9 recursos para hacer frente a la deportacin

9 recursos para hacer frente a la deportacin Todos los extranjeros, incluidos los residentes permanentes legales, pueden ser deportados por mà ºltiples causas. Cuando un inmigrante est en un proceso de deportacià ³n, o se ha dictado en su contra una orden de salida de Estados Unidos, tiene a su alcance una serie de recursos frente a la deportacià ³n que puede utilizar. Deber elegir entre los mismos segà ºn las caracterà ­sticas especà ­ficas de su caso y de su situacià ³n. 9 recursos frente a la deportacià ³n de inmigrantes 1. Salida voluntaria: es una modalidad de alivio discrecional de la deportacià ³n. Es decir, una corte en audiencia o las autoridades migratorias tienen libertad para decidir si la conceden. Permite que un extranjero abandone EEUU sin el estigma de la deportacià ³n. Pero su gran ventaja es que permite al inmigrante, una vez que se encuentre de regreso en su paà ­s, solicitar una visa para regresar a EEUU, que podr ser concedida o denegada, segà ºn las circunstancias de cada caso. 2. Cancelacià ³n de la deportacià ³n (conocida como relief of removal en inglà ©s) es otro recurso frente a la deportacià ³n de inmigrantes. Los requisitos para solicitarla varà ­an segà ºn el caso: si se es un residente legal permanente, si no se es, o si es una và ­ctima de violencia domà ©stica. En ningà ºn caso la persona que solicite la cancelacià ³n de la deportacià ³n puede haber sido condenada anteriormente por haber cometido una felonà ­a o delito agravado. 3. Asilo: puede ser un recurso frente a la deportacià ³n. Se puede conceder a las personas que acrediten que no pueden regresar a su paà ­s porque allà ­ han sido perseguidos o teman por motivos fundados que puedan serlo por razà ³n de su opinià ³n polà ­tica, raza, religià ³n, nacionalidad o pertenecer a un determinado grupo social. Entre los requisitos mà ­nimos para que el asilo se conceda se encuentran el haberlo solicitado en el plazo de un aà ±o a contar desde la fecha de entrada en EEUU, no haber sido condenado por una felonà ­a o delito agravado y no ser un riesgo para la seguridad nacional. No debe confundirse el asilo con el aplazamiento de la expulsià ³n (withholding of removal, en inglà ©s), que es una proteccià ³n temporal. Para que se conceda el inmigrante debe demostrar durante el proceso de deportacià ³n que, si regresa a su paà ­s, existe una probabilidad de que ser torturado que es mayor a la de que no lo ser. Si consigue probarlo, el aplazamiento de la expulsià ³n deber necesariamente ser otorgado. 4. Ajuste de estatus: es un proceso por el que un extranjero adquiere la condicià ³n de residente permanente legal. En el caso de una deportacià ³n, durante el proceso el inmigrante puede solicitar al juez que ajuste su estatus, siempre y cuando el interesado cumpla una serie de requisitos. Salvo excepciones muy concretas, no se concede el ajuste de estatus a personas contra las que con anterioridad se dictà ³ una orden de deportacià ³n. 5. Mocià ³n para reabrir un caso: se presenta ante un juez de inmigracià ³n cuando el inmigrante tenga acceso a una nueva prueba que sea importante y que no tuviera a su disposicià ³n durante la audiencia de deportacià ³n. Deber presentarse en los 90 dà ­as siguientes a la orden final de deportacià ³n. Esta mocià ³n no suspende la ejecucià ³n de la deportacià ³n, que sigue su curso, a menos que la corte o el DHS acuerde un aplazamiento de la deportacià ³n. 6. Mocià ³n para revisar un caso de deportacià ³n: se presenta ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones de Inmigracià ³n, informacià ³n en inglà ©s (BIA, por sus siglas en inglà ©s). Su objetivo es que se revise el caso argumentando que ha habido un error en la aplicacià ³n de la ley o en los hechos. Deber presentarse esta en los 30 dà ­as siguientes al dictamen firme de la orden de deportacià ³n. Al igual que ocurre con la mocià ³n para reabrir el caso, aquà ­ tampoco se suspende el proceso ordinario de ejecucià ³n de la deportacià ³n a menos que una corte o el DHS ordene un aplazamiento de la misma. 7. Aplazamiento de la deportacià ³n (conocido como stay of removal en inglà ©s): es una suspensià ³n temporal de la ejecucià ³n de una orden de deportacià ³n. Es automticamente concedida en los casos de apelacià ³n, pero discrecional en otros supuestos. 8. Apelacià ³n administrativa: una vez que un juez de inmigracià ³n ha dictado una orden de deportacià ³n, el afectado puede recurrir la decisià ³n ante el BIA. Asimismo, si el Departamento de Seguridad Interna (DHS, por sus sigles en inglà ©s) no est de acuerdo con la decisià ³n del juez de inmigracià ³n, tambià ©n puede apelar. La decisià ³n del BIA en vinculante, es decir, debe ser obedecida tanto por el juez de inmigracià ³n que fallà ³ en primera instancia como por el DHS y el inmigrante. En dicha decisià ³n se puede confirmar la decisià ³n judicial original o cambiarla, es decir, puede dejar sin efecto la orden de deportacià ³n. En casos muy extraordinarios, el Procurador General de Estados Unidos puede alterar una decisià ³n del BIA. 9. Apelacià ³n judicial. En casos muy especiales se permite que un inmigrante apele la decisià ³n del Tribunal de Apelaciones de Inmigracià ³n (BIA) ante una corte federal. Todas las formas de alivio discrecional que corresponde al inmigrante probar que reà ºne los requisitos legales para que se le conceda el alivio y que se lo merece. La