High Compensation Pay Will Influence Employee Motivation

High Compensation Pay Will Influence Employee Motivation This article shows the relationship between high compensation pay and employees motivation in organization. Besides training, job satisfaction, and work environment, compensation pay is one of the factors that can influence employee motivation. Motivation has many theories that support employee will perform better in their job. Compensation pay aspects such as pay or reward package and promotion will lead or boost up employee motivation in order to perform in their work that contributes to organization. There are many theories that explain compensation effect on employee motivation. Many researchers had mentioned about the relationship between compensation pay aspects, pay or reward package and promotion and employee motivation in organization. Higher the compensation pay, employee motivation in organization will increase. Introduction Compensation is the total amount of the monetary and non-monetary pay provided by employer to an employee in return for work performed as required. Wayne. F. Cascio had stated that compensation which includes indirect cash payment and direct payments in the form of employee benefits and incentives that provide by employer in order to motivate employees to perform well for higher levels of productivity is an important component of the employment relationship between employer and employee. According to Milkovich, Newman Gerhart (2011), compensation refers to all forms of financial returns and tangible services and benefits that give by employer to employee as part of an employment relationship. For monetary pay, it as the return for employee that work or contribute in organization, while for non-monetary pay is provided by employer to an employee in order to motivate employee to perform in their work. Every stakeholder such as employer, manager, shareholder and others have their own perceptive regarding compensation and how compensation affects how they behave. Employee may define compensation as an exchange of service employee contribution or as a reward for a job well done. Employee see compensation as to some reflects the value for their personal skills and abilities, or the return for the education training they have learned or acquired. The pay individual receives for the work they perform in their work is usually the major source of personal income and financial security in their life and so it is very important determinants of an individual economic and social well being. For manager, compensation pay directly influences their success in two ways. Firstly, it is a major expense competitive pressure both internationally and domestically, forces employer to consider whether their compensation decisions is affordable or not. Other studies show that many organization labor cost s account for more than 50% of total costs. And for industries such as public employment or service, this figure is even higher. Compensation is one of the factors that influence employee motivation in organization. The good compensation pay is a good motivator for employee. Employee motivation and behavior influence by compensation by two ways (Milkovich, Newman Gerhart 2011). High compensation pay will lead employee to motivate in doing their job or perform well in their work and performance. If employee did not get compensation pay much as they should get, employee tend to not perform well and motivate to do their job. Compensation pay desired behavior which is motivated employee for better performance. This study would like to investigate the relationship between compensation pay aspects which are pay or reward package and promotion towards employee motivation in organization. The problem After bonuses are distributed, management teams may often be frustrated by the lack of employee motivation. If the employee does not see a direct correlation between performance and bonus, this may lead to a lack of motivation because employees see no reason to perform better. Shun Linda Wang, 2003 Nowadays organization whether small or large, people pay much more attention to their life style and the money they earn from the work than their senior. However, it still remains unclear whether many of employees would continue working if it were not for the money that they earn. Employee will expects their employer give a compensation plan are that it is fair and equitable, that it provides them with tangible rewards matched with their skills and, further, that it provides recognition and employee feel their employer appreciate them. Employer will face big challenge in order to motivate employees in organization. Motivation of employee is an important key to an organization that can lead to overall effectiveness of organization. Basically, employee will do or perform well in their work if their employer provides compensation pay to them. In other word, employee is not motivated in order give full commitment in their work because of compensation pay that they receive from employer is not enough or dissatisfied. Employee will perform better if they see the relationship between compensation pay and performance. Employee tends to motivate and perform better in their job if employer provides high compensation pay. Are wages attached to jobs and do promotions play an important role as a wage determinant? Do expected promotions affect motivation and, once the promotion has been realized, will this make the motivation disappear completely? These questions is the famous question that employer will ask in order perform well towards increase productivity or efficiency of organization. As Herzberg (1968) has argued, just because too little money can affect and demotivate employee, does not mean that more and more money will lead about increased satisfaction, much less increased motivation. But it is reasonable to assume that if employees take-home pay or salary was cut in half, employee morale would suffer enough to not perform well and undermine performance. It doesnt necessarily follow that doubling that employees pay would result in better work or employee will motivate to perform well. According to Schuler and MacMillan (1984), they stressed that Human resource management practices (including com pensation) may give a competitive advantages to one corporation over its rivals in order to retain and motivate their employee in organization. Literature review Motivation is the desire to achieve beyond expectations, being driven by internal rather than external factors, and to be involved in a continuous striving