like this it is a given that the other country wants to take advantage of the cheaper price, but since there is no agreement there are tariffs and taxes to add on the market price of the goods that will still make the bilateral partners goods and services preferable because of the absence of tariff and tax. In order to take advantage of that cheap price the particular country might want to start a free trade agreement with the other partner that will be complicated and time consuming. This shows that one country can have a bilateral agreement with two or more countries or it is possible to create a multilateral agreement among all participants and this kind of agreement is common among those that live in a given geographical region, as attested by the number of regional free trades (Bhagwati, 2002). But that does mean free trade is limited to a certain pattern since it can take many forms. It can be bilateral based on what the two countries agree, multilateral based on the participating countries agree that do not necessarily should have geographical proximity such as the US has a bilateral agreement with Israel, Jordan, Chile, Singapore, Australia and more and Australia has many bilateral trade agreement with many Asian countries that does not affect the relation it has with other countries because each participant gets certain advantage from the bilateral deal they are making. The most common FTA used to be among countries in the same region but that is changing (Levy, 19997). Looking at international multilateral agreements such as the members of the WTO reveals that there are more than 160 countries that have eliminated trade barriers among themselves and are allowing similar preferential treatment for each other, while they are allowed to go into any kind of bilateral or multilateral trade arrangement with other countries and create preferential treatment that they do not have to allow to the other members of WTO, where what is not allowed is not to discriminate among members (Pugel, 2003) (Aghion et al, 2007). One other dissimilarity will be the competition will be different when multilateral countries are trading with each other with no tax and tariff barriers based on demand and supply, where the choices of the participants will be more and can buy from those who are offering the lowest price without engaging in dumping (Bagwell and Staiger, 1997). Dumping always creates difficulties since it is always the outcome of subsidies that mostly originate from governments that had signed not to intervene in the market by any means (Brander and Krugman, 1983). World Trade Organisation (WTO)Â  WTO is an international organisation that promotes free trade by working with its members to enable them abolish tariffs and taxes so that there will be unhampered trade among countries. The main duties of the organisation are it polices the free trade agreements among countries, and it settles whatever disputes ensue among the participating countries and their governments. Whenever there is a dispute with two trading countries that are members it is its job to resolve the dispute and is empowered by its members to enforce its decisions by introducing sanctions on those who have breached the agreed upon rules. WTO had replaced another organisation called the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1995. GATT came into existence in 1948 when 23 countries agreed to bring down their tariffs and taxes among the trading partners. The difference between GATT and WTO is the later has more scope and oversees more trade sections other than trade in goods and services alone such as banking, telecommunications and intellectual property rights. WTO has 160 countries that allow each other a preferential treatment or a favoured trading partner status. The organisation provides a framework others can employ to negotiate and form trade agreements, while at the same time it oversees the signed agreements ratified by the parliaments of the member countries are strictly observed. The organisation, for the most part, focuses on trade negotiations such as the Uruguay Round (1986-1994) and currently the defunct negotiation called Doha Development Agenda known also as Doha Round that tried in 2001 to raise the overall status of poorer countries that make up the majority of the world population. This particular negotiation had been derailed by the same group that the negotiation was trying to enhance their equitable representation that demanded to see in place a special safeguard measure that will shield farmers from import flooding. The particular organisation is under the governance of ministerial conference that takes place every two years and has a general council in charge of implementing whatever agreement the conference arrives at and for administrating the day to day business, while it is represented by a director-general. The WTO works hand-in-hand with other organisations such as the World Bank, Intentional Monitory Fund, International Trade Organisation etc. that go much further than focusing on trade and deal in areas that are related to trade indirectly