Thursday, December 26, 2019
Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 810 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2019/07/01 Category Finance Essay Level High school Tags: Income Inequality Essay Did you like this example? Income inequality is the unequal distribution of household or individual income across the various participants in an economy. It is often presented as the percentage of income related to a percentage of the population. It is an inequality based on the economy. DonÃ¢â¬â¢t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Can Income Inequality be Solved?" essay for you Create order Income inequality is one of the reasons why the gap between rich and poor in America is growing. There are many reasons for income inequality such as education, technology lower economic growth, one sector dominance, and capitalism. Most of the families with single householder have to work overtime to run their family because of low wages. With income inequality not only lower-class are being hurt, its middle class too with low wages. However, If this problem does not get solved then the demand of job will grow to pay for expenses. Therefore, income inequality should be addressed by increasing the minimum wage, invest more money in education and stop using the robot in automobile factories. Education is one of the reasons for income inequality in the United States. Education is the key to success. It makes space for everyone to get a better job either you poor or rich it doesnt matter if you have a higher education you can get a better job. If education is available for everyone then, people can do well-paying jobs that can reduce income inequality. If the government makes more fund for education and make it free. So, everyone can get access to higher education. Therefore, it can be one of the ways to stop income inequality. The countries that have done a better job increasing their educational attainments like Canada and Sweden, have also seen bigger broad-based income gains than the United States. ( David Leonhardt ). Which means that Canada and Sweden are mostly focusing on educating its a citizen so they can balance income inequality by offering better wages. For every challenge, we are face unemployment, poverty, crime, income growth, income inequality, productiv ity, competitiveness a great education is a major component of the solution. ( Bruce Rauner). In this quote, the author is saying that education is the major component to solve the income inequality. Which is why the United States should focus on making its educational system better in order to reduce income inequality. Technology has played a huge role in income inequality. Technology has caused associations like travel organizations, bank employees and different types of center administration to close somewhere near conveying a progressively advantageous approach to utilize those administrations. For example, robotization of assembling items has diminished openings for work, say producing a vehicle was finished by human turns before, however now because of the assistance of technology, the work has been done quicker and with less labor. The hourly wage of a robot such as Baxter has been reported to be around the US $4.32 per hour, less than the average hourly wage of US $23.32 paid to humans in US manufacturing. ( Paula Nagler ). In this quote, the author means that the wage of a robot is way cheaper than humans. Therefore, owners started using a robot instead of humans in the workplace. We should care and stop it because it is the biggest reason for income inequality. It makes the owner richer and the worker is getting poorer. Therefore if the government makes a law for every automobile companies to stop using a robot in the workplace and if they used they should pay fines and if also increase the minimum wage so, we can reduce the income inequality. On the other hand, some people claim that income inequality has been going forever. Every year, the village produced the same amount of goods for the same number of people to divide. (David Leonhardt). In this quote, the author means that every year people are making the same amount of goods. So, they will never get better goods and cant help to stop the income inequality. The people who make more money they make more goods. And the poor people not getting enough goods to increase their investments and cant make more money. Therefore, the poor are getting more poor and rich getting richer. This is started happening in the US after the great depression and it is still happening. So, they think income inequality has been going forever it wont be solved. In conclusion, from research and article research we can say income inequality is a phenomenon that is running forever and will continue running in the future. But if we take actions and work together to stop the reason for income inequality. We can solve it. And we must do it because income inequality makes lacker social mobility, shrinking middle class, living standards and it also bad for our economy because the less tax government get from us the less money goes on education, healthcare, etc. Therefore, we should work together and save our country from income inequality.