for improvement. (Torrington, Hall, Taylor Atkinson, 2009, p. 276) Motivation, in the context of work, is a psychological process that results from the interaction or relationship between an employee and the work environment and it is characterized by a certain level of willingness to do something. Motivation also defined as the employees are willing to increase their work effort in order to desire that they hold or obtain a specific need (Beardwell Claydon, 2007). According to Arnold (1991), motivation consists of three components: Â · Direction what a person is trying to do? Â · Effort how hard a person is trying to do? Â · Persistence how long a person keeps on trying to do? Motivation of employee was set as the dependent variable in this study. Although the construct of motivation can be operationally defined with the help of similar to variables such as motives, dispositions, needs, and values (Hogan and Hogan, 1990), the field of psychology has not observed a single, crucial measure of employee motivation. Therefore, there is the study that measures motivation by a single straightforward item: How has the level of your work motivation level changed in the last three years? The responses of the study had range from decreased (1) to increased (5). (Takahashi, 2005) Moreover, in a way of accomplishment expected work productivity and job satisfaction motivation is the outmost element to be taken into account (Schultz Schultz, 1998). Mainly, the impacts of motivation on the work performance and productivity will attract attention towards employee motivation in the work environment (Huddleston Good, 1999). Employee with high level of motivation tends to work hard and perform better in their work as compared to the employees with low level of motivation. The understanding of the employees expectations and needs of employees at work signifies the base for their motivation. In order to increase employee satisfaction and motivation with their work, it is important to arrange employees work and the level of satisfaction with work. Motivational models are usually divided in to two between and those, which are process theories that focus on the individuals interactions with their environment and those content theories that which focus on an individuals internal attributes. Expectancy theory is one of the process motivation theory describes motivation as a function of individual or employees perception that they have about their surroundings and they will form the expectation based on these perceptions. The organizational psychology literature includes a number or many motivational theories, but based on Ghazanfar, Chuanim, Khan Bashir (2011) they have selected expectancy theory as their implementation mechanism for some reasons. Firstly, the theory has been subjected to rigorous academic testing that each of its components has been experiment and the result is there is a positive influence or relationship on employee motivation. Other researcher such as Klein (1991), Pritchard and Sanders (1973), and Arvy (1972) give support for the link or relationship between effort and E-P expectancy. Hope and Pate (1988) established that the link between instrumentality and effort is one of be the best supported of the components and measured by Lawler and Porter (1967), Snead and Harrell (1994), Klein (1991), Harrell and Stahl (1984). Pritchard and Sanders (1973) have confirmed the motivational link between effort and valence. Secondly, the theory is easily to understand and very straightforw ard. Developed by Vroom (1964), expectancy theory determines three factors that play an interactive role in motivation. Effort-performance expectancy refers to E-P expectancy that concerns the employees perception which effort is positively linked with level of performance in organization. Maslows theory shows that human needs as a role of the capacity in which the human needs have already been fulfilled. It means that human needs that are fulfilled have a low motivation value. Other than that, Herzberg explains that work satisfaction is based on the presence of intrinsic motivation, while the presence of extrinsic factors will lead to dissatisfaction of work. If there is hygienic factors, workers will be happy with their current work situation. In order to have motivated workforce in organization, the hygienic factors must be satisfied and when motivations are in place. This model is in the same type as the theories of Lewin and Vroom that it is concern with the influence of perception and expectancy on motivation. However, this model is a more comprehensive theory than the other theories. The model is based on the following propositions: The motivational force of an individual is based on how individual see the value of the goal, the power required achieving the goal and the probability that the goal will be achieved. Because of individuals past experience is similar of situation, it will enable to a better self-assessment of the required effort, ability perform well and achieve the goal Performance achievement can be achieved by individual efforts which mean individual understand the task requirement and know their self-assessment of ability. Individual sees performance as lead to both rewards which is extrinsic and intrinsic can give satisfaction if individual feel the rewards are fair. This model is most complete and has enough description of the process of motivation. Performance of employee is usually described as a joint function between both ability and motivation, and one of the primary tasks that employer have to face is motivating employee to perform to the best of their own skill or ability (Moorhead Griffin, 1998). Basically, when economists talk about incentives and motivation, it refers to type of motivation which is extrinsic motivation (Frey, 1997, Benabou and Tirole, 2003). Extrinsic motivation is a type of behavior influence by external interventions, examples your boss give reward in term of money, praise your work, or status (Frey, 1997). This type of incentives works same as quid pro quo: employee has the implicit contract that after perform well in a performance they will receive an external reward. This means that the view of monetary rewards, either in the form of incentive compensation or promotions automatically will increase employee motivation. According to Minner, Ebrahimi, and Watchel (1995), they explain that motivation consists of these three interdependent and interacting elements which are drives, needs, and incentives. As long as organizations have been operated, compensation had recognized