such as employment, investment, various kinds of lending, regulation business practises that do not adhere to the rules and various agreements dealing with how to manipulate commodities. The GATT is very important in such a way that if the WTO was not formed, GATT would have been reigning still serving the same purpose the WTO started serving, because it was the only multilateral agreement between countries starting from 1948. There had been seven rounds of negotiation under the GATT that were working to bring down tariffs among countries. The Kennedy Round in the sixties raised the question of antidumping where when countries are caught in the action of selling goods substantially less than they are selling in their own market. In the seventies, the Tokyo Round started to look at other barriers that are not tariff related where it was not easy to get results, because of the controversial nature of what were taking place since some of them known as plurilateral agreements were not approved by all participants. However the Uruguay Round had amended some of them later and they had become multilateral agreements. The Uruguay Round that took place in 1986 had introduced new areas such as including services and intellectual properties in the agreements. The Uruguay Round also dealt with trade reforms in the area of agriculture and textile that were always sensitive areas. Finally in 1994 the Final Act concluded what the members started in the Uruguay Round and established the WTO that took place at the Marrakech Agreement. This means that WTO does not have its own mandate till date and it is still using GATT as its umbrella treaty, although the Final Act at Marrakech had added new 60 agreements adopted into the mandates of the organisation. Consequently, the major areas the WTO oversees among its international members are to oversee how goods and investment are crossing the borders of member countries, including the various services, intellectual property, dispute settlement and reviewing the trade policies the various member governments are introducing from time to time. There had been several ministerial conferences since the WTO was formed that came up with various policies to deal with the various problems at hand at the time the various conferences were taking place. The major principles of the WTO concerning trade are non-discrimination that has two key components, the most favoured nations and national treatment. The former requires member to treat every member equally where if they create a favourable condition for a given member they have to create to all members, a requirement that is possible to override among bilateral and multilateral agreements. The national treatment requires that goods and services imported should receive similar treatment with what are locally available.

Euthanasia Needs to be a Legal Option Essay -- Argumentative Persuasiv

Euthanasia Needs to be a Legal Option    "Warren Hauser is dying. Should the Supreme Court decide that terminally ill Americans have a constitutional right to commit suicide with a doctor's help, he would qualify. Emphysema and valvular heart disease have left him debilitated and physically dependent" (Byock). For terminally ill patients like Warren, where death is inevitable and would be less painful than living, euthanasia should be a legal option. Euthanasia is Greek for "easy or happy death" and implies measures deliberately taken by a physician to curtail pain and suffering. This concept has been enlarged to include such action in incurable diseases, especially those in which the patient must endure torment and extreme pain and/or is terminally ill ("Euthanasia"). Euthanasia is the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for their alleged benefit. If the death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia, so the key word is "intentional." Assisted suicide is when a person provides an individual with the information, guidance, and means to take their own life. When a doctor helps them take their life, it is labeled physician-assisted suicide. However, there is no euthanasia if what was or sometimes was not done does not intentionally cause the death. In some cases, medical actions are labeled "passive euthanasia" since the intention of taking life is lacking. Active euthanasia is intentionally cau sing a person's death by performing an action such as giving lethal injection ("Euthanasia Definitions"). Passive euthanasia can be more painful because neglecting care for a terminal patient puts them through more suffering and pain than active euthanasia, which speeds up death and avoids pain and s... ...bout/newsday.htm>    Hendin, M.D. Herbert. "Scared to Death of Dying." American Foundation for Suicide Prevention 8 Dec. 2002    Hippocrates. "The Oath." The Oath. 16 Dec. 2002    Humphry, Derek. "Prisoner of Conscience." Who's Who and What's What 10 Dec. 2002    Larue, Gerald A. "Patients Should Decide." Opposing Viewpoints. Neal Bernards. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, Inc 1989.    Moreland, J.P. Dr. "Active and Passive Euthanasia." Stand to Reason 10 Dec 2002    "Right to End Suffering Asserted." Facts on File News Services. 8 Dec 2002       "We can try to avoid making choices by doing nothing, but even that is a decision." -Gary Collins   

