Housing Prices Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Housing Prices - Essay Example In this paper, we will first have a look at the whole U.S. mortgage crisis scenario as that has been the major factor that has brought this whole situation into the public perception. Understanding the situation in the light of statistics is very important, as even though this whole topic is so dense and enormous that it cannot be in this paper, but it is certainly essential to have a feel of the situation before we move along. Then, we would move onto the U.S. housing market and try to understand the shifts in pricing over the past decade and the reasons behind these shifts. Furthermore, we will try and determine the implications of the housing market on the economy of the country in general i.e. what effect will the volatility have on the demand and supply equilibrium of the market itself and the greater effect this will have on the economy in general. This is an important section of this paper as this provides the rationale for conducting an analysis on the housing prices and also helps us understand key economic indicators which can help us understand the market better and perhaps prevent market meltdowns like the one suffered in 2006 from occurring again. Finally, we will conclude the paper with our final remarks on the conducted analysis. [1] The U.S. mortgage side has been ruined. ... Even those from lower classes "benefited" from this housing price bubble by being able to own houses with small down payments. Rising prices of housing led to increased borrowing on home equity. The Americans were enjoying their time in the U.S as housing prices shot up 40% between 2000 and 2006 to a high of $234,000. The ratio of median house price to median household income rose from a historically steady ratio of three times (from 1970- 2000) to five times in 2006. This could not be sustained. Housing prices tapered off and started to decline in early 2006 and furthermore in 2007 and 2008; in compliance with what we have seen in the recent two years. With a $20 trillion housing sector, every 10% fall erodes off $2 trillion in household wealth. Almost in parallel, rates of default and foreclosure began to climb. In 2006, 1.2 million household lends saw foreclosure, up 42% from the previous year. The basic definition of sub-prime mortgages is basically lending to borrowers who want to buy a house but who have a weak credit rating. Lenders did so by providing small or zero down payment, and low introductory adjustable rate mortgages. Between 2004 and 2006, there were bookings of $1.5 trillion (15% of the total U.S. housing lends) of sub-prime mortgages. Total sub-prime lends form 25% of the housing mortgage market; these sub-prime lends were fine as long as the housing market continued to boom and interest rates remained stable. When these conditions disappeared, sub-prime borrowers defaulted. The defaults caused an implosion of Mortgage-backed securities and the Collateralized debt duties industry. The blow out shelled in June 2007 with the collapse of sub-prime mortgage hedge funds managed by Bear Stearns, quickly followed by suspending other funds managed

Directive analysis of what to do in the evnt of a disatser that is Essay

Directive analysis of what to do in the evnt of a disatser that is possibly due to global warming, such as a hurricane - Essay Example Preparing for a hurricane before it arrives involves making an emergency plan and getting together the important supplies. The first step is to see what your insurance covers and see if any adjustments are needed in the policy. Many valuables, like cars, are damaged so it is best to make sure that all costly belongings are insured. Also, have an evacuation plan and map out the closest escape routes that will take you and your family away from the danger zone. Have emergency family or friend contact numbers and decide beforehand where to go in case of an evacuation. This also involves organizing a list of the absolute necessary items to take along to avoid confusion and panic when a storm does hit. It is also important to locate the safest room or area of the house, preferably on the lower level, if the need arises to stay inside rather than evacuating. After a plan has been set up, it is now important to get the supplies and disaster kit ready. Make a list of the items needed such as a first aid kit, non-perishable food items, water, blankets, medication, hand crank powered radio, batteries and flashlights (Henthorn 2011). It is essential to secure all the important documents in water proof bags or containers. Make sure to have a sufficient amount of cash at home and do not wait till the last minute to fill up your vehicle with gas. Also get together plywood or shutters and the required tools to board up windows and doors if hurricane warnings are close. If your budget allows, have a back up generator in case of power outages and electricity failure. Be knowledgeable about any weather changes and continue to listen to the news about updates. This will help you and your family make any necessary adjustments to the plan and gathered supplies. Knowing what to do during a hurricane is just as important as planning for it. If staying inside, seek protection in the safest area of the house and keep yourself and your family away from windows and glass doors. Make sure to turn off all heavy duty appliances, like refrigerators and microwaves, to minimize damage. Do not go out to check on the hurricane even if it seems calm, because there can still be flying debris and rapidly increasing winds (Henthorn 2011). Through out the storm continue