as one of major motivator of employees in order to perform better as well as an important tool for organizations. To construct compensation systems, organization must have mutual understanding so that it can be to the organizations structure, strategies, and employees that has been an important area. To use compensation as a motivator to employee motivation, personnel employer must look at four major components of a pay structures in an organization (Popoola Ayeni 2007). These four major components are job rate, which is the importance the organization attaches to each job, payment, which employer give reward to encourage employee based on to their performance, personal or special allowances, like transport allowance and fringe b enefits such as holidays with pay and pensions. According to Akintoye (2000), he highlight that money is still be the most important motivational strategy. Early year 1911, Frederick Taylor and his scientific management associate defined money as the most important factor to motivate employee in order to achieve and improve better productivity. Taylor also defined compensation and performance based pay as one of the major tools management had to motivate employees and to improve their productivity hence reduce turnover. Money sees as an important motivating power in as much as it symbolizes intangible goals like security, prestige, power, and a feeling of accomplishment and success. Sinclair (2005) explained that the motivational power of money with the process of job choice. Sinclair explains that money has the power to attract, retain, and motivate employee in order to increase and improve performance. As example, if an employee gets another job offer, which offers best financial rewards and has same job characteristics with his current job, that employee would be motivated to leave current job and accept the new job offer. Banjoko (1996) states that employers which want to reward or punish their employees, they usually use money. This is can be done through the process of rewarding employees for increase productivity by give recognition to employee so that employee will feel fear of loss of job or other related issues such as no promotion because of not perform well in performance. The eagerness to be promoted and earn improved pay also will motivate employees. Compensation research is more focus on stressing the internal orientation to an individuals reaction to pay. This research orientation is always led by industrial organizational psychologists and has contributed to human resource management practice. The main force for this research has been the suggestion that pay will affects level of job satisfaction of employee and work behaviors or employee motivation (Oshagbemi, 2000). Generally, organizations offer their employees three types of opportunities which are (Ospina, 1996): Promotion. Pay. Challenges at work. According to Kwon (2004) there are two ways promotion provided incentives. First, wage increase upon promotion or promotion premium can be fixing by principal, and let the promotion probability depend on performance. Second, a principal also can fix the promotion probability and let the promotion premium depend on performance. Hence, both promotion probability and promotion premium will base on performance. However, the literature has only focused on the former, and mostly will ignore the final. Remind that when use for performance-based wages, in most previous models of promotion-based incentives, the principal do not have any reason to provide huge incentives, and sometimes promote employees without any reason. Our model highlights the final. Because employees in the model is same and usually makes an investment along the equilibrium path, the principal promotes them based on term unless they realized performance or wages. This is consistent based on seniority-rule in promote emplo yees. But, a wage increase with promotion based on performance in order to provide incentives for investments on job-specific human capital that does not for a new job level. In the extreme case, controlling for term, the promotion probability based whether on performance or on wages. According on a survey amongst all individual employees, Herpen, Cools Praag (2004) found a positive link that effect of promotions on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, which leads to the effectiveness of promotion. They show that promotion will affect positively on extrinsic motivation that constant with one of the basic assumptions in the tournament model. Motivation is high in this type when employees think that they will get promotion in the future. Intrinsic motivation is not so much affected by an expected promotion but rather by a recently realized promotion. Without a realized or expected promotion in long period will lead to a decrease of intrinsic motivation (Herpen, Cools Praag, 2004). Promotions should elaborate motivation in many ways. Moreover, there often does not seem to be strong pay for performance within jobs, which only increases the clear importance of promotions for organizational incentives (Hedstrom, 1987). But for internal labor markets, the status of higher positions is more important rather than higher pay because employees tend to perform well to win the competition. Promotion defines an incentive mechanism that gives value to employees that in higher position (Takahashi, 2005). For organizations that want to motivate their employees, they must fully the incentive effects of promotion. Lazear Rosen (1981) stated that promotions have contributed a great deal in theoretical interest, especially in the tournament models. A promotion can be an indication of trust and lead to empowerment, which is correlated positively with intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 1985). In order to find out the full incentive that effect promotion, organization will analyze the relationship between perceived promotion opportunities and intrinsic motivation. Reward is the benefits that workers can get from perform well in a task, representation a service or discharging a responsibility. (Colin Pitts, 1995, p. 11.) Pay can be as the most important factor that will motivate employees and also can be motivating reward that is received when employees can perform better in a task and service. Individuals will motivate to go out and find a work in order to get pay. Pay is also can be seen as a way in order to value employees work that contributed to organization. Organization will face a problem such as hard to retain good employees in organization if employees