Corte tiene libertad para decidir si lo concede o no. En el caso de salida voluntaria no es necesaria la audiencia en Corte, ya que puede ser acordada por las autoridades migratorias. Consejos Si mientras dura la espera para presentarse en Corte si se produce un cambio de domicilio a otro estado, es posible solicitar un cambio de corte. Las revisiones de los procesos de deportacià ³n que se estn llevando a cabo en casos muy concretos y por decisià ³n de las autoridades migratorias suponen la no deportacià ³n del inmigrante beneficiado, pero a diferencia de recursos de alivio como el ajuste de estatus o el asilo, en esos casos el inmigrante no gana el derecho a una residencia permanente. En otras palabras, no va a ser deportado pero tampoco es legalizado. El presidente Obama autorizà ³ dos pequeà ±os alivios. Uno para Dreamers que cumplen con los requerimientos para solicitar la Accià ³n Diferida. El otro para familiares de militares mediante la parole in place. Beneficios y perdones Los inmigrantes con peticiones antiguas aprobadas pero que no finalizaron los trmites podrà ­an estar protegidos por la norma 245(i). Si se cree que se tiene derecho a este beneficio, consultar con un abogado. Si se produce una deportacià ³n, en algunos casos es posible pedir el perdà ³n I-212  y, posiblemente, otro perdà ³n al mismo tiempo para no tener que cumplir fuera de Estados Unidos todos los aà ±os del castigo. NOTA Este artà ­culo es meramente informativo. No es asesorà ­a legal.

Free Essays on Rutgers

In life, it is very important to improve in any way possible. During my past four years in high school, I have used my talents and abilities in order to help benefit others and improve my community. Since childhood, I have always been very creative and artistic in all of my endeavors – both academic and extra-curricular. In addition, I have always been a very enthusiastic student and have had a strong interest and desire to learn new things. I have the difficult of being the â€Å"second†. I will be the second one in my family who is going to attend college. I have a sister goes to college far away from me, I realize it will not be easy. Without having anyone around to advise me about the new life I will face, I have had to figure out everything by myself. If I am to make a mistake in selecting a college, I will bear the full burden of that mistake. As I begin to realize this, I understand that I will need to find the inner strength and self-reliance to face difficult changes alone, but I know I have the personal strength to do this. In addition, because I am the second in my family to be educated abroad, my fifteen year old brother looks up to me in awe. He fully accepts to follow in my footsteps and to be educated in the legendary land that I am constantly speaking of. As a result, I must be careful in what I do since he will follow in my tracks. Thinking about these consequences, I decided that nothing would be easy for me, but whatever I faced, I would never give up. With the hopes of my little brother on the line, I am not going to thwart him dreams of studying in the states. When I first saw the booklet of University of Rutgers Newark on my counselor’s desk, I knew right away that this was the school I wanted to be part of. The University of Rutgers Newark offers me much more than an education. It also offers me the opportunity to learn how to be an individual who can fulfill society’s needs both now... Free Essays on Rutgers Free Essays on Rutgers In life, it is very important to improve in any way possible. During my past four years in high school, I have used my talents and abilities in order to help benefit others and improve my community. Since childhood, I have always been very creative and artistic in all of my endeavors – both academic and extra-curricular. In addition, I have always been a very enthusiastic student and have had a strong interest and desire to learn new things. I have the difficult of being the â€Å"second†. I will be the second one in my family who is going to attend college. I have a sister goes to college far away from me, I realize it will not be easy. Without having anyone around to advise me about the new life I will face, I have had to figure out everything by myself. If I am to make a mistake in selecting a college, I will bear the full burden of that mistake. As I begin to realize this, I understand that I will need to find the inner strength and self-reliance to face difficult changes alone, but I know I have the personal strength to do this. In addition, because I am the second in my family to be educated abroad, my fifteen year old brother looks up to me in awe. He fully accepts to follow in my footsteps and to be educated in the legendary land that I am constantly speaking of. As a result, I must be careful in what I do since he will follow in my tracks. Thinking about these consequences, I decided that nothing would be easy for me, but whatever I faced, I would never give up. With the hopes of my little brother on the line, I am not going to thwart him dreams of studying in the states. When I first saw the booklet of University of Rutgers Newark on my counselor’s desk, I knew right away that this was the school I wanted to be part of. The University of Rutgers Newark offers me much more than an education. It also offers me the opportunity to learn how to be an individual who can fulfill society’s needs both now...