to communicate with your family in order to engage in a normal activity and help with any feelings of fear and panic. Also, keep on listening to the radio to be informed of any changes taking place. If the need arises to evacuate, try to turn off all utilities and appliances, gather only the necessary items and follow the proper evacuation routes. Remember that during a hurricane it is important to stay calm and ensure the safety of your loved ones. It is equally critical to be precautious after a hurricane because injuries can still be sustained even if the storm has passed. Do not leave the house in order to check on the damage done until a clear sign is given by the authorities. Avoid coming into contact with puddles, loose wires and smashed trees (Henthorn 2011). Try to use your phones for emergency purposes only, reporting broken gas or water pipes, and unstable power lines. If power had to be restored, carefully go about the house checking on food and other items, staying clear of electrical appliances and wires. In the

Executive Pay And Company Performance

Executive Pay And Company Performance Executive pay and compensation packages are a hot topic in todays world of business and public analysis. Many top executives in the United States are seen as more highly compensated than is necessary, while other Americans are struggling to make ends meet. Even so, the cost of executive compensation continues to increase despite efforts to curtail this type of company spending. Despite the fact that the cost of compensation is steadily increasing, a company ´s performance often depends on the performance of a good Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Therefore, it is often necessary for a company to pay its CEO handsomely, usually well above the market rate, in order to retain him or her as one of the companys most prized assets. This paper analyzes this notion and gives an in-depth look into the concept of pay for performance for senior executives such as CEOs. It is important to note that a companys Board of Directors, shareholders and compensation committee are responsible for executive compensation package proposals presented to prospective CEOs, and they are charged with weighing possible risks against benefits for any particular package presented. CEO Compensation There is a consensus in America regarding executive compensation and it is the philosophy that it is better to align executive compensation with performance. It is reasonable, considering that it just makes sense that paying an executive more for better performance is motivational to the executives (Ferracone 2010). As analyzed by Gomez-Mejia, Tosi Hinkin (1987), compensation for CEOs is as follows: Compensation has three distinct components: salary, bonuses, and long-term income. The last includes a wide array of deferred compensation benefits like pensions, profit sharing, stock options, IRAs, and bonus deferrals (60). The above quote outlines the totality of the basic CEOs compensation package, not including any added benefits or perks the company deems is necessary to attract and retain their chosen CEO executive. However, the bottom line is whether or not the executive is capable of handling the responsibilities of being the top executive for the firm. According to Lewellen, Loderer, Martin Blum (1994), senior executives are responsible for their corporations sound investment and financing decisions and also to ensure that their firms shareholder and investor interests are well taken care of; however, there is concern by many shareholders and investors that their corporate executive may not do was is expected. This brings up the issue of whether there is a correlation between the size of senior executive compensation packages offered and the firms financial performance standing. A positive correlation between the two can result in a reduction of overall costs for a large corporation (Lewellen, Loderer, Martin Blum 1994). This is significant, given the fact that many smaller firms are competing in the marketplace with larger firms that can afford better executive compensation packages. Similarly, Gomez-Mejia, Tosi Hinkin (1987) suggests that economic theory concerning executive compensation is based on the human capital theory, and it relates to a companys size as being associated with how difficult a top executives job is. It is further noted that organizational size and the CEOs compensation package should be closely related and based on the complexity of the job more so than how well the job is done. However, many experts and industry professionals disagree and feel that the CEOs performance should definitely be taken into account. The obvious assumption is that a high compensation incentive would yield a high performance level and success for top executives. More CEO Pay vs. CEO Exits As illustrated by Ferracone (2010), a companys Board of Directors may see the company in a position of risk by losing a strong-performing, qualified CEO, so they may opt to reward the CEO accordingly rather than risk losing the CEO to a competitor. They see it in their best interest to retain an already well-performing CEO who is experienced with the ins and outs of their firm and not have to deal with the possibility of ending up with a less desirable executive. Morgenson (2012) reports, many corporations argue that if they do not pay high CEO compensation packages, then they will not have the most highly qualified CEO. Therefore, many corporations find it in their best interest to justify the high-valued executive rewards and compensation packages by saying that their focus is really on hiring the most