Education As a Career

Education As a CareerEducation as a career is one of the most sought after. It is very desirable to have education as a career because the opportunities are endless. So, there are many avenues to select an education as a career. One can opt for a degree in any subject.One of the major reasons for this is the need for differentiating between education and the world of business. For instance, if you take an MBA in finance, your focus on finance will be much different from an education graduate. The field of education has many educational options such as schools or colleges, or even the university where you study your course.What is the distinction in education and that of an education graduate? It's about how to become the perfect education graduate.In terms of specific courses, education is actually a series of classes that include subjects such as math, history, science, English, social studies, etc. You can take any of these subjects to get a job. But, if you do it well, you can com e up with a PhD in a field such as engineering, teaching, the sciences or psychology.However, for those who have advanced degrees in a specific area such as teaching, education can also be a great career option. Again, there are many schools that have classes geared towards this topic. This can make you come up with a professional certification to get into that particular area.Another interesting fact about education as a career is that, if you do not have formal education, you can also try to go for an education as a career. This is more popular among people who want to work in schools but want a different education.Education as a career is still possible. You just need to have the confidence to go for it. Take time and educate yourself well so that you can make your education as a career the best.

Freemark Abbey Winery Case - 1013 Words

Baur Bektemirov BUSF 36106: Assignment 5 Freemark Abbey Winery Assume that under no unusual circumstances (no storm), Jaeger sells 1,000 cases of Riesling. Consider diï ¬â‚¬erent cases: 1. Jaeger harvests grapes in anticipations of storm. Then the total revenue will be equal to 12Ãâ€"1000Ãâ€"$2.85 = $34200. 2. Jaeger doesn’t harvest and there is no storm with 50% chance. 2.1. With 40% chance, sugar concentration is 25%, then the total revenue is 12 Ãâ€" 1000 Ãâ€" $3.50 = $42000 2.2. With 40% chance, sugar concentration is 20%, then the total revenue is 12 Ãâ€" 1000 Ãâ€" $3.00 = $36000 2.3. With 20% chance, sugar concentration is below 20%, then the total revenue is 12 Ãâ€" 1000 Ãâ€" $2.50 = $30000 3. There is storm with 50% chance 3.1. Storm causes botrytis†¦show more content†¦MicroPharma will receive 75% of sales in the U.S. and only 10% from sales overseas. v. A ï ¬ rm receives proï ¬ t for the 10 years after if launches its product in 2003, starting from year 2004. During ï ¬ rst years, the sales are increasing in an arithmetic progression starting from 0 in 2003 and reaching the peak in 2008. Since all numbers are in constant dollars, the total sales equal to the sum of sales in each year. If MegaPharma decides not to buy rights or license from MicroPharma, there is 50% chance of successful Phase 2 and 80% chance of successful Phase 3 (conditional on success of Phase 2), and 100% of success in FDA Review. Thus, MegaPharma has 40% chances that the the compound will be approved. If it passes Phase 2, Phase 3, and Review, MegaPharma will spend $52 million. Total MegaPharma’s anticipated sales of the compound are equal to 100 + 200 + 300 + 400 + 500 + 500 + 500 + 500 + 500 + 500 = 4000 million, total revenue is 75% Ãâ€" 4000 = 3000 million, if MegaPharma is the only supplier. If both MegaPharma and MicroPharma are on the market, the anticipated revenue is only a half: $1500 million. Total MicroPharma’s anticipated sales in the US are equal to $3660 million, and the revenue is $2745 million; anticipated sales overseas are equal to $3660 million and the revenue is $366 million, thus, 3111, if MicroPharma is the monopoly and 3111/2 if it has to share the market withShow MoreRelatedCase Study : Freemark Abbey Winery2635 Words   |  11 Pages Case Study Freemark Abbey Winery Dallas Baptist University Leah Bynum Megan Bynum Harrison Daniels III Brandon Decker MANA-6302-N1â€Æ' Case #21 Freemark Abbey Winery The partnership, which owns the Freemark Abbey Winery, is faced with a dilemma. The winery is located in the Napa Valley region of California, an area known for producing some of the finest wine on the planet. Freemark Abbey is located in the ideal central and southern areas of the valley. The climates, as well as decisions made during