Wednesday, December 18, 2019
Why does the world need to kill two million men just because two countries canÃ¢â¬â¢t agree with each other? War is devastating to countries and most indefinitely to individuals and soldiers. A war can ruin families, friendships, education, economy, and the minds of innocent people. Most young men, who were just approaching manhood, were pulled of their innocence of childhood, and thrown into a world of rage and destruction. Soldiers that luckily survive a horrific war often find their lives turned completely upside down since they enlisted, and sometimes it is just impossible to forget the vicious past and start over again as a civilian. Many older men believe that wars being fought are wars of dignity and glory, but truthfully, wars areÃ¢â¬ ¦show more contentÃ¢â¬ ¦Another point that the author creates about the negative aspects of war is that there is never an abundant supply of food to support the well-being of all the men out there in the war. In the novel, the men who were used to eating decent meals every day before the war face severe hardships because in the army, they do not receive opulent nor tasty rations. Ã¢â¬Å"Long time since youÃ¢â¬â¢ve had anything decent to eat, eh?Ã¢â¬ Kat asks one of the [new recruits]. Ã¢â¬Å"For breakfast, turnip-bread, Ã£â¦ ¡lunch, turnip-stewÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ ¦itÃ¢â¬â¢s nothing new for it to be made of sawdust.Ã¢â¬ (Remarque 36) If these poor soldiers had better nourishments and more rest, the already-harsh environment would have been easier to survive. Many more recruits have actually died from a lack of sleep and food than from actual hand-to-hand combats. Another issue about the war is the complete loss of sanitation, or hygiene. Ã¢â¬Å"We must look out for our bread. The rats have become more numerous lately because the trenches are no longer in good condition.Ã¢â¬ (Remarque 101, 102) Because it is very unclean and pathogens float all over the place, various soldiers have deceased from an i nfection somewhere in the body. Maybe, just maybe, if the army had more suitable circumstances for the men in the war, fewer soldiers would have died. In addition, a concept that Remarque makes regarding the adverse effects of wars is that wars have killed many frank young men, who
Tuesday, December 10, 2019
Based on the principle of LMX theory, what observation would you make about CarlyÃ¢â¬â¢s leadership at Mills , Smith and Peter.The LMX theory is a theory that focuses on the interaction between the leader and the follower. Based on the case study, I observed that Carly used the in-group leadership style at Mills, Smith and Peter. She gave more attention to her preferred team and cause the other team members to be unhappy. She may be considered an ineffective leader because for better result on task to be achieved she needs to all the teams equal attention. Is there an in-group and out-group, and, if so, which are they?In the case study, there are both in-groups and out-groups. Jack and his team fall in to the in-group category while Terri, Julie and Sarah fall in the category of the out group. They fall under this category because they have observed that Carly has picked Jack as her favorite and they are unhappy about it. We will write a custom essay sample on LeaderÃ¢â¬âMember Exchange Theory (LMX Theory) Case Study or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In what way is CarlyÃ¢â¬â¢s relationship with the four groups productive or counterproductive to the overall goals of the agency?CarlyÃ¢â¬â¢s relationship with four teams is both productive and counterproductive. JackÃ¢â¬â¢s team is productive because they are willing to go the extra mile to get the work done for Carly . However the other three teams Terri, Julie and Sarah are counterproductive they are unhappy and are likely not going to go the extra mile for Carly. But, I also observed that Sarah may fall under the category of productive group because she may have observed some of these favoritism by Carly but still gets the work done regardless. Do you think Carly should change her approach toward the associate directors? If so, what should she do differently?From the case study , the company is considered as one company. Therefore, Carly should change her approach towards the associate directors to enable them achieve more for the organization.
Monday, December 2, 2019
In order to perform the job requirements an individual must exhibit a number of different skills and talents. For example, the person who fills the position must do the following: * Decide whether the research has commercial application * Move patent applications forward * Consult with management on corporate strategy * Teach, manage, and assist subordinate researchers * Develop top-notch scientific research In order to be successful in performing the aforementioned duties, the applicant must have high level research skills, interpersonal skills, leadership skills, management skills, organizational skills, marketing skills, time management skills, technical scientific knowledge, etc. Task Identity- 7 Justification: In order to successfully fill this job, an individual must understand each of the necessary tasks in performing a given project. An individual must be able to see their own projects from start to finish and the ability to identify specific tasks is essential to do so. Task Significance 6 Justification: Vitality expects their researcher to have an impact science. We will write a custom essay sample on Performance Management at Vitality Health Case or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The researcher can do so by producing high-quality scientific literature and presenting at conferences for scientific literature. Vitality expects the scientific contributions of the researcher to be worthy of receiving patents. The contributions of the research can have a large impact on people, on women specifically. As we know, cosmetic products are important to many women. Also, nutritional supplements can help to improve an individualÃ¢â¬â¢s overall health. As a result, research breakthroughs at Vitality can have a large and lasting impact. Autonomy 6 Justification: Overall, the scientist at Vitality seems to have complete freedom over the projects that he/she wishes to take on. The project must meet the following requirements: aligns with corporate strategy, receives managementÃ¢â¬â¢s approval and has commercial applications. Feedback Scores 4 Justification: Currently, evaluations are conducted once a year. It may be desirable to conduct evaluations more frequently. Also, there is some question as to the appropriateness of managersÃ¢â¬â¢ ratings. Some feel that they are timid in their ratings in order to avoid conflict. It has been reported that managers are telling the employees they received one rating, while officially giving them another, or by rotating the good ratings to different employees each year. MPS = (6 + 7 + 6)/3 * 6 * 4 = 152 2. Both the equity and expectancy theories of motivation can be used to illustrate why scientist turnover at Vitality Health was primarily occurring among the more productive scientists under the old performance