feel reward package that they get is unfair and not satisfied. It is because pay can be a powerful demotivator towards employees (Colin Pitts, 1995). It shows that rewards absolutely can influence employee motivation. Inequity in the management of compensation such as performance that measure unfair may give negative impact to the objectives of the company, as employees will not work ha rd but want to get reward so it will lead to expense of contribution. But if the compensation pay is perceived as fair, satisfied and competitive, hence good employees are likely to stay in the organization (Schuler, 1998). Many employees think that reward package is only wages and salaries that employer give as a return of their contribution to organization. Actually the reward package is include bonuses, health insurance, pension schemes, car allowance, beneficial loans, meal allowance, profit sharing, share options and others. (Pitts, 1995, p.13). Efficient reward system can be a good motivator but an inefficient reward system can lead to demotivation of the employees. Reio and Callahon (2004) concludes that both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards motivates the employee resulted in higher productivity. Carraher et al (2006) stresses that there should be an effective reward system in organization in order to retain the quality employees and reward should provide based on their productivity. There many works has been done in order to evaluate the link between rewards and employee motivation and there are many researchers investigated and agreed that reward can give impact on employee motivation. Organization must make sure that policies and procedures to form reward system will increase employee motivation and satisfaction in order to maximize the performance of the employees. Performance-based pay (PBP) is one of the compensation schemes that have link between employee performances with pay. It can be defined as a system of remuneration in which an individuals increase in salary is solely or mainly dependent on his/her appraisal or merit rating (Swabe, 1989). Armstrong (2005) defines it more comprehensively as the process of providing a financial reward to an individual which is linked directly to individual, group or organizational performance. But Schuler (1998) maintains that PBP is not limited to financial rewards, and that non-financial rewards, such as recognition, can also constitute pay for performance. The basic reasons for PBP are performance enhancement for competitive advantage and equity (MIlkovich and Newman, 1996). In this regard, Beardwell and Holden (1995) identify several specific reasons for which managers may introduce PBP. These include: Help in recruitment and selection; Facilitate change in organizational culture; Weaken trade union power; increased role of the line manager; Greater financial control and value for money; Ability to reward and recognize performance; and Encouragement to flexibility. Proposition/ Recommendation Each researcher has their own recommendation regarding this study that investigated the relationship between compensation pay and employee motivation. Organization or employer should understand what influences individuals motivation which determines how they behave and why they behave in a certain way. Organization can use theories of motivation in order to determine level of motivation or factors that can influence employee motivation in organization. One of the theories that organization can be use is the basic one, Maslows theory. Maslows theory shows that human needs are a function of the capacity in which the needs have already been fulfilled. This means that a fulfilled need has a low motivation value. Bishop (1987) suggested that pay is directly related with productivity and reward system depends upon the size of an organization. Compensation pay such as pay or reward package and promotion will influence employee motivation in organization. For efficiency of compensation pay, organization can give compensation pay based on their size of organization. If the organization is big, employer should provided compensation pay that suitable to their employee such as high compensation pay in term of give employee high pay so that employee will motivate and tend to perform well. Consequently, it will increase employee motivation in organization and employee. Herzbergs theory explained that if employer give an opportunities for promotions and actual promotions are highly to motivate higher performance than regular pay structures. This is supported by Maslows earlier needs theory, which ranks self-esteem and self-actualization as higher-order needs compared with physiological needs, which would include pay, as lower-order needs. Promotions do usually increase pay, but the motivational influence stems from recognition, increased responsibility, more challenging work and a personal sense of accomplishment all of which are motivating factors, according to Herzberg. Herzberg even notes opportunities for advancement specifically as a motivator. If employer gives opportunity or promotion to employee, motivation of employee will increase towards to perform better in work because employee feels that employer appreciate their contribution to organization and get recognition from organization. Conclusion and Implication Human resources Compensation pay is one of the most important factors that influence employee motivation in organization. The findings of the present study adds a new perspective on the basis of a new environmental settings to the existing evidence signifying that the work motivation in the organizations is influenced by the satisfaction of the employees with their compensation, which is offered by the organization. The further analysis of the data pertaining to the satisfaction with compensation and work motivation suggest that benefits had a positive but weak relationship with the work motivation. Benefits include allowances and reimbursements for miscellaneous expenses, company housing and company conveyance. The previous researches in this regard refer benefits as not an ingredient, which motivates employees, Jacques and Roussel, (1999). Our findings relate with these findings because of the weaker relationship of benefits with work motivation. We might also find an explanation f or the inefficiency of benefits, in research by Hills, Bergmann and Scarpello (1994). Referring to surveys concerning employees, they formulate the proposition that benefits are generally perceived as a right in United States society, so they have no incentive character.