The character of Nora in A Dolls House Essay Example For Students

The character of Nora in A Dolls House Essay As a famous early 20th century philosopher once put it, There are two people, so to say, in each of us- one derived by heredity from our parents and the other composed of all the influences we have received from the society in which we happen to have been born. By heredity we may be one sort of person; by training and education we may be quite another. This, what one might call, principle, in my opinion greatly applies to Ibsens A Dolls House. It is interesting to find if Noras decision to leave was something that was imposed on her by her environment, or a bad trait that was passed on to her by her father. Or is her decision a compromise between the two? Having said that, also brings about the thought of how much of a persons character results from heredity and how much results from the environment. Ibsen, like many of his contemporary writers, was under the influences of numerous scientific advances and among them was Charles Darwins theory of evolution. This led many people to believe that God was not the one responsible for creating human beings and that God was not responsible for the actions that people took during their lives, that they were either a product of their free will or heredity. Noras decision to leave is the climax of the play, an unexpected turnout of events. Or was it? Was it her fathers bad traits that made her leave? Or were they at all that bad? We can only speculate about Noras fathers habits, all we know from Helmer is that he was a spendthrift. But what about the other, so called, bad habits? The things we never found out about? Were they something like donating money to the poor? Helping the poor out in person? Things like that could have been considered by many as bad traits at the time, and certainly by such narrowed minded and hypocritical people as Helmer, who would have considered such things as bad ethics.

Othello And Iago Essays - Othello, Fiction, Film,

Othello And Iago One of the most interesting and exotic characters in the tragic play " Othello", by William Shakespeare, is "honest" Iago. At first Iago seems to be motiveless. However, the motivation behind his actions lie more in Iago's quest for personal gain, as opposed to just being evil for evil's sake. Iago's greediness can be validated by examining his manipulation of Roderigo, Cassio, and most importantly, Othello. Iago's main interest is the destruction of Othello. The reason being that Othello has chosen another man, Cassio, as his second-in-command, preferring him to Iago. This resentment, accompanied by Iago's accusations of adultery and his blatant racism, cause Iago to despise the kindly moor. Because Iago is much too smart to immediately kill Othello, he proceeds with the arduous process of dismantling him emotionally. Iago also knows he must distance himself from any part of this, so he cleverly gets someone to do his dirty work. The first to fall victim to Iago's manipulation is half-witted Roderigo. Iago knows Roderigo is consumed by lust for Desdemona, and would do what it takes to make her his own. Iago tells Roderigo that the only way to win Desdemona's love is to make money to procure gifts for her. "Put money in thy purse..."(act I scene 3 line 339). However Iago is just taking those gifts intended for Desdemona and keeping them for himself, and making a profit. Roderigo eventually starts to question Iago's honesty. When faced with the accusations, Iago simply offers that the killing of Cassio will aid in his cause and Roderigo falls for it. In doing this, Iago keeps Roderigo in the dark and continues to profit from him monetarily. Roderigo is also used as a device in both Cassio and Othello's downfall. Iago's actions demonstrate his monetary and power based motivations, invalidating the claim that Iago is evil for evil's sake. Cassio like Roderigo follows Iago blindly, thinking the whole time that Iago is trying to aid him, when in fact Iago, motivated by his lust for power, is attempting to remove Cassio of his position as lieutenant. With Roderigo's help Iago causes Cassio to forfeit his position as Othello's second-in-command. Cassio is also used to bring out the monster inside of Othello. In Iago's exploitation of Cassio, it is clear to see that, although evil in his deeds, Iago is strictly motivated by his hunger for power. As mentioned earlier, Iago's main intention lies in the degradation of Othello. Iago feels that he was best suited to hold the position of lieutenant, as opposed to Michael Cassio. From this Iago manufactures accusations of adultery, claiming that Othello has slept with his wife, Emilia. "...Twixt my sheets/ he's done my office."(Act I scene 3 line 380) These accusations are merely excuses to validate his own pleasant acts and greed, and should be seen as nothing more. Again it's plain to see that, in Iago's deception of Othello he is motivated by his jealousy and subsequent bitterness. In conclusion, it's evident that Iago is evil for greed's sake, as opposed to evil for evil's sake. His craving can be seen in his clever manipulation of Roderigo, Cassio, and Othello. He uses Roderigo for his own financial benefit, as well as support his master plan; the destruction of Othello. Cassio was unfortunate enough to be chosen ahead of Iago as Othello's second-in-command, and was reduced to a deteriorated state by Iago because of it. Lastly, driven by his bitterness towards Othello for choosing Cassio over him, Iago takes it upon himself to ensure Othello's demise. Iago is an extremely complex character, and far from ordinary. His complexity and uniqueness makes him one of Shakespeare's greatest villains.