Richard Nixon

Richard Nixon is Good Richard Nixon is considered to be one of the worst presidents of our time and for very good reasons. He lied under oath about knowledge of the Watergate scandal, he illegally invaded Cambodia and violated international law, and he installed wiretaps. All these actions caused him to resign from the Presidential office. What we don't think about, is all the good he did. Nixon did a lot for our country.From foreign affairs o the environment, he accomplished much during his time as president. First of all, one of his greatest accomplishments was the d ©tente with the Republic of China. He was the first president to visit the country, and he opened trade with China and bettered the economy by making China its biggest trade partner. He came to agreements with both China and the Soviet Union where the use of nuclear weapons would stop being used. Nixon accomplished much with our nation's environment.He passed many acts hich included the National Environmental Policy of 1969, The Environmental Protection Agency of 1970, The Clean Air Act Extension of 1970, Marine Mammal Protection of 1972, the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973. We can thank him for making our environment a better place. Besides improving our environment, President Nixon also accomplished much under Civil Rights. It is because of Nixon that women have equal pay and employment opportunities today.Nixon also worked towards racism towards African Americans and helped stop the segregation towards them in the school systems. Even though President Nixon had a lot of faults and made a lot of mistakes, he couldVe handled things a lot better. So why look at only his faults? He did a lot for our country and doesn't deserve all the mistrust that people feel towards him. History seems only to remember the faults of people, but in the very end, he was actually a really good president Richard Nixon Richard Nixon is Good Richard Nixon is considered to be one of the worst presidents of our time and for very good reasons. He lied under oath about knowledge of the Watergate scandal, he illegally invaded Cambodia and violated international law, and he installed wiretaps. All these actions caused him to resign from the Presidential office. What we don't think about, is all the good he did. Nixon did a lot for our country.From foreign affairs o the environment, he accomplished much during his time as president. First of all, one of his greatest accomplishments was the d ©tente with the Republic of China. He was the first president to visit the country, and he opened trade with China and bettered the economy by making China its biggest trade partner. He came to agreements with both China and the Soviet Union where the use of nuclear weapons would stop being used. Nixon accomplished much with our nation's environment.He passed many acts hich included the National Environmental Policy of 1969, The Environmental Protection Agency of 1970, The Clean Air Act Extension of 1970, Marine Mammal Protection of 1972, the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973. We can thank him for making our environment a better place. Besides improving our environment, President Nixon also accomplished much under Civil Rights. It is because of Nixon that women have equal pay and employment opportunities today.Nixon also worked towards racism towards African Americans and helped stop the segregation towards them in the school systems. Even though President Nixon had a lot of faults and made a lot of mistakes, he couldVe handled things a lot better. So why look at only his faults? He did a lot for our country and doesn't deserve all the mistrust that people feel towards him. History seems only to remember the faults of people, but in the very end, he was actually a really good president Richard Nixon On August 8th 1974 Richard Nixon became the first American president ever to resign from office. His final action was the imminent consequence of more than two years of political controversy, of public displays of discontent towards the media, and ultimately of obvious attempts to minimize and cover up a scandal that, in the end, proved to be fatal for the outcome of his presidential mandate. He would later recall, â€Å"This was the nightmarish end of a long dream† (Associated Press, 1999). His last address to the nation as a standing president must be seen through this perspective and through the lens of the historical circumstances of the time.The overall perception of the exact purpose of the speech is still debatable, some of his critics accusing him of not giving a resignation speech, but rather a persuasive one. Despite these differences in ideas, one can reach a common ground and the conclusion that Nixon, while making his final official speech, also tried to save a di gnifying image for posterity, later on implicitly underlining the importance the judgment of history had for him: â€Å"The jury has already come in, and there's nothing that's going to change it. There's no appeal. Historians will judge it harshly.