Case Study 1 Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Case Study 1 - Research Paper Example These capabilities make windows 7 ultimate preferable as they help safe on time through the hard disk such engines and improve on data security through data encryption. Data security is guaranteed due to the data encryption security feature as only authorized personnel will be able to access the stored data. Additionally, windows 7 ultimate version also supports the multi finger touch-screen technology which allows the resizing of windows therefore improving the user interface and easing the use of the computers at Mr. Green’s business (Pane & Wentworth, 2010). The improved functionalities on data encryption and hard disk search functionalities will be beneficial to Mr. Green’s business in saving on the time consumed and improving on data security. The minimum processor requirements for both the 32 and 64 bit applications of windows 7 ultimate are 1 gigahertz or faster (Pane & Wentworth, 2010). The 32 bit application requires a minimum of 1 gigabyte of Radom Access memo ry while the 64 bit application requires a minimum of 2 gigabyte of Random Access memory. The minimum hard disk space for 32 bit application if 16 gigabytes while the 64 bit application requires 20 gigabytes (Zacker, 2010). The computers at Mr. ... ncryption and search capabilities, it supports direct access remote connectivity and Branch Cache which is a communication tool used for satellite offices (Rathbone, 2009). 2. List and explain the concerns about win 7 ultimate capabilities that Mr. Green should be aware of as his business and network grows There are however various issues and challenges that Mr. Greens business is likely to face as a result of the implementation of the network in his business. One of the main challenges is the security threats. Security has been a major challenge to most small and medium sized businesses, these businesses and faced by internal and external security threats that may even impair the business operations. One of the security challenges in the network is worms and viruses that may affect the network. The viruses and worms may affect all the computers on the network within a very short time. Virus infection is likely to cause loss of erroneous manipulation of data. As a result of the netwo rking, all the computers on the network are prone to virus infection. The viruses are mostly transmitted to the computers via emails and content from the internet. Another security challenge that Mr. Green is likely to face in the business network is the hacking of the network. Business networks are more vulnerable to hackers that are likely to leak or deliberately manipulate the important data about the business. These security challenges are likely to result to expensive costs so as to maintain a secured network. Therefore, Mr. Green will be required to commit various resources to implement security measures on the network. 5. Describe the concerns you have about helping Mr. Green experiment with Windows 7 ultimate without requiring commitment to it The transition from windows 7 home

Pere Goriot Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Pere Goriot - Essay Example This novel shows how difficult it can be to maintain a loving relationship in the modern world. Through the character of Eugà ¨ne de Rastignac, it is possible to see that while love is achieved at points in this novel, it is no longer the traditional version of love. It is a new, modern version where certain faults and attitudes must be ignored in order to make things work. One such example of a character who cannot truly love another is Eugà ¨ne de Rastignac, who does not have any interest in the women he pursues, but it rather more interested in improving his position in society. This is shown by the fact that he abruptly halts his pursuit of Madame de Restaud and begins his pursuit of Madame de Nucingen simply because of who the latter’s father is. As the novel progresses, Rastignac does develop true feelings for Delphine. This, however, blinds him to her true character, as she is only involved with him for selfish intentions. He deceives himself into believing that she is not as bad as she seems, but it is clear that she is only involved with him for her own interests and, therefore, does not truly love him. While this relationship does eventually become sincere, it only becomes so because of Rastignac’s decision to ignore all of Delphine’s faults and to love her anyways. This makes the relationship seem somewhat forced, as Ra stignac has to make a decision to love this selfish person, rather than simply looking out for his own good. This could be viewed as a modern form of love, implying that the old love where people are perfect for one another no longer exists. Another character that is affected by Rastignac is Victorine. She is a young girl who falls for the first attractive man who shows interest in her, which is not true love, but is rather based on inexperience. Rastignac does not truly love her, but he leads her on in order to possibly marry her for her father’s money.