competent executive instead of simply trying to scrimp on pay and end up losing a promising executive for the company. Additionally, it is a fact that plenty of management teams in companies across America feel like they have to keep up with whatever the competition is doing, in this regard, based on what the market can stand. Its a classic case of keeping up with the Jones. However, a companys compensation committee may choose to offer a compromise by presenting the CEO with a reasonable pay incentive that is contingent on company performance. This way, the company is protected from the possibility of the companys financial collapse and also having to lose the CEO by forced resignation, along with paying out a hefty CEO severance package. With this in mind, questions often arise about whether or not pay-for-performance incentives for CEOs actually work and are a good idea. In terms of pay-for-performance, it is a fact that high value incentives may not necessarily equate to good CEO performance, and good CEO performance may not necessarily mean better company performance. As outlined by Barro Barro (1990), the amount of CEO pay-for-performance increases as the CEOs relative experience increases. Additionally, as it relates to CEO turnover, CEO skill matching is directly related to compensation and the size of the corporation. It is also noted that CEO experience has an affect on pay-for-performance sensitivity. As it relates to CEOs jumping ship of a firm to join the competition, relative transferable knowledge, skills and talents is an issue. Morgenson (2012) points out that most CEO skills are not easily transferrable from one firm to the next and that CEOs do not move often because of this fact. This means that perhaps all the hype about more money and incentives every year for CEOs is not necessary to keep them, because they will more than likely not move anyway. Many CEOs are comfortable and would rather not risk jumping ship to find greener pastures and end up in a worse situation than the one they think they are in at their present company. This is a valid assumption and it is crucial to the concept of aligning CEO pay with company performance. However, some highly compensated executives are raking in the dough even when their companies are not performing well, and this is seen as highly unacceptable. Executive Compensation Overpayment Some CEOs are overpaid, in spite of undesirable company performance trends. Highly compensated top executives often accept large compensation bonuses and incentives, even when they see their company is not doing so well. A case in point is outlined in an article in the Huffington Post reports that, in 2011, the CEO of Dean Foods, Gregg Engles, was given a 52 percent increase in salary and incentives from the previous year and made $8.5 million, even though the company had a $1.6 billion loss for the year (Kavoussi 2012). This seems out of context but it is evident that this CEOs company places a high value on his presence without the organization. Another example of a CEO cashing in when his companys profits took a downturn is the case of the CEO of Omega Healthcare in Hunt Valley. His executive pay package value doubled to $7.8 million, in spite of it being criticized by a shareholder advisory firm and also in light of the fact that the companys fallen stock price and decreased profits were on the books (Hopkins 2012). These are glaring examples of CEO overpayments and many people in the general public consider it an outrage. As it relates to CEO overpayments, Popper (2012) reports that the median pay of the 200 most highly compensated CEOs in the United States was $14.5 million in 2011. This statistic comes from a study done by Equilar, a Redwood City, California compensation data firm. Additionally, those same CEOs median pay raise equaled 5 percent. This is a standout social issue and it feeds the anger of ordinary Americans who often struggle with unemployment, pay cuts and decreasing wealth. It is seen as a case of the haves catering to greed while the have-nots are barely getting by. Ferracone (2010) states some people blame the recent financial collapse in America on overly high executive compensation. CEO Pay Alignment to Performance In light of the overpayment issue, company investors points of view are often in favor of aligning CEO pay with company performance, as well as having a trustworthy compensation committee that has the best interests of the investors and shareholders of the company in mind (Ferracone 2010). For instance, a Wall Street Journal report shows that 2011 CEO pay packages were more aligned with company performance. On average, CEOs received 0.6 percent increases for every extra 1 percent of returns to shareholders. This, at least, is a measurable component to the executive compensation package issue. Shareholders often need justification of the significance of an executive compensation package before approving it. To meet approval, it is often not so much an issue about the amount of pay that is being considered for the CEO but more of whether or not the CEO is giving the corporation its moneys worth. It is a question of does the CEO meet goals and standards put in place to help the company advance. Bhatt (2012) states that companies justify executive pay to shareholders by implementing compromises such as eliminating perks, tying bonuses to corporate goals and putting policies in place that allows the company to take back bonuses and stock options from executives if the company gets into financial trouble. This is seen as a fair compromise. With this type of justification tied to compensation package