Should America Abolish the Federal Reserve System Essay Example

Should America Abolish the Federal Reserve System Essay Example Should America Abolish the Federal Reserve System Essay Should America Abolish the Federal Reserve System Essay Should the United States Abolish the Federal Reserve System? The Federal Reserve System was instituted on December 23rd, 1913 by an act of Congress and serves as the central bank of the United States (â€Å"Federal Reserve System†). It is made up of twelve Reserve Banks with its headquarters in Washington D. C. The Board of Governors consists of seven members and two of them are designated and confirmed Chairman and Vice Chairman. The Chairman and Vice Chairman serve for four year terms while the other members serve fourteen year terms (The Structure of the Federal Reserve System). The responsibility of the Federal Reserve System is to conduct the nations monetary policy, supervise and regulate banking institutions, maintain the stability of the financial system and provide financial services to depository institutions, the U. S. government, and foreign official institutions (Bachman, Jess). Henry Ford once said, â€Å"It is well enough that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be revolution before tomorrow morning. (Conspiracies of the Federal Reserve†¦. † There are but a few persons who truly know about the Federal Reserve System. What people must realize is that the Federal Reserve System virtually controls the monetary system of the United States, yet it is accountable to no one. It has no budget, it is subject to no audit and no Congressional Committee knows of, or can truly supervise its operations. Therefore, the United States of America should abolish the Federal R eserve System simply because it lacks transparency, it caters to the rich and wealthy of the nation instead of the poor and middle class and it is not a government institution or a bank. If this is the case then why should a private institution be in control of the government funds and why should an institution that is not a bank serve as the central bank of a nation? There are many who question the Federal Reserve and why it is not transparent like other central banks in developed countries and also whether or not this lack of transparency will affect the economy. For many years the Federal Reserve has explicitly defended secrecy and opposed full disclosure. They believe that fuller disclosure will promote unnecessary volatility in financial markets, benefit certain speculators and interfere with the execution of money policy(Bachman, Jess). The fact is that secrecy of the monetary policy will increase financial market uncertainty, unvolatility, and larger uncertainty premiums in interest rates. According to the President of the Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City, a potential solution to the problem of lack of transparency is â€Å"advancing how they use the minutes†(Grurdman, Don J. . He believes that forcing the Federal Reserve System to be more honest and open when crisis occur, allowing them to be questioned on the economic policy and giving wide publicity to their decisions will help bankers and investors make wise and safe decisions that can help the market to grow, but since the Federal Reserve was created it has always operated in the shadows, without sufficient scrutiny or oversight of its operations. In one instance, the Federal Reserve can enter into agreements with foreign central banks and foreign government yet the Government Accountability Office is prohibited from auditing or even seeing these agreements(Conspiracies of the Federal†¦. ). If the Federal Reserve System cannot operate in openness then why should it be in operation? The Federal Reserve was always in favour of the rich of the country. There are three financial forces that keep the poor and middle class working hard and struggling financially. These forces are taxes, debt and inflation and retirement (Kiyosaki, Robert T. ). It is important to understand that these forces are kept alive by the Federal Reserve System’s license to print money. America was basically tax-free in the early days. In 1862 the first income tax was used to pay for the Civil War. In 1895, the Supreme Court ruled that income tax was unconstitutional but however, in 1913 when the Federal Reserve System was created, income tax was made permanent. By this the rich could put their hands in the people’s pockets via taxes permanently. Also, inflation which is caused by the Federal Reserve printing money to pay the government’s bills makes the cost of living very expensive for the poor and middle class but the rich get richer since they are the ones who own the big businesses. Additionally, in 1974 the U. S. Congress passed the ERISA and this forced Americans to invest in the stock market for their retirement through mediums such as 401(k). Such investments normally have high fees, high risks and low returns. Because of this, today many people do not have enough money to retire because they have lost all their wealth in the stock market crash (Kiyoskai, Robet T. ). When we look at the relationship between the Federal Reserve and the three forces we can indeed conclude that the poor and middle class have not been served justice. If the Federal Reserve System is one that is biased and caters to only one class in the American society then it should without a doubt be abloished. Thomas Jefferson, declared, If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered†(Supinski, Ron). From the beginning it was persons like Thomas Jefferson who knew that the idea of allowing private banks to control the nation’s funds would not to be beneficial to the