Nozicks Wilt Chamberlain argument

Nozicks Wilt Chamberlain argument Explain and evaluate Nozicks Wilt Chamberlain argument. In Robert Nozicks famed Anarchy,State, and Utopia Nozick uses the example of a basketball player who becomes considerably richer than the rest of the population to demonstrate that liberty is incompatible with any patterned theory of distributive justice. This argument, if successful, would be a considerable challenge for Rawls because his theory prioritises liberty in his conception of justice but also requires some redistribution of wealth (as determined by the difference principle). If Nozick is right that a patterned theory (of which the difference principle is one) is incompatible with liberty then the Rawlsian project collapses into a libertarian theory because the first principle (liberty) must be favoured over the second redistributive principle. First I will argue that the Wilt Chamberlain argument is not question-begging because it assumes self-ownership and not absolute property rights (the latter is what the patterned theory must deny) and attempts to derive the latter fr om the former. Second I will argue that interpreting liberty as self-ownership does entail the incompatibility of liberty and a patterned theory as long as we do away with a Lockean proviso on initial acquisition. Nozick categorises theories of distributive justice by two classifications. The first classification is whether a theory is historical or ahistorical which is the distinction between whether a theory takes into account past actions/events/circumstances (historical) or not (ahistorical). The more important distinction that Nozick makes between varying theories of distributive justice is between patterned and unpatterned theories. A patterned theory of justice is one in which distributive shares are determined or correlated with some variable. For example a utilitarian theory of justice would be a patterned theory of justice because it would distribute social goods according to how much utility they promote. An unpatterned theory would not determine who is to get what by reference to some variable in the world. The best (and seemingly the only) way to interpret an unpatterned theory of justice is to not determine who is to get what but by what means who can get what; we may call this a procedural theory of justice. Nozicks argument against patterned theories of justice is that they are incompatible with liberty and uses the example of Wilt Chamberlain to argue for this point. In an imaginary world we assume a patterned theory of justice. Although it doesnt (and shouldnt as the example is meant to show that all patterned theories of justice are incompatible with liberty) matter which patterned theory we choose we will assume an egalitarian theory. So in the initial situation (from here on D1) we assume that the social goods in society have been distributed equally. In D1 Wilt Chamberlain, a famous basketball player, strikes an agreement with his club that for every ticket sold he will receive 25 cents (Nozick 1997:208). As a result of this Wilt Chamberlain becomes very wealthy and so upsets the patterned theory because society becomes more unequal (from here on D2). About this case Nozick can be interpreted as arguing the following: Ex hypothesi in D1 each person is justly entitled to their share of goods. This entails that no person in D1 has a claim of injustice against any other person(Nozick 1997:208-9). If everyone is entitled to their goods then they are to be at liberty to do with them whatever they want i.e. they have absolute property rights. An egalitarian principle denies that each is to be at liberty to do as they wish with their goods because it upsets the patterned theory of equality (as it does in D2). Therefore an egalitarian principle of distributive justice is incompatible with liberty. As there is no good reason to think that any other patterned theory of justice cannot be upset by liberty then any patterned theory of justice is incompatible with liberty. The essential point that Nozick is trying to make is that if each person is entitled to their goods in D1 then how can it be possible for an unjust situation to occur in D2 after each person voluntarily gives money to Wilt Chamberlain in order to see him play? As Nozick puts it, how can an unjust situation arise from people transferring their money to Wilt when each customer had no claim of justice on any holding of the others before the transfer ?(Nozick 1997:209). An initial objection may be that in society people will always freely trade (i.e. not have their property taken coercively in order to maintain a distributive principle) in accordance with that distributive principle. This objection misses the point because all Nozick is trying to show is that a patterned theory of justice is in principle incompatible with liberty. That is, any patterned theory of justice doesnt necessitate a respect for liberty. A more serious problem for Nozick arises in trying to establish (2) because it seems to beg the question against the patterned theorist. For exactly what the patterned theorist denies is that each individual has absolute property rights over the goods that have been distributed to him. When goods are redistributed after D2 in order to correct the unpatterned distribution that Wilt and his customers caused then this is not a violation of Wilts liberty because he had no absolute rights over his goods. If he had no absolute rights over his goods then when his goods are taken from him then Wilt cannot complain that his liberty has been violated. His liberty to do with his goods as he wishes is only his right to do with his goods as he pleases and if he has no absolute rights over his goods (which is exactly what the patterned theorist denies) then his liberty has not been violated under any circumstance in which it is taken e.g. not violated when in accordance with the patterned theory. In order to establish the incompatibility of liberty and any patterned theory non-question-beggingly then Nozick must give independent support for absolute property rights. Nozick does give independent reasons for absolute property rights and these are not reasons that the patterned theorist necessarily denies. Whilst the patterned theorist necessarily denies absolute property rights they dont necessarily deny the principle that each person is the owner of their own bodies i.e. the principle of self-ownership. Even if Nozick fails in his attempt at this he has not begged the question against the patterned theorist because the denial of self-ownership is not what the patterned theorist has denied in the Wilt Chamberlain argument, rather, what he has denied are absolute property rights. If self-ownership does entail absolute property rights then the patterned theorist must, by modus tollens, deny self-ownership as they necessarily deny absolute property rights. But you dont beg the qu estion against an opponent by asserting a conditional that entails the denial of your opponents point otherwise all of philosophy would be question-begging! Rather Nozick has provided a new argument and it is for the patterned theorist to deny this in order to deny the Wilt Chamberlain argument. If Nozick is to