Leadership of Richard Branson Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Leadership of Richard Branson - Research Paper Example In total, there are over 60 companies operating under the Virgin brand name with the most recent being Virgin Galactic that was created in September 2004. Virgin Galactic illustrates Branson’s high-risk appetite where he signed a 21 million dollars deal that would see the company carry out space tourism. Primarily, the Virgin Group operates in three main areas lifestyle, entertainment and travel where Branson has been cited as saying that his business model has been found on starting businesses in new countries and markets as opposed to expanding the current businesses as this affords him a global presence. Notably also, the coming up of the business name Virgin where one of Branson’s associates stated that this signified their commercial innocence as every business they got into they were a virgin (Pfister & Tierney, 2008). In the 1970s, Richard Branson came up with principles that have long since defined the Virgin Group as they are its brand values; these are value for money, good quality, innovation, competitively challenging and fun. There being over 200 firms and foundations, the Virgin Group is not a single object but a congeries of firms and institutes that are mostly based in the United Kingdom. A distinguishing characteristic of the Virgin Group is the fact that the companies are all run separately and the only thing connecting them is finance and the brand name. Prior to being listed in the stock exchange in 1986, the Virgin Group was privately managed. This corporate structure, however, was not prosperous and as such it was made private again and this saw the market crash in 1987. Thereafter, Branson and other shareholders bought back all the shares at their original price of offer. In the subsequent years, Branson got into business ventures where customers were underserved and the Virgin br and name was only given to companies that had certain characteristics- innovation or high quality. The Virgin

Strategic interactions of players in Oligopoly Markets

Strategic interactions of players in Oligopoly Markets The strategic interaction between players in the oligopoly markets gives its study a tint of dynamism. This interdependence nature of oligopolies brings about the concept of conjectural behaviour, a situation whereby the actions and decisions of firms in the markets depends on the actions and decisions of the others. This brings about many of the theoretical problems in modelling oligopolistic behaviour (Waterson 1984, pg 17). An extension of such problem is borne on the willingness of firms to gain market power, and most cases; it is done through integration into lines of business that are related. Literature varies with respect to the theoretical aspect of integrating related firms with unrelated ones, as there has been mixed results in the area of profitability. Rumelt found out that firms that are not vertically integrated are more profitable (Rumelt 1976). Whereas, the situation was different with Luffman and Reed, who argued that vertically integrated firms are more profitable (Luffman and Reed 1984). Policy actions is said to cause a loss in social welfare rather than the actions of the firms themselves, and that integration is used strategically to achieve anticompetitive effects (Cowling and Mueller 1978). This study assesses the measurement of monopoly profit in a collusive oligopolistic market and also deals with the estimation of welfare loss in the distribution aspect of the British film industry. It will also deal with whether vertical integration contributes adversely to consumers welfare or not. The analysis is carried out using the gross profit, general selling administrative expenses and after tax profits of the distributors in the British film industry for the past 20 years, ranging from 1990 2009. As is in the treatment of oligopolies, there are different ways of measuring the game theory. It is either the use of Bertrand equilibrium (which focuses on the manipulation of price to gain market power) is employed, or the Cournot model (which talks about the adjustment of quantity) is used. In other cases, there is the use of intermediate models which deals with the combination of price and quantity adjustment to achieve competitive edge over other players in the industry. In t his analysis, Cowling and Muellers (1978) model will be employed. Their method is based on the Cournot-Nash equilibrium model. The distributors involved in this analysis will be divided into two categories as is the industrial structure. There will be a set that is involved in integration of the production and or exhibition aspect into the business of distribution, while the other set is basically the independent distributors, that is, those involved only in the business of distribution without recourse to other aspect of the industry. The next section will deal with a discussion into the industry. This will involve the history of the industry, the basic structure, size of the industry, how concentrated the industry is and a look into the recent development in the industry. A descriptive statistics into the distribution aspect of the industry will also be discussed. Chapter 3 (i.e. literature review) will deal with the approaches used in the analysis of the behaviour of oligopolies that collude in other to gain monopoly profits. The section will start with a brief review of the oligopoly theories as it affects the industry. The main model in this work, the Cournot-Nash model, will be reviewed before the discussion of the complications in the work of Cowling and Mueller (1978). The assumption that welfare loss is enhanced through vertically integration will then be reviewed. The methodology chapter (i.e. chapter 4) will be based on how the analysis is to be carried out. There will be the description of data, the met hods used and the problems encountered during the analysis. Chapter 5 will be based on the findings of the work. It will involve the presentation and discussion in the findings. The final section, chapter 6, will be a conclusion on the work and policy recommendation, if any. Chapter 2 The Industry The British film industry, over several years, can be classified as undulating, with its high and low peaks. The industry is characterised by volatility and persistent instability, and due to such inconsistencies, has attracted government intervention. There are catastrophic cycles in the history of British film. Fluctuations in cinema attendance and the degree of American dominance in the industry were major factors that influenced the industry. Despite these cycles, the industry is said to be the second largest in the world, next to that of US. This section would look at the history of the industry, the industrial structure (i.e. the key distinct but related sectors in the industry; production, distribution and exhibition), size and concentration. This would involve focusing on the pertinent issues that have contributed to the development of the industry over the years. After this, a discussion into recent developments of the industry would be done. History The emergence of the film industry can be attributed to the series of innovations encountered in the nineteenth