Capitalist Welfare States
Political Science 111 Instructor: Dr. Gregory Johnston Due Date: 27 April 2009 Capitalist Welfare States A welfare state refers to a state's responsibility to secure some vital degree of welfare for its citizens and to ensure of the security of the people that live within the boundaries of that state. Capitalist welfare states are categorized under three models. These models include the Liberal regime, the Social Democratic regime, and the Corporatist regime. These regimes are characterized by several key variables, which create different systems of social stratification. The Liberal regime, which the United States is classified under, is associated with poverty relief that sustains differentiation based on income. The Corporatist regime is identified with contributory social insurance that maintains class distinctions based on occupational status. The Social Democratic regime is linked to middle-class universalism and social equality. While all of these models have benefits, the one that I find most appealing is the Social Democratic regime. The Social Democratic regime seems to be the most beneficial and ideal type of capitalist welfare state. This is the only model of the three that does not seem to classify its citizens into groups of aristocrats and underprivileged. This model has several benefits, such as universal healthcare, which make it possible for all within
12 angry men
In the play "Twelve Angry Men", by Sidney Lumet, Every person may have his own way of defining the term "reasonable doubt. The story unfolds as 12 men of a jury are asked to deliberate beyond reason able doubt whether a 16 year old boy knifed his father to death. One jury, number eight, stands alone against 11 others to convince them that the boy is not guilty. There is a witness who said that she saw the murder happen through her window as a train was going past and an old man who said the he heard the thump of the body hitting the floor as someone ran away. Everyone on the jury seems to think that the boy is guilty as all the evidence points to him committing the murder, except for one jury who "just wants to talk". Before he sentences a young man to death, he wants to make sure that the fasts are right. To the jury#4 acted by E. G. Marshall is a well-educated, smug and conceited, well-dressed stockbroker, presumably wealthy; studious, methodical, possesses an incredible recall and grasp of the facts of the case; common-sensical which is more of objective, dispassionate, cool-headed and rational and yet stuffy and prim. This often displays a stern glare; treats the case like a puzzle to be deductively solved rather than as a case that may send the defendant to death and claims that he never sweats. Jury # 4 states that the boy's entire alibi was 'flimsy." He claimed that
Employment Law and Equal Opportunities legislation
Employment Law and Equal Opportunities legislation The Employment Rights Act 1996 was created so every employee has the right to holidays, leave, payslips, redundancy payment, and maternity leave. The Race Relations Act 1976 was created so everyone would be treated equally, whatever their colour race religion nationality citizenship or ethnic origin. The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 was created to stop discrimination between males and females as this occurs in training, recruiting, dismissing and promotion prospects. Without any of these legislation's in place anyone could get treated unfairly at work. For example; Mr Black went to get a job at a company and was told by Mr White that he couldn't have a job in charge of white people. This would be discrimination because of his colour and Mr Black would be able to take this to court now that the Race Relations Act is in place. Mrs Muslim tries to get a job as a nurse and is told that she will have to wear a short nurses traditional uniform but wearing a short dress is against her religion. She asks if she could wear trousers but is told no even though the men are allowed to wear trousers. This is discrimination against her religion and she could take further action using the Race Relations Act 1976. Mrs Female is the most qualified person at an interview for a doctor but is told she did not get the job. When she finds
Describe how the doctrine of precedent operates through a hierarchy or courts within the English legal system. Illustrate you description with cases.
a) Describe how the doctrine of precedent operates through a hierarchy or courts within the English legal system. Illustrate you description with cases. (15) The doctrine of binding precedent states that a judge us bound by the law contained in earlier decisions. This system is based on stare decisis; that which is decided is to stand. The operation of judicial precedence depends on the hierarchy of the courts. This is because before a judge is bound by a precedent, three conditions have to be satisfied, one of which being that the precedent must have been decided by a binding court. In matters of law with a European element, the highest court is the European Court of Justice. Its decisions are binding on all English courts including the House of Lords, the next highest court, whose decisions are binding on all lower courts and, up until 1966, was also bound by its own decisions. It was in this year that the Lord Chancellor, Lord Gardiner issued a practise statement that the House of Lords could depart from their own previous decisions "when it appears right to do so." The first time the House of Lords exercised this power was in 1972 in the case of British Railways Board v Herrington when they overruled an earlier House of Lords decision in Addie v Dumbreck [1929]. It wasn't until 1986 in R v Shivpuri that the House of Lords overruled itself in a criminal case,
Harold has been involved in an accident at work. He suffered severe spinal injuries and is unlikely to be able to return to work for some time.What type of case is this? Which court might the case appear before? What could be the outcome of the case?