†(Stacks, 1994).In order to fully grasp the complex message behind the speech delivered by Nixon, certain elements are essential for building a proper image of the historical background of the time. Cristina Schaffner, in citing Christoph Sauer, points out the necessity for analyzing the wider context of the political discourse in order to understand and capture its overall meaning.She considers that â€Å"the analysis of political speeches in particular and political discourses in general should relate linguistic structures to larger contexts of communicative settings and political functions. Any public speech is part of a larger, more extensive communicative process and it is characterized as a strategic move in an overarching c ommunicative plan. It can therefore be assessed properly only if the larger context is taken into account†( Schaffner, 1993, 203).Richard Nixon was the 37th elected president of the US and had the uphill endeavor of leading his nation through some of the most trying times of its history. Henry Kissinger, his Secretary of State would later on acknowledge the fact that â€Å"Nixon was the first president, after Theodore Roosevelt, to lead his country’s foreign policy largely in the name of the national interest†(Kissinger, 1995, 636). He admits, as do numerous other experts in external policy, that â€Å"the Nixon Administration was given the task of withdrawing the American troops from its first experience of a lost war, and from the first external commitment in which the American moral convictions collided with what was possible to achieve†(Kissinger,1995, 586).Therefore, the Vietnam War was the major issue of Nixon’s presidency. Another critical is sue was that of the US-USSR relations that were in a tight point at the beginning of his term in office in 1969. Intimately connected was the situation with China which proved to be delicate and in demand of a diplomatic resolution. Stacks points out these elements: â€Å"By sheer endurance, he was the most important figure of the postwar era.Nixon put the country through some of its worst times, leading the red-scare politics of the 1950s, escalating the war in Vietnam in order to end it, trying with all his enormous energy and guile to defeat the legal processes that closed in on him during the Watergate scandal†(Stacks, 1994). Thus, it not the conduct of the foreign policy that brought his resignation, but rather his continuous conflicts with the Congress, that is the dispute between the Executive and the Legislative. All these aspects of the political reality are dealt with, some more than others, in his final speech.Depending on his motivation, Nixon targeted more than o ne audience in his speech. Smith argues that â€Å"understanding the American audience in terms of the issues it holds dear, the positions it takes on those issues and the way it measures character is crucial to crafting speeches that resonate with the public.   Furthermore, due to the modern media, the president often addresses more than one audience at a time† (Smith, 2006).It was expected of him to start with the most pressing development of internal politics, which was the Watergate scandal. His political career had been stained by the possibility of being accused of obstructing justice procedures and abuse of power, yet his considerations on the matter were rather reluctant and until the final end, set for denial of all evidence shown to him in this respect (Impeachment, 2006). It was only after the irrefutable proof of taped conversations demonstrating his implication in the scandal that he tacitly admitted his guilt and acted on his resignation (Legacy: Richard M. Ni xon, 37th president, 2006).Stacks even comments on the idea, calling the attention to the fact that â€Å"no other President in American history had been revealed to be so cynically, so selfishly breaking the law to preserve his own power. Other Presidents may have acted as ignobly, but none was caught so nakedly† (Stacks, 1994). Nixon’s mentioning of the scandal in the speech was quite lapidary, the term â€Å"Watergate† only being used twice throughout the text. It is therefore clear to say that he attempted to underplay its importance and to change the focus of the attention towards other aspects of his political actions.Within this line of argumentation, Nixon tried to appeal to the general public. He made use of personal references, by mentioning that â€Å"my family unanimously urged me to do so (to carry through to the finish whatever the personal agony it would have involved)†( Scholing, 2003) structuring his address on the need to reach out to th e American people and thus offer them a certain justification of his actions, which he even stresses were carried out as â€Å"to do what was best for the nation†. Therefore, one of the aims of the speech was to attract the sense of public acceptance and along with this, a closure of the chapter.Throughout his speech though, he