century in the US, France and UK. Shortly after the UK dominance in the American market (accounting for about 15% share of the market), there was a slum in their dominance as a result of Americas expensive and heavily marketed productions, which resulted into the loss of indigenous followership to less than 10% (Bakker 2005). Despite this, the home audience increased prompting the government to introduce the Entertainment Tax in 1916. This is based on the premises that the industry is a sleeping giant, thereby including other forms of entertainment, like music hall and theatre in the tax. However, the tax was abolished in 1960 (Murphy 2004). The dominance of the American film market was unprecedented in the 1920s that the government had to intervene by the establishment of the Cinematograph Films Act in 1927. The act was to encourage the production of films indigenously and also set the criteria for the distribution and exhibition of films in the home industry. It was believed that the industry could help stimulate the exports of other goods and services in the British economy, and that it would help wade off American dominance in the industry. This act recorded significant success, as more production companies sprang up, among which are Warners, Fox and British International Pictures. The production of films in the UK doubled as a result. However, the criticism faced by the act has to do with the production of low quality films and low cost of the films, in order to meet the quota requirement set out by the Act. In 1936, the act was reviewed and it allocated quotas to both the distribution and exhibition sector of the i ndustry. Also, quality test was also included in the act. This was to encourage competitiveness in the international market for the industry. Financial institutions were also encouraged to participate in the industry through the provision financial assistance to firms in the industry. At the end of World War II, the industry experienced a boom, which saw cinema attendance soar. Of worthy mention is the existence of the Rank Organisation, a vertically integrated firm, involved in the production, distribution and exhibition of films in the industry. The firm dominated the industry in the 1940s, and was the largest film distributor at the time (UK Film Council Research and Statistics Unit 2009). The British government enhanced their role in the administration of the industry when it was realised the American film industry is taking over the home market, through the establishment of the National Film Finance Corporation (NFFC) and the Eady Levy in 1950. The Eady levy was a law enforcing the ploughing back of a percentage of the film profits back into the development of the industry (UK Film Council, 2009). In the early 1980s when Margaret Thatcher came into power, there was an attempt to create a free market in all industries, with the use of a deregulation policy. This was in view of breaking up monopolies, thereby, enhancing competitiveness in the economy. However, there was criticism that there would be a preference for profit maximisation of firms rather than the welfare of people (BFI Institute 2005, pg 1). In line with this deregulation policy, the Eady Levy was abolished in 1985 and the 25% tax break for film investors was removed. The withdrawal of government support in these areas made getting involved in the film business more risky. At the time, the only hope from the state was also privatised thereby curtailing financial assistance. The Rank Organisation failed at this time. Despite this, the industry still witnessed unprecedented growth. In the words of Leonard Quart, in his work The religion of the market cited in Friedman (1993), despite the Thatcher governments unwillin gness to aid the film industry, it did establish a general mood that encouraged economic risk-taking and experimentation with new and more innovative business practices (Friedman 1993, pg 25). Cannon Group became the dominant player in the industry and was involved not only in the financing of films, but was also engaged in the production, distribution and exhibition. But due to over expansion, the group became bankrupt. Structure, Size and Concentration The industry is characterised basically by activities in three areas, which include the production, the distribution and the exhibition of films. These activities are unique but are related in that the films produced are given to distributors, who market to the exhibitors that show it to the final audience. Thus from the process of production till the final stage where the films are screened, there is distributors who serve as middle men, who helps realise the potential of the film. Production The industry is production led. By production expenditure, the market is the fifth largest and is the eleventh largest with respected to the number of films produced as at 2008. The production sector is heavily dependent of inward investments, basically from the United States. This was attributed to the availability of tax relief, the high quality of workforce and the strength of the exchange rate. The fall of the UK pound contributed significantly to the rebound in the production of films. The total expenditure appreciated to about 20 per cent in 2009 when compared to that of the preceding year. Based on the UK Film Council Statistics in 2008, the sector has about 202 active production companies, with few large ones making films of substantial budgets and others producing mainly low budget films (UK Film Council 2009). Distribution Distribution has to do with the management of the release of films produced in order to earn revenue. The main function of the distributor is to convince the exhibitor in renting or booking each film after production. This is a value chain and it involves negotiation with exhibitors, sequencing of the various windows at which to screen the films, advertisement of the films produced and printing production of the films. However, there is also a weakness in this arm as most of the firms are dominated by the UK subsidiaries of American studios. As at 2008, these subsidiaries accounted for 78 per cent of the market power and the top distributors, numbering up to ten, were responsible for 95 per cent of the market share. The largest indigenous distributor in the industry in terms of gross box office is Entertainment Plc. It was responsible for 8 per cent of the market share in 2008. However, the distribution arm of the industry is taunted by audiovisual piracy, which contributed largely t o most of the losses experienced by firms involved. The marginal profit encountered are as a result of retail sale of DVDs and showing on television, with the Video on demand (VOD) market relatively underdeveloped, contributing marginally to the total revenue. The focus of this analysis is on the distribution aspect of the industry. Based on the characteristics of the sector, it is highly concentrated with few firms assuming a greater control of the market share. Unfortunately, this aspect of the British film industry has been given less attention in the past by state regulations, with more emphasis being given to production rather than distribution. However, the bulk of the profit generated in the industry is greatly enhanced by the activities of distributors as they are