proposals, shareholders can feel better about the executives worth and commitment, and therefore they can feel better about approving the executives compensation package. Say on Pay Authority In contrast to decades past, investors are heavily involved in the decisions of what to pay top executives in their companies. They have a say about pay for top executives, unlike in the past. The vehicle in which investors voices can be heard is called the Say on Pay law. The Say on Pay law mandates that public companies allow its shareholders and investors to cast votes, based on advisory decisions, regarding executive compensation (Bhatt 2012). This has shed light on pay practices and allows a check and balance approach to alert for any red flags that may arise. The Say on Pay law is also a way for investors to vote against compensation packages it deems is too much and not in the best interest of the company, its shareholders and investors. For example, Bhatt (2012) reports that a Portland-based bank had an executive-pay proposal rejected by its committee and it cut the CEOs base salary by about 7 percent last year to a paltry $815,000. This example shows a move in the best inter est of the shareholders, while still allowing for a hefty pay package for the CEO. It also shows that there can be a win-win situation with controlling executive compensation package amounts. Shareholders, legislators, regulators and the media all put pressure on company Boards to appropriately balance the vested interests of investors and corporate management (Mercer 2009). This is not only true for companies in the United States, but other countries as well. For example, Mercer (2009) reports that Europe has imposed legislation giving shareholders a say on executive compensation matters. Also, firms in Span, Sweden, Australia, Norway and the Netherlands have voted to increase disclosure of executive pay programs. These types of corporate governance reforms have become popular, though the United States and Canada are the last to implement them. It is important that new disclosure regulations about executive pay programs are presented to shareholders of companies (Mercer 2009). In addition to an increase in corporate disclosures about executive pay matters, there has also been an increase in compensation committee responsibilities in many firms. This is significant because it shows that more time is going into the decision-making process to approve CEO compensation packages and that the interest of the companys shareholders and investors is taken into consideration on a larger scale. Regulations have been strict, so it is in a companys best interest to ensure compliance to regulatory standards to avoid any possible corporate scandals (Mercer 2009). However, this presents a challenge for Board and compensation committee members to ensure an appropriate balance between executive pay with a necessity of attracting and retaining the best executive talent in the market. Additionally, when it comes to the compensation of top executives, many in the industry believe that CEO pay scales should have restrictions. CEO Pay Should Be Restricted CEO pay is often a subject of controversy as it relates to unnecessary compensation of corporate executives at the expense of taxpayers. DeCarlo (2012) reports on a study done in 2011 that revealed top executives of the United States top 500 companies received $5.2 billion in pay raises, which represents 16% collectively. Comparatively, the average American worker only got an average of a 3% raise in pay. This is an in-balance that is seen as unfair to the general public. Its the old adage, the rich keep getting richer and it shows a need for more corporate governance in this regard. In contrast, some CEOs are simply not as greedy or fortunate as others. An article by CNET News reports that the CEO of Amazon, Jeff Bezos, has passed on his pay raise and bonus for the last five years. To make up for this, though, he did exercise some very lucrative stock options (Kawamoto 2003). This is something that is seen by shareholders as a good move and is preferable. It helps the corporation but still takes care of the executive. Additionally, in the case of Amazon, a proposal is on the table for more executive compensation plans to include linking stock option cash out to an industry performance index. This means that the company executives would only get paid the large dollar amounts if the companys stock performed favorably (Kawamoto 2003). This is a compromising concept to executive pay restrictions. Similarly, Hopkins (2012) states a recent study showed that six Baltimore CEOs received large pay cuts instead of large pay raises, due to low performing company issues. For example the CEO of Corporate Office Properties had his compensation cut in half the year before he retired. This was because the company had a loss in 2011 of approximately $134 million due to plummeting stock prices. The other five CEO pay reductions were also mostly related to bad company performance but there were other factors involved as well. Another example of a CEO pay reduction instead of increase is the case of Armours CEO whose compensation package was cut last year by 14 percent to only $1.1 million, but this was in light of the fact that the companys stock prices went up and they realized substantial profits. The company justified this by citing that the CEO did not reach all of his goals for the year (Hopkins 2012). This is an example of CEO pay restrictions in place. According to Pearce, Stevenson Perry (1985), some industry experts agree that CEO pay should have restrictions. This is based on the concept