created for himself a number of different occasions to address the general public, the electorate and subsequently those who decide in a democratic system. One such occasion was the referral to the possibilities of the American people â€Å"to have not only the blessings of liberty but also the means to live full and good, and by the world's standards even abundant lives†( Scholing, 2003). Such political rhetoric could only have pointed to the important achievements his administration had registered, although he did mention the inflation problems facing the society.Even so, he managed to draw the attention on the wellbeing of the nation by simil ar comparisons with the rest of the world. In justifying the wide media and public attention that the Watergate scandal had received, and, at the same time, in supporting Nixon’s confidence in the internal and external US position, Walter McDougall, a historian at the University of Pennsylvania, said that â€Å"the American people could afford to obsess continuously over this affair and paralyze the nation†¦the American people wouldn't have put up with that if they had thought the country was in danger†(Anderson, 2004).Nixon pointed out the successes of his administration in relation to the main international actors such as the USSR, China and the players in the Middle East. Even though, in general, the American public is less interested in foreign affairs and more in domestic issues, the Vietnam War and the broader context that determined its final outcome had provoked great unrest among regular Americans, and had created a rift in the society. Therefore, when in voking the fact that â€Å"we have ended America's longest war† (Scholing, 2003) he also tried to offer a sense of reassurance that would, in the long run, help heal the wounds of the nation.A well delimited part of the speech was aimed at underlining the distinctiveness between â€Å"I† and â€Å"Congressional and other leaders†. While addressing the public, he tried to make a clear delimitation between what the public might consider â€Å"good† such as himself, and â€Å"evil† such as those in search of his indictment. He strongly stressed the lack of Congressional support in his strive to uphold what he considered to be â€Å"the constitutional purpose†. There were even opinions that considered Nixon to have â€Å"acknowledged his lonely isolation in his televised resignation speech† (Anderson, 2004).Therefore he subtly lets himself to be portrayed as the less eager to continue the battle with the Congress, fact that had an opposit e effect on the elective body. By mentioning his lack of further action for the purpose of revenge, as he would not â€Å"continue to fight through the months ahead for my personal vindication† (Scholing, 2003), he skillfully managed to sow the seed of doubt in the public’s mind over the real reasons for the Congress’ actions. Furthermore, he would appear in the eyes of the public as the one that appealed to a common and acceptable solution on behalf of both parties. Therefore, it could be said that, in the public view, he managed to partially save a certain political dignity.The presentation of the new president was, from a strictly political perspective, an electoral maneuver. Its placement after the subtle â€Å"attack† of the Congress insured the transfer of the political support he enjoyed among his own traditional electorate. His reaffirmed trust in Ford’s capabilities was also meant to lie to rest any uncertainties in the future course of po licy. It is rather obvious that, following that passage, the continuous and vigorous call for mobilization to take further the actions started by his administration, Nixon attempted to give an additional level of credibility to all that was previously said. His determination and explicit support for his successor was designed as a display of confidence and conviction in his arguments that, among others, motivated his innocence in the Watergate scandal.Taking into consideration the concurring factors that eventually led to the resignation of President Nixon, it can be concluded that his final speech addressed exactly the variety of these issues. Summing up the pulse of the era, McDougall considers that â€Å"even Watergate will some day be put in a larger context and will be seen as the most dramatic episode in a rebellion by Congress and the courts against executive power† (Anderson, 2004). In addressing the American people, he tried both to justify his actions and to subtly state the difference of opinion with the Congress.BibliographyAnderson, Hill. â€Å"Analysis: Nixon's watershed presidency†. The Washington Times. 2004. 14 Mar. 2006. Associated Press. â€Å"Nixon's resignation changed American politics forever†. Aug. 1999. 14 Mar. 2006 ;http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/08/06/nixon.resigns/;â€Å"Impeachment†. American Experience. 2006. 14 Mar. 2006. ;http://watergate.info/impeachment/impeachmentarticles.shtmlhttp://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/rn37/speeches/resign.htm;Kissinger, Henry. Diplomacy. London: Simon ; Schuster, 1995.