involved in the promotion and distribution of the work of the producers, helping achieve the full potential of the films. As stated earlier, this is because they act as intermediaries between film makers, exhibition outlets and the final audience. Due to their indispensable role, there absence in the industry would create a situation where there is neither reinvestment in film production nor the display of viable movies to the final consumers. Also, in their absence, the industry would be open to exploitation from external market, such as the domination in existence in the production aspect of the industry. There are several independent distributors who are UK-based operating in the sector and are basically divided into small and large independent distributors. Even though the large distributors are involved in the release of fewer titles in comparison with smaller ones, they still have control of the market share. Exhibition Exhibition has to do with the display of films to the final audience through theatre screening. The market is dominated by few large numbers, as is the case of the distributors, of firms. But these firms are not predominantly owned by foreign firms. In 2008, majority of the screens were controlled by firms; Odeon, Cineworld and Vue, two of which were owned by private equity firms. Recent Development Insert The industry contributed a total of GBP2.5bn to the economy in 2007, with production cropping up a large chunk of 48 per cent, distribution responsible 36 per cent and exhibition taking up the remaining 16 per cent. The industry also contributed to other aspects of the economy like exports and employment. In 2007, the balance of payment surplus accruing to the industry was estimated to about GBP232m. According to the Labour Force Survey conducted by the Office of National Statistics, there were over 35,000 jobs in the industry. There were over 7000 firms in the industry as at 2008 and these were mainly concentrated in the production arm of the industry. However, the concentration of activities in the distribution arm of the industry is concentrated in the hand of few. The contribution of distributors to the industry, and ultimately to the economy, makes it interesting for a study into how they contribute to welfare loss and how vertical integration affects the accumulation of monopoly profits/losses. Chapter 3 Literature Review From previous studies carried out by researchers, there were mixed results as regards the loss in social welfare by firms trying to gain the bulk of the market share in various industries. In the case of Harberger, he found out that the loss of welfare in the United States is at 0.1 of 1 per cent of the Gross National Product (GNP) (Harberger 1954). This finding confirmed that the loss of social welfare as a result of monopolistic tendencies is insignificant. This idea was also backed by others, even with the use of varying assumptions. However, this was under attack by Bergson (1973) who criticised the partial equilibrium framework employed. Bergson employed the general equilibrium approach, which assumed that social welfare can be captured through a social indifference curve. According to Cowling and Mueller (1978), it was argued that such assumptions brings about discrepancy between the variations in the price cost margins and the supposed constant elasticities of demand (Cowling and Mueller 1978). Thus, this analysis will employ the use of the partial equilibrium approach, following the work of Cowling and Mueller, which was based on the Cournot-Nash equilibrium approach. The next section deals with the brief review of oligopoly theories, the review of the model used, discussion of the complications of the Cowling-Mueller model, and how it affects the industry. Review of oligopoly theories The main feature of an oligopoly is the reliance of firms on the actions of the others, which makes it difficult to assume the simple solutions of a monopoly or perfect competition. There are two main forms clearly distinguished under the classical oligopoly theory, both being majorly determined by either price or quantity (Tasnadi 2006). In order to study the oligopoly markets, economists make use of the game theory in modelling their behaviours. There is the Bertrand competition, which relies on the manipulation of prices as a way of competition. On the other hand is the Cournot Nash competition, which describes the industry with oligopolistic tendency, as one in which companies compete on the amount of goods produced, with the assumptions of homogenous goods, no collusion, existence of market power, and rationality. There is no single model describing the workings of an oligopolistic market. This is because companies compete on varying platforms such as price, quantity, marketing , reputation, technological innovations, etc (Colander 2008). The Bertrand model of oligopolies focuses on price. The model illustrates the interactions between the firm (one who sets the price) and the customer (one who chooses the quantity to buy at the price given by the firm). The working of the model is based on the assumptions that goods are undifferentiated, no collusion and prices are set at the same time. Given the rationality of consumers, they buy from the firm who offers the lowest prices and if all the firms give the same price, they choose the firms to buy from at random. Assuming there is no capacity restriction, if a firm raises the price of its goods, it becomes likely that such firm would lose most or all its customers. In the same light, if the firm reduces prices below its marginal cost, it would lose money on every unit sold (Binger and Hoffman 1998). Thus, under the Bertrand model, the equilibrium is where the price is equals to marginal cost, resulting in zero-profit for the participating firms. However, relaxing the assu mption of capacity restrictions results in a situation where equilibrium is not achieved. The Cournot-Nash Model While the Bertrand model focuses on price, Cournot-Nash model emphasises the importance of quantity adjustment. The model assumes the existence of Cournot conjecture; that firms compete based on quantity rather than prices and that the behaviour of firms are stable. Equilibrium is reached at a point where neither firm desires to change what it produces based on its knowledge on what other firms produces. This is regarded as the Cournot-Nash equilibrium (Kreps 1990). Traditionally, the model considers two firms with the assumption that their marginal costs are linear but not necessarily identical. Each firm is believed to have the ability to decide on the level to produce in other to maximize profit, given the output level of the other firm and this is called the reaction function. In the case of N-number of firms, overall industry production curve is based on the reaction functions of other firms with respect to what the market leader produces. As in the game theory, each firm decide s on the best response function that helps maximize their profit, and if followed at all times results into the Nash equilibrium (Fulton 1997). In general, the Cournot theorem states that as the number of firms in the industry grows to infinity, it brings about competitive tendencies and pushes price towards marginal cost. In perfect competition, allocative efficiency requires