that high compensation merit pay may be an inappropriate way to enhance CEO performance and statistical analyses showed this to be likely. Additionally, it is noted that CEO performance motivation should be contingent on performance but many times it is not. It is interesting to note that, according to Pearce, Stevenson Perry (1985), a comprehensive study on performance-contingent pay programs for executives revealed that implementing these types of programs did not show significant effects on general CEO organizational performance. One reason for this is suggested that managers have limited direct control over the performance of an organization and focus should be more on environmental influences that the managers are responsible for manipulating. It is important to note that even when CEOs are high-performing, they may not necessarily receive the highest pay for their performance. For example, the Society for Human Resource Management reports on a study done by a professional services firm that revealed that top CEOs of companies with the highest performance did not receive the highest pay raises. With this in mind, a question of whether or not it is even possible to successfully restrict CEO compensation and still benefit from the work of a quality CEO is appropriate. However, inefficiency in a product of interference should be taken into consideration as well as possible regulation of CEO compensation package ceilings. CEO Compensation Packages Regulation Many argue that it is unfair to have such an inequality in business as it relates to the astronomical salaries and compensation packages of CEOs in this country. However, others argue for its justification based on the fact that the CEO has the responsibility of final decisions that are made for a company and they have responsibility towards the company ´s reputation and performance. In light of this and the public attention from highly publicized, high profile corporation scandals such as the Enron situation, pay and performance of executives in the United States have come under some scrutiny (Jarque 2008). It is no wonder that the general public is skeptical and suspicious of how much money many executives make on a yearly basis. This is especially true because a lot of the money paid to these executives comes from taxpayer dollars, and the everyday American is aware of this and is not happy with it. An article from ABC News reports on a 2011 study that found tax loopholes, concerning executive compensation packages, which costs taxpayers more than $14 billion a year. This is due to CEOs receiving more in their compensation packages than was paid in taxes by their companies. Many see this as an unfair concept. It means that large corporations are taking advantage of these loopholes to lower their tax bills and the taxpayers end up subsidizing large CEO paydays. This is possible because, as it stands now, companies can take off executive pay as a deductible business expense on their taxes, so the trick is the companies pay the executives with stock options, which are exempt from taxation (Kim 2012). So, taxpayers get stuck with the bill and CEOs reap the rewards. Regarding regulation of CEO compensation, however, there needs to be some. Jarque (2008) reports over the last 20 years, the average pay of CEOs working in the top 500 firms in the United States increased some six-fold. This compensation was mainly performance-based and was paid in stock options. It is also reported that regulatory standards, imposed over the last 15 years, that affect executive compensation include changes in corporate capital gains taxes, limits on deducting CEO pay expenses unless they are performance-based, increased company disclosure requirements, and standards on option grants expenses (Jarque 2008). Additionally, studies done following regulatory changes show a shift of compensation trends from salaries and bonuses to stocks and options (performance-based compensation). Jarque (2008) states, This suggests that regulation efforts to improve corporate governance and transparency have been moving in the right direction, although it is difficult to evaluate the relative importance of regulation versus the market induced changes in governance practices (267). Conclusion Executive compensation is a significant aspect of corporate governance and is often governed by a companys Board of Directors, investors, shareholders and compensation committee members. Executive pay typically consists of salary, stock options, benefits, bonuses and other perks deemed appropriate, based on different company preferences. As noted above, executive compensation has disproportionately increased relative to the average American worker and this is often seen as a negative in the public eye, so it is a growing social issue. To help change the view of executive compensation as a root to evil, measures have been put in place to gear executive compensation packages more toward pay-for-performance. This equates to more executives receiving their bonuses, rewards and incentives only when their companys are doing well financially. In todays competitive business world, many companies are looking for new and better ways to attract and retain the highest qualified CEOs to help lead their businesses to financial success through growth and expansion. Therefore, many companies are prepared to offer and follow through with paying handsome compensation packages to existing and prospective CEOs. Many firms are prepared to justify paying CEOs compensation packages above the market rates in an attempt to retain the services of what they feel is their most prized asset the CEO.