Harold has been involved in an accident at work. He suffered severe spinal injuries and is unlikely to be able to return to work for some time. What type of case is this? Which court might the case appear before? What could be the outcome of the case? (10 marks) The question is designed to analyse the case study with depth, using the three areas of study given, namely; identifying the type of case, the court in which the case might appear before, and what could the outcome of the case be. The case involves civil law procedures because the civil justice system is designed to decide disputes between individuals. A civil claim will therefore arise because Harold would have the right to seek remedy for the losses he would have to withstand. Once the decision to go to court has been taken, proceedings will be started in either the High Court or the County Court depending on the amount claimed. Alternatively, Harold can take this case to an 'industrial tribunal' where workers claim compensation from their employers on the grounds that his personal injuries occurred at work. If proven that there has been a case of breach of contract, an award of damages is made with the objective to place the claimant in a similar position, as far as money is concerned, as he would have been had the contract not been broken. This tribunal is said to provide a cheap, informal, quick and
The differences between lexical and inflectional morphology
The differences between lexical and inflectional morphology Analogous to the difficulties in defining the term "word", is the great deal of difficulty involved in differentiating between lexical and inflectional morphology. In order to contrast these two morphologies we must, of course define them. As is customary, everything is simple to start with. Lexical morphology is the study of morphological relations among lexemes. Fundamentally it deals with the relationship between complex and simple lexemes. Try, for example, is a simple lexeme, it cannot be broken down into simpler morphological elements. A more complex lexeme would be trying. In addition, there are compound lexemes, an example being swordfish. Different lexemes have separate entries and different definitions in the dictionary. Inflectional morphology, on the other hand, is concerned with the relationship within paradigms. A paradigm, here, are the forms of the same lexeme. These include the past, plural and possessive. A paradigm does not change the grammatical class of its stems. This branch of morphology deals with "semantic opposition among categories" and the formal means, such as inflections, that enable the discrimination between morphosyntactic categories. A morphosyntactic category is one in which criteria from morphology and syntax apply. To give you a specific example of the differences
NEGLIGENCE - BREACH OF DUTY
AMY KEMP NEGLIGENCE - BREACH OF DUTY 04-02-04 Angela had recently been taken on as an adult volunteer helper with an outdoor activity centre. She was making her first trip with a group of 10-12 year old girls. Beth, an experienced leader, asked Angela to supervise the children building a rope bridge across a river. Angela had had no previous training or experience in making rope bridges, but she agreed to supervise on her own. When Angela's group of children started to cross the bridge that they had built, it collapsed, injuring Delia, aged 10. Angela had told the children the bridge was safe to use. (a) Explaining the relevant rules of law, decide whether Beth owed a duty of care to Delia in this situation. Lord Atkin originally determined how a duty of care could be identified in his 'neighbour principle.' In Donoghue V Stevenson [1932] he said, "You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour." It was later established in Caparo V Dickman [1990], the test for duty of care must be answered in three stages. The first of these is the same as the Neighbour test. When applying this test to Beth, we must consider if the injuries Delia suffered were foreseeable and, as she knew that Angela had no previous experience, it would be fair to assume that she would
Legal and Ethical Issues in Health Services : Cruzan vs Director, Missouri Department of Health et. al. 110 S. Ct. 2841
Tammy L. Greene 760 Tower Road Lebanon, Missouri 65536 (417) 532-1964 [email protected] Legal and Ethical Issues in Health Services Assignment #1 Case Brief of: Cruzan vs Director, Missouri Department of Health et. al. 110 S. Ct. 2841 Facts: Petitioner Nancy Cruzan received severe injuries in an automobile accident which left her incompetent and in a vegetative state. Ms Cruzan's parents sought a court order to terminate artificial nutrition and hydration, because it had been determined she had no chance of recovery. Judicial History: Employees of the state hospital in which Ms Cruzan was a patient of denied the parents request to remove Ms Cruzan from artificial nutrition and hydration without authorization from a state trial court for termination, because such termination would cause death. The circuit court ruled that Ms Cruzan's parents acting on her behalf, could order her feeding tube removed. This ruling was in favor of Ms Cruzan's parents, and was appealed by the Director, Missouri Department of Health to the Missouri Supreme Court. The Missouri Supreme Court reversed the trial judge's decision in favor of the Director, Missouri Department of Health. Ms Cruzan's parents then appealed it to the United States Supreme Court. Issue(s): Ms Cruzan's family waged a legal battle to have their daughter removed from artificial nutrition and hydration. The
Suspect witnesses
Suspect witnesses Warnings to Jury Makanjuola warning This is a discretionary warning where the witness has been suspect as to whether they were lying or suspect in anyway. This is usually given where the witness may look as though they have a grudge against the Defendant. This all started in 1977 with the Turnbull case. A Turnbull warning is the one most likely to be used, as it sets out all of the guidelines in disputed eye-witness cases. There must be evidence capable of supporting its correctness or it is not allowed to go to jury in the first place. This warning is to help stop wrongful conviction on unreliable identifications. Cut throat defences: warnings to juries. A Beck warning is given where it looks as though the Witness has a purpose of their own to serve. This takes away a corroboration warning requirement, only a need to proceed with caution warning. Beck warnings may be given against co-defendants or against other people with a purpose of their own to serve. There is a mandatory Beck warning, and a discretionary Beck warning. Cut throat defences would be a mandatory one. Where a witness is mentally ill and of "bad character" the warning, which again is discretionary, is that a jury must have regard to all of the medical evidence and circumstantial evidence of the witnesses
Discuss the pros and cons of the requirement of individual and direct concern for natural and legal persons to challenge Community acts pursuant to Article 230 ECT.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