American society and this is why the Federal Reserve System should be abolished. It is a privately owned bank. In the Federal Reserve decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government (Brown, Ellen). The shareholders of the Federal Reserve are private banks. In fact 100% of its shareholders are private banks and none is owned by the government (Brown, Ellen). By law, ownership of a certain amount of stock is a condition of membership so if the government is not a member of this institution, why is it in charge of the nation’s monetary system? Shouldn’t this be one aspect the government should have the ultimate say in? In the case of John L. Lewis/Appellant vs. The United States of America/Apellee, it was held: It is clear from this that in some circumstances, the Federal Reserve Bank can be considered a government instrumentality, but cannot be considered a federal agency, because the term carries with it the assumption that the federal government has direct oversight over what the Fed does. Of course it does not, because most people who know about this subject know that the Fed is politically independent. (Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned) Because of this ruling, the United States government was not entitled to pay John Lewis for the injuries he received from an accident that involved a vehicle belonging to the Federal Reserve. It is quite evident now that the Federal is indeed a private institution and because of this it should not control the United States’ monetary system and it should be abolished. Up to this present day many Americans still argue that it was the Federal Reserve System that saved the United States from the Panic of 1907. It was believed that the United States unlike European states was vulnerable without a central bank and if the Federal Reserve hadn’t come along to extend the supply of money during periods of low cash reserves, the country was going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history. Sadly, the Federal Reserve still failed in preventing the even worse bank failures in the Great Depression. What Americans must understand is that the Panic of 1907 was not caused because the United States did not have a central bank. The main cause of the crash was stock market and real estate speculation (Flodvary, Fred). This shows that if there was a central bank established, there may have been the same results since there is no proof of the Federal Reserve being the one to save the economy of the United States during that time. I must remind the audience that from the beginning when idea of the Federal Reserve came into existence it was always a big secret where everyone was left in the dark. Many secret meetings were held on Jerkyll Island where banking ideas were discussed and the plan eventually became the Federal Reserve System (Foldvary, Fred). The Federal Reserve System did not come into existence to help the Americans overcome the panic of 1907 but it was created with the interest of its creators in mind. Even when the Federal Reserve Act was passed in Congress, there were only three members present. This was because there were many persons who really knew what the future of the American economy in the hands of the Federal Reserve looked like and they had opposed it. The monetary system is not what Americans are led to believe. The creation of money has been privatized, or taken over by private money lenders and Thomas Jefferson called them â€Å"bold and bankrupt adventurers just pretending to have money† (Brown,Ellen). The banking system has been contrived by the Federal Reserve so that big banks always get bailed out by the taxpayers from their risky ventures. The deceptions of the Federal Reserve concerning the money scheme has been unraveled and a crystal clear picture is presented of the financial abyss towards which America has been led to. There is workable alternative to the Federal Reserve, one that was tested in colonial America and is grounded in the best of American economic thought, including the writings of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln. This alternative is a federal agency owned by the government that can be subject to an audit, has a buget, accountable to someone and in a position where its operations can be truly supervised. This idea has already been thought out by America’s greatest minds. It is now that time for the American government to take those ideas in order to continue in the best interest of its people and abolish the Federal Reserve System for good! Bachman, Jess. A Visual Guide to the Federal Reserve System. (2009). Brown, Ellen. The Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth about Our Money System. Third Millennium Press, 2008. - . Who owns the Federal Reserve? The South Florida Business Journal (2008): 73-75. Conspiracies of the Federal Reserve System. Perf. Ron Paul. 2008. Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned. No. 04-2357. United States Courts of Appeal. 28 April 2005. Federal Reserve System. 2010. 20 October 2010 lt;www. britannica. comgt;. Foldvary, Fred E. The Panic of 1907. 1 May 2007. 12 October 2010 lt;www. freerepublic. com/focusgt;. Grurdmann, Don J. The Truth about the Federal Reserve- The Biggest Financial Crime in the History of the United States. (n. d. ): 1-2. Kiyosaki, Robert T. Rich Dads Conspiracy of the Rich. New York: Business Plus and CASHFLOW Technologies, Inc. , 2009. Supinski, Ron. The Federal Reserve System is a Private Bank. 8 October 1992. 15 October 2010 lt;www. the7thfire. com/Politics%20and%20History/Federal-Reserve. htmlgt;. The Structure of the Federal Reserve System. 3 July 2003. 2 November 2010 lt;www. federalreserve. govgt;.