demonstrate that liberty is incompatible with any patterned theory then in order to avoid begging the question Nozick must give independent support to the idea of absolute property rights. If people are forbidden from exercising their right to property (e.g. their right to keep their property despite it being incompatible with a pattern) then we may say their liberty has been violated just as we say that a person whose right to speech has been violated has also had their liberty violated. So conceived liberty is just a collection of rights;we are at liberty to do something so long as we have a right to do that thing and no-one prevents us from exercising that right. An example that supports this conception of liberty is given by Ryan (Wolff 1992:93) where we would think it absurd to say that a professors liberty has been violated by him being prevented from transferring his tenure to his children. We think that his liberty hasnt been violated because he had no right t o transfer his tenure in the first place. Therefore our liberties are dependent on our rights. Liberty is violated when a right is violated and if peoples right to property is absolute then taking it from them without their consent violates their right to that property and so their liberty too. When we say that property rights are absolute we do not mean that people have the right to use their property literally however they want for that would give people a right to throw their spears at somebody without provocation. Rather we mean that people may use their property however they wish as long as they dont interfere with others using their property as they wish and crucially that they may use their property despite it not maintaining a patterned distribution. Can Nozick give independent support for absolute property rights (and not merely postulate them)? His attempt at this starts with the thesis of self-ownership (Kymlicka 2002:107): 6. Persons have the right to decide how they use their bodies as long as they dont interfere with anybody else using their body. Self-ownership is essentially an absolute property right to your own body; we are to be at liberty to use our bodies in any way we wish as long as we respect the like rights of others. Self-ownership seems intuitively a very plausible starting place for any normative theory. If it is denied then either other people have a claim on our bodies or nobody has a claim on our bodies or their own bodies. If people dont have the right to decide what they should do with their bodies then in what sense is slavery wrong (slavery that is better than no slavery, to cut short the utilitarian response)? Self-ownership seems to have enormous explanatory power for our moral intuitions as it explains why slavery, murder, rape, kidnapping and almost any other use of force is seen as wrong. An initial implication of this is that it would be wrong in a world where people are born with different numbers of eyes to take, without consent, peoples eyes in order to achieve a more equal distribution of eyes (C ohen 1995:70). This is one way in which a patterned theory would violate rights and thus liberty but Nozick wants to take aim at all patterned theories not just some. For example Rawls patterned theory would guarantee the right to freedom of speech and freedom of thought which are both guaranteed by self-ownership. Nozick wants to attack the Rawlsian redistribution of private property (i.e. property that is not identical to your own body) and show that violations of these private property rights (and thus liberty) is tantamount to denying self-ownership.The point is as follows: 7. If (6) is true then anyone can gain an absolute property right to any part of the world as long as they dont worsen the condition of others. (7) follows from (6) because (6) implies that we may do anything we wish as long as we dont interfere with others doing what they wish. It doesnt matter exactly how we acquire a piece of property only that it seems we must use our bodies. For how else could something that was not originally ours become ours? If this is the case then we may acquire property because we acquire property through the use of our bodies and we have the right to use our bodies as we want. The clause in (7) is introduced in order to try and stop the acquisition of property which deprives another of that right to it. For when we acquire a piece of land then it comes ours and it is up to us if others are to be able to use it and thus no-one else can have a say over how that piece of land is to be used. Nozick thinks this is acceptable as long as we hold a proviso on exactly when we may acquire a piece of land. We may only acquire a piece of land if the acquisition of that piece of land materially worsens the co nditions of anybody else who would use that piece of land. We only worsen the condition of others if they have less of what they need than if we had not acquired the piece of land that we did. For example we may not take the only full water hole in an area and deprive others of the water in it because we are clearly worsening the conditions of others. He doesnt specify exactly what happens to someones property once the Lockean proviso is violated just saying that there become stringent limitsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦on what he may do with his property(Nozick 1974:180). He seems to doubt that we could even call it that persons property. If the argument is successful it will show that people can gain absolute property rights and thus that patterned theories are unjust because they involve violating those property rights and thus liberty in order to maintain a pattern. The problem with the above argument is that the self-ownership thesis does not entail (7). Specifically it doesnt entail the Lockean proviso and the proviso seems completely ad-hoc. If Nozick admits that our ability to acquire property is dependent on how it affects the materials that others can have access (and thus their welfare) to then how is this different to weakening the property rights in order to achieve greater utility via a patterned theory? Nozicks proviso seems arbitrary in that he gives no reason why we should select his Lockean proviso over another. If we should limit the acquisition of property because of its harmful effects on others then why shouldnt we accept another Lockean proviso such as one that maximises the welfare of others? I believe that Nozick specifically selects that principle because of his interpretation of interfering in (6). For he wants to forbid acquiring property when that interferes with others acquiring property. This seems to be a mistaken int erpretation of the interfering which seems to be essentially depriving another of a negative liberty rather than a positive liberty. The distinction between positive and negative rights is essentially the distinction between what others have a duty to do and what they have a duty not to do. For example my right to not be killed is a duty that others have to not murder me and so is a negative duty whilst my right to an education is generally conceived as a duty that my lecturers have to come and lecture me about distributive justice. So I have a negative right if I have a right that people