â€Å"Legacy: Richard M. Nixon, 37th president†. 2006. 14 Mar. 2006.;http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/37_nixon/nixon_legacy.html;Schaffner, Cristina. â€Å"Political speeches and discourse analysis†. Current issues in language and society. 1996: 203. 14 Mar. 2006.; http://www.multilingual-matters.net/cils/003/0201/cils0030201.pdf;Scholing, Peter. â€Å"Richard Milhous Nixon. Res ignation Speech, August 8, 1974†.From Revolution to Reconstruction. 2003. 14 Mar. 2006.;http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/rn37/speeches/resign.htm;Smith, Craig R. â€Å"Speechwriting in the Nixon and Ford White Houses†. California State University. 14 Mar. 2006;http://www.csulb.edu/~crsmith/nixford.html;Stacks, John F. â€Å"Victory In Defeat†. Time. 2 May, 1994. Richard Nixon Richard Nixon is Good Richard Nixon is considered to be one of the worst presidents of our time and for very good reasons. He lied under oath about knowledge of the Watergate scandal, he illegally invaded Cambodia and violated international law, and he installed wiretaps. All these actions caused him to resign from the Presidential office. What we don't think about, is all the good he did. Nixon did a lot for our country.From foreign affairs o the environment, he accomplished much during his time as president. First of all, one of his greatest accomplishments was the d ©tente with the Republic of China. He was the first president to visit the country, and he opened trade with China and bettered the economy by making China its biggest trade partner. He came to agreements with both China and the Soviet Union where the use of nuclear weapons would stop being used. Nixon accomplished much with our nation's environment.He passed many acts hich included the National Environmental Policy of 1969, The Environmental Protection Agency of 1970, The Clean Air Act Extension of 1970, Marine Mammal Protection of 1972, the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973. We can thank him for making our environment a better place. Besides improving our environment, President Nixon also accomplished much under Civil Rights. It is because of Nixon that women have equal pay and employment opportunities today.Nixon also worked towards racism towards African Americans and helped stop the segregation towards them in the school systems. Even though President Nixon had a lot of faults and made a lot of mistakes, he couldVe handled things a lot better. So why look at only his faults? He did a lot for our country and doesn't deserve all the mistrust that people feel towards him. History seems only to remember the faults of people, but in the very end, he was actually a really good president

Cause And Effect Of Gun Control - 1384 Words

There are an abundance of causes and effects in the way guns are used, purchased, and sold – legally or illegally. A few causes include how guns are kept (with a safety and locked away or not), and in the way guns are obtained. The effects of these acts are, peoples state of mind, and the criticisms law enforcement may receive. Thought of as technical and firm, the laws about guns can easily be bypassed by criminals and people who are not in the right frame of mind. In the legal and illegal use of firearms, some ways of obtaining and the selling of guns are shocking and others are well known. Children, teens, and adults all have ways to obtain a firearm even if they are underage or do not pass a mandatory back-ground check, which causes†¦show more content†¦Even though a criminal intends to use the firearm in an illegal way, they can still obtain it though legal means, some not knowing they will commit a crime with the weapon in the future. Criminals and people who are not in the right frame of mind are the reason that gun control is such a major issue, especially for law-abiding citizens who live with a set of more restricted rights due to this issue. In the use, purchase, and selling of guns, there are consequences for the actions of those who bypass the law. One major issue is in the contrast of people’s state of mind. For example, in the article about the two school shootings, the author includes the following statement from a child: â€Å"‘Just because I have access to a gun, that doesnt mean Im going to go out and kill somebody,’ said Cummings, who took a safety course before receiving a state hunting license. ‘Anyone who does that, theyve got to be messed up in the head.’† (Kids). The people, children or adults, who come to have access to a gun and do not use it solely for self-defense or the sport of hunting, will use it for violence and have the reputation for not being in the rightShow MoreRelatedEssay on Guns Dont Kill People, Criminals Kill People1187 Words   |  5 Pages Gun control is a leading concern in America today. Recent shootings and murders today have people scared and pushing forward for gun control acts. In my opinion there should not be gun control acts on any guns besides automatic guns because, automatic guns should strictly be for military use only. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. Many people push for gun control, but the effects of gun control are too severe. In this paper I claim to tell about the reasons why someoneRead MoreGun Control And Its Effect On Acquiring Firearms1623 Words   |  7 PagesNSW, therefore leading to an increase in guns, cause a reduction in crime? Gun control and restrictions on acquiring firearms has been a topic that has been disputed heavily in NSW since the 1980s. Similar to various other nations, Australia has seen a number of high profile shootings, resulting in a tightening of gun control laws. One may believe by instinct that relaxing current restrictions on acquiring firearms would lead to more crime, as more guns are readily available. This paper will exploreRead MoreThe Effects Of Gun Control On The United States Essay1742 Words   |  7 PagesGun control has become a very important topic within the United States after the past couple of months. There have been many issues that have occurred to make people think that banning guns is something we need to invest in, even though that just would not be the greatest option. There are many parts to winning a debate on gun control. One always needs to be sure to view both sides of the issue, look at the causes and the effects of the issue, and being sure one has enough f acts and statistics toRead MoreThe Pros And Cons Of Gun Control785 Words   |  4 PagesGun control is a big topic in the United States today, a lot of people have many different opinions on this. They are usually about whether we should we have gun control or not. We should not need gun control to solve crime in the United States. We need laws, background checks and more. The conversation about gun control will continue on as long as guns are made and used. The argument about gun control is doubled sided. This means that on one side citizens want the government to have control overRead MoreAgainst Gun Control Of The United States1145 Words   |  5 PagesEnglish II November 1, 2015 Against Gun Control Crime and guns, the two always seem to be acting together, however, these two elements are absolutely nothing alike. Do guns commit the horrific crimes? Do the laws placed on gun control keep the citizens of the United States safe? These are the questions many citizens and lawmakers are asking themselves when they try to launch laws on gun control. Although many people are for gun control, they do not realize that gun control violate the United States SecondRead MorePersuasive Essay On Gun Control1465 Words   |  6 PagesAfter every highly publicized mass shooting, the topic of gun control becomes a political hot potato being juggled by the senators, congressman, and even the sitting president of the United States. It followed the usual pattern of condemning the shooter, questioning the ease in which the shooter was able to obtain guns, and with most mass shootings, proposing a ban on assault files used in the shooting. But within a few months, when the news agencies move onto othe r headlines, when all the hashtagsRead MoreEssay on An Argument Against Gun Control773 Words   |  4 PagesArgument Against Gun Control An Argument Against Gun Control As long ago as 1789, the creators of the Constitution realized the importance of guns in American society. The Second Amendment states,A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. No loopholes, or legal caches exist in this statement. The Founding Fathers allow for no restriction of the private ownership of firearmsRead MoreGun Control Gun Rights873 Words   |  4 PagesStates have gun control or gun rights? This is a question many people ask and argue over. As a citizen of this country, I would like to examine both sides of the argument and then pick my view on the topic. As of right now, the United States have more gun rights than gun control. However, there have been laws made to regulate the sale and possession of guns. Many anti-gun activists argue that the NRA (National Rifle Association) is the cause of many of the horrific events involving guns. On the otherRead MoreEssay on Both Sides of Gun Control in the United States1442 Words   |  6 PagesUsually when people think about guns they think about crime. But are the two really related? Do guns really lead to crime? And if they do, do laws that restrict firearm ownership and the use of guns stop the crime or protect people? These are the questions many politicians are asking themselves when creating gun control laws. The debate over gun control is nothing new. As you can see this debate still goes on today and is the cause for the beginning of gun control laws. Guns are extremely powerful weaponsRead MoreGun Control Should Be Abolished869 Words   |  4 Pagespassed very strict gun control laws, and you, being a good citizen, do not have a gun to protect yourself, even though the constitution supports owning guns. Gun control (or firearms regulation) refers to laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms.Some people think that without guns there wouldn’t be any crime, but that is just ridiculous, because not all crimes involve guns . Gun-control should be abolished, because gun laws will and won’t