Market Equilibrating Process Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Market Equilibrating Process Paper - Essay Example However, I will argue that this may be the case at present but the product is at risk in the long term for several reasons. This can be reflected in the gradual shift in the supply and demand equilibrium. Successful branding and Apple innovation have ensured the current demand for iPhone. The product has been the first to usher in the era of "touch" smartphones and this has been displayed by the array of competitors emulating the product even until now. So for a time it has enjoyed leadership and dominance due to the scarcity of such product given the limited options and demand choices for consumers. Things are changing, however, because of the increasingly competitive market and the increasingly sophisticated requirements of the consumers. The development of the Googles Android operating system has launched the success of many smartphone manufacturers that collectively led to a viable and sophisticated alternative to the iPhones IOS. The Android phone and the iPhone became substitutes: as the price of the other increases, the demand for the other increase (p.50) Recently, a research by the firm IDC placed the market share of Android to about 68 percent whereas Apple claims only 16.9 percent (AP 2012). Of course, Android is fragmented into several phone manufacturers such as Samsung and HTC. But the trend signals an interesting shift in the market, which bring together buyers and sellers (p.46). This year Samsung toppled Apple as worlds leading phone manufacturer. As more and more people are exposed to many choices, they are able to expand the variables that inform the cost-bene fit analyses that drive their purchase decisions. In this instance, price and quantity are no longer the sole drivers of the market. The so-called other â€Å"determinants of demand† assume equal importance in the pattern of market demand (p.48). Moreover, increased competition aggravates the principle of "diminishing marginal utility", which argues that "for a

OBSERVATION 5 OBSERVING KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM Essay

OBSERVATION 5 OBSERVING KINDERGARTEN CLASSROOM - Essay Example Inside the class, the children were gossiping with one another and making a lot of noise. Some were even banging their desks while others started to take out their notebooks and pencils from their bags. The teacher asked the children to be quiet so that she could take the roll call but the children would not listen. The teacher then shouted at the top of her voice saying, â€Å"Be quiet!† and also clapped the rostrum with her palm loudly to gain the children’s attention. Suddenly, there was pin-drop-silence. Some children looked terrified while others put their fingers on their lips. The teacher called the students â€Å"a mess† and similar rude words. Once everybody was quiet, the teacher then started taking the roll call. It was the kindergarten classroom and the average age of the children was 5 years. They were 25 children in total. The teacher made a very rational approach in transiting from the exercise activity to the classroom activity. She asked the children to arrange themselves in a line. This not only organized the children so that they could move toward the class in a disciplined way, but also saved the teacher’s time and energy that would have otherwise been consumed in guiding the scattered children toward the classroom. The children even looked very disciplined when arranged in the form of a line. While the teacher’s approach here was very praiseworthy, her way of getting the children’s attention in the classroom was just as much indecent and unsophisticated. She looked struggling very hard to gain their attention and she even had to bang the rostrum and shout at the top of her voice to make them quiet. She was loud enough to be heard shouting outside the classroom as well. Her shouting even terrified the children. This not only broke her emotional connection with the children but might also have set a bad impression on the other teachers who had heard her shout. Rather than shouting, the teacher could have easily