Leadership and Ideology in Animal Farm Essay -- Animal Farm Essays

The Theme of Leadership in Animal Farm Sub-theme: Power Corrupts The sub theme of power corrupting people is very eminent in animal farm. The leaders on the farm - the pigs, were the brains of the farm. The animals let the pigs lead the farm, thereby placing them into a position of power. This power corrupted them as they became more and more greedy and their ideology became more and more corrupted. Also, the pig’s transgressions of the rules of animalism worsen as they grow in power. In chapter 2, when the 7 commandments were first written down, there was already a slight corruption in the pigs. The pigs steal the milk and apples and explain it with the lie that these foods have nutrients essential to pigs, which need these nutrients to carry on their managerial work. This chapter was the chapter in which the farm was closest to Utopia. In chapter 6, the pigs started trading with the other farms, which was another sign of the growing corruption. The also broke a commandment by sleeping on a bed and furthermore, they masked this by changing the commandment to brainwash the other animals. This was a clear sign that the pigs were corrupt. From chapter 6 onwards, things went downhill as the pigs got more and more powerful and greedy and at the end of the story, all 7 commandments were broken. Also, this sub theme is also reflected in the state of the farm. As the pigs grow in power, the state of the farm worsens. Although this fact is masked from the animals by the pigs, it is quite clear. Immediately after the rebellion, food was plentiful and the animals could get a double ration of corn, but as time passed the animals began to starve, even though Squealer’s figures showed otherwise. â€Å"At times the animals felt that the... ...a means to stop violent revolutions and to keep the discontented workers docile. Another example is in Muslim suicide bombers, whose fanatic belief in their religion blinds them from the truth that they are not doing the right thing. However, it is irrelevant in some cases. For example, people who believe in an ideology are not necessarily taken in by falsities or misinterpretations in the ideology in the same way as people who are Muslims are not necessarily fanatics to their religion. Orwell treats this tone in a satirical manner and uses irony to convey its message. This can be seen from the fact that at the start of the novel, nobody believed in Moses but at the end, many did. Orwell included this in the storyline to tell the reader not to be taken in by falsities or misinterpretations in the ideology or religion hey believe in and to do what is right.

Discuss How Shakespeare uses dramatic techniques Essay

The audience have probably guessed that it will be an angry argument as he wants the best for Juliet. This is shown at the start of his speech; â€Å"When the sun sets, the air doth drizzle dew But for the sunset of my brother’s sun It rains downright. How now! A conduit, girl? What, still in tears? † His speech is well thought out and he shows he does have some concern for his daughter. He has imagery and alliteration in his speech which his main focus is on, rather than the main focus being Juliet. This allows the audience to have more sympathy for Juliet as it shows Lord Capulet isn’t really too bothered about her. He express his disapproval of her crying by saying â€Å"evermore showering? † He then moves on to talk about juliets grief which contrasts with the first part. He shows he disapproves of the crying. He has no sympathy or understanding for why Juliet is so upset and this therefore allows the audience to have even more sympathy for Juliet. He compares her to a ship â€Å"sailing in this salt flood†; he warns her she will also sink and be wrecked like a ship. Once Capulet has finished he rant, he leaves and Juliet is in a state of despair and worry. She begs her mother to help and she would rather die than marry. However Lady Capulet still offers no sympathy and this only makes the audience feel even more sympathy for Juliet as both her parents have abandoned her. Lady Capulet agrees with Lord Capulet, she isn’t angry with Juliet just naturally cold hearted. The audience may then doubt that Lady Capulet could be as cruel to her only child as her reaction is shocking. Lady Capulet tells Lord Capulet that Juliet doesn’t want to marry parish but is thankful to him, therefore demonstrating that she feels he shouldn’t be too harsh with Juliet because she is grateful. Lord Capulet asks lots of quick sharp questions without waiting for an answer which shows his anger adding more tension. Juliet proceeds to try and stand up for herself as well as showing respect for her father but isn’t best please that she is being forced to marry a man that she does not love. He tells her that if she doesn’t show up at the church h he will drag her â€Å"on a hurdle† to the church himself. Capulet then verbally abuses Juliet and because she was very pale after all the crying he calls her â€Å"tallow-face†. He claims he wants to hit Juliet â€Å"My fingers itch. † Juliet is his only child so his anger must be increasingly violent