dont do something to me whilst if I have a positive right I have a right that someone provide something to me. Interfering is naturally construed as violating negative rights such as when we say that people have a right not to be interfered with. So we should interpret the self-ownership thesis as saying that we may do as we want with our bodies (including using them to acquire property) as long as we dont stop others using their bodies as they wish (including them acquiring property). So our negative right to use our body as we wish is somebody elses duty to not stop us from using it as we wish. We do not have a positive right to use our body as we wish and thus nobody has a duty to help or assist us in someway of using our bodies as we wish. This means that we have the negative right to acquire property and so everybody has a duty to restrain from stopping me acquiring property unless in doing so I am violating the negative right of someone else to acquire or maintain property. When I acquire property it does stop others acquiring property but this is nothing to the point, since you had no right to that plot (Narveson 1987:62). For nobody had a right to that piece of land until I got there and it became mine and when it becomes mine then nobody may violate my right to that property. So Nozick makes the mistake of assuming that by acquiring a piece of land I am interfering w ith somebody elses right to that piece of land. But in actual fact I am not violating anybodys right to that piece of land because I only have the duty of not violating anybody elses right to property but nobody had a negative right to that piece of property because it was me who first acquired it. So self-ownership guarantees that I may acquire property using my body and that I may acquire property as long as I dont interfere with the property rights that others already have and as interfere is violating a negative right we dont interfere with someone else acquiring property by acquiring that property because they had no positive right to a piece of land rather only the negative right that someone else not stop them acquiring a piece of land. Thus self-ownership does not require a Lockean proviso in order to acquire property because the mere depriving someone of a piece of land doesnt constitute interference. The implications for the Wilt Chamberlain case is that each person acquir es a right to that piece of property and that we may use our property in anyway that we wish as long as we dont violate the negative rights of someone else to their property. In the Wilt Chamberlain case nobody is violating anybody elses right to property by buying tickers because nobody is stopping anybody else using their property as they wish and therefore the redistribution to maintain the pattern violates the negative rights of Wilt to his property. As we have identified the violation of a right as correspondingly the violation of a liberty then it can be said that redistribution violates the liberty of Wilt by violating his liberty to do with his property as he wishes. In conclusion it seems that the Wilt Chamberlain argument does provide a good argument to show why patterned theories of justice are incompatible with liberty. We first identified that the violation of a right to do something is best described as the violation of a liberty to do something. Then we argued that in order for Nozick to avoid begging the question against the patterned theorist he must give independent support to the idea of absolute property rights which give somebody the right to use their property even if it upsets a distributive pattern. Nozick tries to argue for absolute property right from the basis of self-ownership which is the idea that each person is to have the right to use their body as they wish (which includes using it to acquire property rights) as long as they dont interfere with others using their bodies as they wish. Nozicks Lockean proviso on acquisition is not entailed by self-ownership because interference is defined only as the negative right to acqui re property and we are not violating somebody elses right to that piece of property by acquiring it because they only had the negative right of the opportunity to acquire it and not the positive right to somebody else not taking it for themselves. As self-ownership guarantees that people may acquire and use property as they want as long as they dont violate the negative rights of others to their property then the taking of Wilts property (his money) is a violation of his absolute property rights and is therefore a violation of his liberty. Bibliography Nozick,R., Anarchy,State, and Utopia 1974 Wolf,J., Robert Nozick: Robert Nozick: Property, Justice and the Minimal State 1991 Cohen,G.A., Self-ownership,freedom and equality 1995 Narveson,J., The libertarian idea 1987 Kymlicka,W., Contemporary political philosophy 1990

On the Backs of Blacks and Sorrowful Black Death Is Not a Hot Ticket :: Sorrowful Black Death Is Not a Hot Ticket Essays

On the Backs of Blacks and Sorrowful Black Death Is Not a Hot Ticket      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In both Toni Morrison's "On the backs of blacks" and bell hooks' "Sorrowful Black Death Is Not a Hot Ticket" the authors attempt to analyze the role and treatment of blacks in motion pictures. Morrison's essay deals with what she calls "race talk", and defines as "the explicit insertion into everyday life of racial signs and symbols that have no meaning other than pressing African Americans to the lowest level racial hierarchy" (Morrison, 1993). Hooks' essay similarly analyses the issue of death for blacks in movies to which she concludes "that there can be no serious representation of death and dying when the characters are African-Americans." (hooks) In both these essays there are huge errors made in their thinking, and their analyzation.      Hooks, in her opening paragraphs attempts to compare the portrayal of black vs. white death in films. In her comparison she blows all future credibility with critical readers by using examples that obviously don't have any baring on the point she is trying to make. The example she gives for a white death is that of Tom Hank's character in Philadelphia, a homosexual lawyer with AIDS who had taken his firm to court because of their bad treatment towards him because of his disease. For this case she points out that "even before tickets are brought and seats are taken, everyone knows that tears are in order." (hooks) Hooks then goes on to explain that "There is no grief, no remembrance" for the deaths of blacks.   She uses the film The bodyguard for her example of black death, citing the scene where "the sister of Rachel Marron (Whitney Houston) is accidentally assassinated by the killer she has hired" to kill her own sister (Hooks). These two examples have nothing in c ommon. The character in Philadelphia deserved sympathy when he died because he was treated unfairly for a condition he had no control of. The character in The Bodyguard neither deserved nor received recognition for one reason. It had nothing to do with her blackness, that was a non-issue, it was because she was a murderer who in an ironic twist was murdered by the assassin she had hired.