that prices to be set equal to the marginal costs of production throughout the economy. If firms are able to restrict output in order to maintain price above the marginal costs this leads to a misallocation of resources and loss of economic welfare. The monopolist is able to raise his price above the level of marginal cost, as he is a price maker. This situation can be compared with the benchmark case of perfect competition where firms are price takers and cannot sell any unit of goods produced at a price higher than the marginal cost and cannot earn supernormal/abnormal profits. Fig 1: Welfare effect of Competition and Monopoly profits Figure 1 compares the welfare effects or performance of perfect competition and monopoly. It depicts the neoclassical case against monopoly. Theorists have formulated the welfare loss concept which measures the potential gain of a movement away from monopoly to perfect competition. The analysis shows the basic deadweight loss model used by Harberger (1954). In order to simplify the analysis, the assumption that costs are constant is used. If the industry is competitive, the firms cannot set price above MC (P=MC), thus the quantity produced is Qc. In figure 1, under perfect competition price would be at Pc and output Qc. Marshall stated that consumer surplus is the difference between what a consumer is willing to pay for a good and the amount actually paid for it. It is a measure of the benefits to a consumer of trading in a market. It is shown by the triangle between price and demand. Market demand is refered to as D (the amount consumers are willing to pay for an additional unit of the product). Thus, consumers pay a price Pc for all units purchased. Any marginal increase in output below Qc generates a difference between the price actually paid and the price consumers are willing to pay. This is the consumer surplus, represented by the larger triangle above marginal cost, depicting an absence of abnormal profit. Given a monopoly facing an equivalent demand and costs conditions, the maximisation of profit may be achieved through output reduction, which is at a point where MC=MR. Here, the price shifts to Pm, thereby setting price above MC, and quantity produced falls to Qm. The triangle above Pm is referred to as the surplus due to consumers in a monopolistic setting. The shaded portion A in the diagram is the supernormal profit due for a monopoly, which signifies the redistribution of wealth from consumers to firms. Thus, the decrease in consumer surplus, as a result of a competitive entity moving to monopoly is represented by the addition of the two shaded portions A and B. However, the net social loss accruing as a result of the existence of monopoly power is represented by the shaded part B (Sawyer 1981). In the work of Harberger, he argued that this triangle is really tiny and is nothing to worry about. Posner, in describing the net social loss, stated that: When market price rises above the competitive level, consumers who continue to purchase the sellers product at the new, higher price suffer a loss exactly offset by the additional revenue that the sellers obtain at the higher price. Those who stop buying the product suffer a loss not offset by any gain to the sellers. This is the deadweight loss from supracompetitive pricing and in traditional analysis its only social cost, being regarded merely as a transfer from consumers to producers (Posner 1975, pg. 807). Complications of the Cowling Mueller Model Observing the mark-up of price on marginal cost helps define the implied price elasticity of demand with the assumption of a profit maximizing behaviour, which also applies to a colluding oligopoly or pure monopoly. Following the work of Cowling and Mueller (1978), in defining a firms implied elasticity of demand, assumed that welfare loss will be estimated from their cost margins. (1) where we have as the price elasticity of demand for the industry; as the price given by firm i; and as the marginal cost of firm i. The estimates derived would help explain the amount of welfare loss (the single firms decision to set price above marginal cost) realised from the reaction functions of firms. The assumption that each firm in the industry possesses some degree of monopoly power is employed and will be applied on a firm by firm basis. This enables them to charge prices higher than the marginal cost of production, given there is perfect competition. This is to help in estimating the relative importance of the variations in each firms outputs. This draws more light on the interdependence of observed price distortions (dp) and changes in output (dq), as seen in the work of Cowling and Mueller (1978). Based on this assumption, the welfare loss of the firms can be derived from the partial equilibrium formula for welfare loss; Â ½dpdq. In a situation where the firms expectatio ns about the behaviour of other competing firms are borne out, it is assumed that = and = =1. Hence the equations; (2) (3) Following the assumption of constant marginal costs, monopoly profit term can be incorporated into the equation, thereby, resulting into (4) Harberger (1954) equated the elasticity of demand to be unitary, i.e. ÃŽÂ · = 1. This depicts that if dpi/pi is small, the social cost of monopoly would be insignificant. He argued that representing the elasticity of demand with a value of 1 was an attempt at compensating for the demerits of using a partial equilibrium measure of welfare loss to examine a structural change in the general equilibrium, and that this would not be so if individual firms cannot act as monopoly in terms of price manipulation. However Cowling and Mueller (1978) refuted this assumption by referring to it as a very awkward way of handling the problem which answers the criticisms raised by Bergson (1973) against the partial equilibrium approach as regards the interdependence of price distortions and change in output (pg. 730), even though their analysis was based on the so criticised partial equilibrium approach. Wenders (1967), as cited in Cowling and Mueller (1978), questioned Harbergers position, but wer e erroneous in their calculations due to ignorance in assuming that the degree of collusion is a variable. Thus, the assumption of joint profit maximization need not be used. Based on this, there is need for proper definition of the methodology involving the partial equilibrium approach, so as to derive plausible estimates from it (to be done later on in this discussion). In measuring the monopoly profits, the excess of actual profits over the long run competitive returns (which are the profits that are compatible with the long run survival in an equilibrium economy) is determined, after adjustment is made for the accommodation of risk, as in the case of Worcester (1973). He used a median profit rate of 90% in allowing for biasness: a rather ad hoc adjustment. The divergence of actual rates of profits and the mean rates was the root of monopoly profits in earlier studies, following that of Harberger. These studies treated industries whose profit is in the range of 5% above or below the mean profit as those that have created welfare loss. However, this will result in a downward biasness of the monopoly welfare estimate as it underestimates the level of monopoly returns. It is not