management system. Equity Theory: Equity theory helps us to understand why the scientist turnover at Vitality Health was primarily associated with the more productive scientists leaving for better job opportunities. If applying the equity theory of motivation, a scientist at Vitality Health would determine the fairness of what he/she is receiving relative to what he/she is putting in, compared to others. For example, Vitality Health used a rating system consisting of 13 different rating levels. However, managers were guilty of abusing the system. They were afraid to offend employees. As a result, scientists ended up with rather homogenous ratings regardless of their actual performance. In other words, regardless of top-performing scientistsÃ¢â¬â¢ input (performance), their performance ratings (output) were similar to the performance ratings of the low-performing scientists. Furthermore, these performance ratings were used to determine merit-based wage increases. Therefore, even though actual performance was different between low and top performers, due to similar performance ratings, merit-based wage increases were similar. Consequently, top-performing scientists felt that they were treated poorly in relation to their contribution. The inequity felt by high-performing scientist helps to explain the turnover of such scientists at Vitality Health. Expectancy Theory: Salaries tended to be 7%-8% higher at Vitality Health than the competition. However, the pay model was focused on a flat salary. Therefore, there were little to no provisions for bonuses or alternative forms of compensation. The expectancy theory of motivation is related in a few ways. When applying the expectancy theory, scientists at Vitality Health would ask themselves three questions. First, Ã¢â¬Å"Will my effort lead to high performance? Ã¢â¬ Scientists had complete control over their effort. As a result, it is probably safe to say that greater effort would lead to greater performance for a scientist. Second, Ã¢â¬Å"Will performance lead to outcomes? Ã¢â¬ In other words, will increased performance lead to higher compensation or higher performance ratings? In the case of scientists at Vitality Health, based on the homogenous performance ratings and flat-salary pay model, it is unlikely that higher performance would lead to either of these outcomes. The third and final questions scientists would ask themselves is, Ã¢â¬Å"Do I find the outcomes desirable? Ã¢â¬ Do the high-performing scientists want to be rated the same as their low-performing counterparts? Do they want to be compensated similarly? If money were an outcome, is that the compensation I desire for my effort and performance? Although, scientists can control their effort, and thereby control their performance, the fact that performance leads to unfavorable and undesirable outcomes illustrates why scientist turnover at Vitality Health was primarily occurring among high-performing scientists. 3. Old SystemNew System A-E system, managers didnÃ¢â¬â¢t want to offend employees, so they only gave B and C ratings| The rating levels are limited to four options so all the levels are used and comparison is more visible| Job Evaluation Points for compensation, with a value multiple, based on job position| Uses metrics to rate employees efforts and achievements instead of just job description| Percentage pay raise is based on where they currently stand in industry pay grade. People paid above industry average get smaller percent raise than equivalent performance by someone who is paid below industry average. Employees are compared to one another rather than to preset industry standards, or compared to arbitrary grade marks| No provision for bonuses, flat rates across the table, but all were at 7-8% over competition| Forces managers to rank their employees above or below each other| | Compensation is now not only cash based, but equity is involved| | Performance-based compensation| The biggest difference seems to be that the old system would only correctly compensate someone for their efforts the first time they produce well. After that, their compensation increases at a slower rate than peers regardless of their effectiveness. Even though people were paid 7-8% over the industry averages, the structure of the compensation made people feel undervalued and eventually led many to devalue the marginal contribution to the company. The new system is an attempt to focus the pay on performance measurements and eliminate free-riding by underperforming employees. By increasing the correlation of performance to compensation, the marginal efforts of an employee becomes more valuable to them. If the MPS for Ramp;D scientists were 160, the new performance management system would encourage more productivity. A high MPS means a specific skill set with a large amount of task identity. As such, the system that is more focused on rewarding achievements rather than job title would promote more focused effort from scientists. Also, it would be difficult to compare the scientists to the industry because of their abstract job description. If the MPS for Ramp;D scientists were 60, the old performance management system would encourage more productivity. If the position scored lower in task identity and autonomy, and thus merited a lower MPS, a system based on job position rather than performance would be more appropriate. The recommended changes to improve the effectiveness of the performance management system * Make performance reviews quarterly rather than annually. This will increase the usefulness of them and take out the pressure of having them tied so closely to compensation benefits. * Under the new rating categories, the Ã¢â¬Å"achieverÃ¢â¬ ranking is too full of employees with a select few above and a pitiful few below. This does not fix the previous issue of all of the rankings of employees being grouped together. One alternative, is to rank the employees as individuals, AND as teams. This way they feel mutually responsible for a positive outcome and nobody takes it personally if a poor rating is received. * It appears one of the main complaints against the new system is that it is too comparative from employee to employee. One solution is to set up job goals/achievements that are objective that each employee must achieve in order to obtain their salary. Then, they may set extra goals to reach for if they desire further compensation in bonus format. This would ensure that compensation is based on each individualÃ¢â¬â¢s effort, rather than how they compare to other employees. 5. Effective goals that Ramp;D managers could set for Ramp;D scientists: * Increase personal annual breakthroughs by 20 percent in the next year. * Publish two articles, annually, in noteworthy scientific journals or present at two noteworthy scientific conferences. This will improve the personal skills of the Ramp;D scientist, and promote the name and research of Vitality Health in the public sphere. * Improve at least two existing products annually such that the products achieve a 15% sales increase within 3 months of the improvement. * Participate in the development of patents, and successfully receive one patent each year.