for him to want to hit her. Capulet final speech shows his anger towards Juliet. He uses words containing only one syllable showing his is irritated with Juliet because she doesn’t want to marry Paris. He shows that he respects Paris far more than Juliet and tells her she will either be thrown out or she must marry Paris. â€Å"but, and you will not wed, Ill pardon you: Graze where you will. You shall not house with me. Look to ‘t, think on ‘t; I do not use to jest. Thursday is near. Lay hand on hear; advise. And you be mind, Ill give you to my friend; And you be not, hang, beg, starve, die in the streets,† Capulet says he will give Juliet to his friend. This is cruel seeing as she is his only child and is as if he owns her. She is treated awfully creating even more sympathy for her. She doesn’t have a fair chance at life because of Capulet. Juliet then turns to the next person for help, the nurse. Juliet looks up to her like she is a second mother. She hopes that the nurse will know what to do as she helped Juliet marry Romeo to start off with. â€Å"My husband is on earth, my faith in heaven; How shall that faith return again to earth, Unless that husband sent it me from heaven By leaving earth? † The nurses reply to Juliet as she cries out for heal shows how she is so different to Juliet’s mother being the complete opposite personality, yet she contrasts with Juliet’s loving nature. She shows how she is impressed that Juliet is so loyal to Romeo even though they have only been married for a matter of days. Her solution is however practical and clever. She believes Juliet should go ahead and marry Paris as Romeo has been banished after him murdering Tybalt. She tells Juliet â€Å"Romeo’s a dishclout to him†. This is humour to convince Juliet it would be better to marry Paris and move on. Once Juliet finds there is no real solution to her problem, Juliet gives in. She goes to Friar Laurence cell to â€Å"make confession and to be asolv’d† this means there may still be hope if Friar Laurence can help her and support her. Juliet is left alone onstage as the nurse leaves, she has been abandoned by the people who have claimed to love her and support her. Juliet uses this opportunity to express he feelings in a soliloquy. This then shows the audience that she is a mature young adult and she can’t rely on anyone to help her. She will no longer confide in the nurse as she spoke badly about Romeo whereas she had praised him in the past. She decides she will go and see the Friar and ask him for help. The soliloquy gives the audience a chance to sympathise with Juliet, as she finds herself realising the harsh difference in being young and growing up. Show preview only The above preview is unformatted text This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Miscellaneous section.

Crime and Wheel Conspiracy

â€Å"Conspiracy is an agreement between or more persons to engaged jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors. † (Dictionary, 2013) There are three different types of conspiracy that can be present during a criminal situation. The first is called a Wheel Conspiracy, which involves one person as well as a group of people that participate in separate things that are considered illegal where a shared purpose is present between the people in the group. Legal, 2013) For example Rudy working for Ron who is one of the biggest bosses in charge of the drug cartel in Miami Florida was asked by Ron if he would confront one of his buyers for money that was owed to him and if the money was not present he was ordered to kill him. Rudy did what he was asked, because Rudy did this he was involved in a wheel conspiracy because he is technically considered the â€Å"middle-man†. He is the one that is doing the crime but there is an agreement between him and Ron who is in charge of the operation and he is protecting Ron by doing his dirty work. Another form of conspiracy is called â€Å"Chain Conspiracy†, this is most likely to involve some type of drug transaction and there is a series of people that are involved. (APSU, 2010) For example Eric meets with the distributor Jack to pack up a pound of cocaine and meets with John and Ed to transport it to Ron that has made an agreement with the distributor for it to e sent. If they are caught during this process this would considered a chain conspiracy because you have the distributor that is involved, the person that is packing it and the people that are transporting it all involved in this crime. Another is called â€Å"Combination Conspiracy† † occurs when the hub has very few organizers with multiple objectives and the chains vary substantially in length. † (Flax, 2005) For example th e gang MSU which is located in many areas of the United States have committed many murders. A local gang member is taken into custody because there were six dead bodies found in NYC. The investigations could not prove as to whole exactly was responsible for these crimes we just knew that MSU was responsible for the crime. This is considered a combination conspiracy because there are too many gang members that are involved and there is no clues or hints that are leading to the leaders of the gang.