feasible to lean ones analysis on the premises of equal effects on welfare loss by monopolists and firms in perfect competition. Even if the assumption holds, the problem of how to handle firms experiencing loss would arise. Rather, it is plausible to argue that these firms are in disequilibrium and as such, have costs above the competitive levels. Hence, in deriving the social cost of monopoly, the firms experiencing loss will be dropped. This is in line with the work of Cowling and Mueller, who assumed that the firms would return to their normal profits or would disappear, thereby, creating no long run loss to the economy. The role of vertical integration The effect of the firms trying to gain market power is also a contributory factor into the loss of social welfare. Vertical integration carves out niches for monopolistic possibilities in product and geographical areas. Vertical integration is divided into upstream (backward, deals with the production of basic inputs) and downstream (forward, deals with the production of finished or nearly finished products). When two or more operations are vertically integrated, there is a natural bias towards internal procurement of components even in the presence of inefficiency. Bounded rationality also has its role in the diseconomies effect of vertical integration. It would basically take place where it is mutually beneficial to do so and not necessarily when it is cheaper. According to Greenhut and Ohta (1976), vertical integration does not increase integrators monopoly power, but rather, eliminates transitional twist caused by increasing mark-ups. Not only does it eliminate such distortions, it improves the provision of differentiated goods. Carlton (1979) assumes the prevalence of downstream over upstream in an integrated world. Hence, integration is socially undesirable since the downstream firms cannot absorb risk as efficiently as the upstream. The market is less to be contestable if integration is embarked upon by established firms. This is because the possibility of a potential entrant having the know-how and the economies of scale in the successive stages of production is very slim. There is likely to be sunk costs, which may be too expensive for the new entrant, thereby raising entry barrier. However, the ability to discriminate hinges on being able to identify groups of customers having different demand elasticities, then being able to preven t them from price discrimination. This firm structure helps to prevent leakages between markets if the collusive oligopoly, engaging in the upstream successive stage of production, integrates into one or more downstream markets, while still possibly allowing sales of the upstream product to unintegrated firms for specific uses (Waterson 1984). In general, the vertical integration accrues to the firm benefits, which would not have been possible if independently functioning. Among the benefits are lower transaction costs, capturing upstream and downstream profit margins, reduction in uncertainty (i.e. there is always supply assurance), expansion of core competence and the ability to gain a considerable part of the market share. These benefits are supported by the existence of taxes and regulations of market transactions, economies of scale, and similarities between the integrated activities (Greaver 1999). According to Buzzel (1983), he argued that operating in an integrated basis results in the benefits being offset by costs and risks, among which he noted capital requirement, reduced flexibility, and loss of specialization. Firms enjoying monopoly power would act to defend their market through entry barriers, which is a potential free rider problem. Unless, the barriers to entry can be effectively coordinated, it would be difficult to derive a means of calculating above competitive profits. Given the unlikelihood associated with gaining monopoly profit without the expense of extra resource, it would be profitable to utilise extra resources to deter entry. Tullock (1967) and Posner (1975), as cited in Cowling and Waterson (2003), maintained that if the existence of competition for market power is granted by some authority and that the practice acquire real resource costs, it is possible that all the gains due on monopolistic tendencies may be frittered away in the struggle to obtain it. These resource costs may be in the form of excessive generation of advertising goodwill stock; involvement is excess production capacity and excessive costs on Research and Development by engaging in product differentiat ion. It was also believed that the efforts to acquire patent protection, tariff protection and other forms of unwarranted state treatment contribute significantly to welfare loss meted out by monopolies. So, Cowling and Muell

Ronald Takakis Hiroshima :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Although WW II ended over 50 years ago there is still much discussion as to the events which ended the War in the Pacific. The primary event which historians attribute to this end are the use of atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although the bombing of these cities did force the Japanese to surrender, many people today ask â€Å"Was the use of the atomic bomb necessary to end the war?† and more importantly â€Å"Why was the decision to use the bomb made?† Ronald Takaki examines these questions in his book Hiroshima. The official reason given for dropping the bomb was to bring a quick end to tht war and save American lives. However, Takaki presents many different explanations as to why the decision to use the bomb was made. He disagrees with the popular belief that the decision to use the bomb was made solely to quickly end the war in the Pacific and to save American lives. Takaki presents theories such as international concerns, American sentiment, and racism in an attempt to more fully explain why this decision was made.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The United States entered WW II immediately following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. The U.S. entry was a major turning point in the war because it brought the strongest industrial strength to the Allied side. The Americans helped the Allies to win the war in Europe with the surrender of Germany on May 7, 1945. However, the war in the Pacific continued. The war with Japan at this point consisted primarily of strategic bombings. America had recently completed an atomic bomb and was considering using this weapon of mass destruction for the first time. The goal was to force the â€Å"unconditional surrender† of the Japanese. Roosevelt had used the term â€Å"unconditional surrender† in a press conference in 1943 and it had since become a central war aim. Truman and his staff (still feeling bound by FDR’s words) demanded unconditional surrender from the Japanese. Consequently on July 26, 1945 Truman issued an ultimatum to Japan. This ultimat um stated that Japan must accept â€Å"unconditional surrender† or suffer â€Å"utter devastation of the Japanese Homeland†. This surrender included abdication of the throne by their emperor. Japan was not willing to surrender their dynasty and ignored the ultimatum. On August 6th and August 9th, atomic bombs were dropped on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki respectively.