Essay --

No, not again! I cannot be hungry, I just got finish with my dinner. Food is my best friend, it helps me get through my days and always make me happy. My Mother think’s I have no idea where she put the snack pantry keys, but I do. Once everyone is asleep in my house, I will sneak to get my favorite midnight snack Little Debbie double fudge chocolate chip brownies and a glass of chocolate milk. This is an example of twelve year old Ivy Michelle. She has been obese since a toddler. Her parents will give her anything she wants to prevent her from crying. Ivy now attends middle school and she experiences name calling from her peers, which has made her very unsocial with the kids around her. During physical education Ivy never gets called to play team sports because the kids would tease that â€Å"she’s too fat†, or â€Å"she would make them lose because her weight would make her tired†. This treatment has made Ivy have very low self-esteem about herself and makes her feel like an outcast. Weight plays an important role in everyone’s lives adult or child, it also plays a major role with our society and health issues. Eating habits and lifestyles have changed tremendously over the last decade which is leading the U.S. into a bigger obesity epidemic. Childhood obesity could because of genetics, improper eating habits with lack of or no exercise. Mothers and Fathers who are working more than they have time to tend to their children, trying to build a suitable life for their growing families never really have enough time to make sure their child(ren) is getting the proper amount of exercise and a nutritious meal daily. This is an issue that is going on all across America. This issue is contributing to our childhood obesity epidemic. According to Ce... ...ising they think of the old ways of exercising like jumping jacks or running. So, it is imperative to make exercising fun that way children could stay interested. Try things like kickball, dance, football, basketball, or soccer. It is also important for you to follow a healthy diet and exercise regime because children often follow the footsteps of parents and their peers. Make healthy eating and exercise a family fun project. Living the same lifestyle as your child could be the thing to get the job done and keeping them on a healthy lifestyle for life. Childhood obesity has grown over the last decade,children need to find ways to cope with obesity, and they need support from the all the people around them. Our job as a nation and parents is to protect, teach, love and guide children. Doing this things will help them overcome obesity and take control of their weight.

Magnatism & The Things We Think We Know About It! :: essays research papers

Magnatism & the Things We THINK We Know About It! Magnatism is a wonderous natural phenomanon. Since days before scientific discoveries were even written down the world has been playing with the theories of magnatism. In these three labs we delt with some of the same ideas which have pondered over for long before any of us were around. In these conclusions we will take a look at these ideas and find out what exactly we have learned. To understand the results of the lab we must first go over the facts about magnatism on the atomic level that we have discovered. The way magnatism works is this: magnatism is all based on the simple principle of electrons and there behavior. Electrons move around the atom in a specific path. As they do this they are also rotating on there own axis. This movement causes an attraction or repultion from the electrons that are unpaird. They are moving in two directions though causing a negative and positive charge. In the case of magnatism though we find that these elements have a lot of unpaired electrons, in the case of iron, Fe, there are four. What happens then in the case of a natural magnet the unpaired electrons line up or the magnet in a specific mannor. That is all the atoms with unpaired electrons moving in a direction which causes a certain charge are lined up on one side and all the atoms with the opposite charge move to the other side. The atoms then start to cancel each other out as they approach the center of the magnet. This all happens at the currie point where these atoms are free to move and then when cooled and the metel becomes solid the atoms can no longer move (barely) causing a "permanent" magnet (as in the diagram on the next page). This same principle can be applied to a piece of metal that has been sitting next to a magnatized piece of metel in that over the long time they are togather the very slow moving atoms in the metal situate in the same fassion also creating a magnet. Now that we know the basics lets begin with the experiments. Part one of the lab started us on our journey. In this part we took an apparatus with wire wrapped around it put a compass in the middle of the wire wraps. The setup was arranged so that the wraps were running parralel with the magnetic field of the earth, that is they were north-south. With this setup we

History of Soul Music

History of Soul Music Christina Ivery University of Phoenix RES/110 John Thomas February 11, 2010 Soul music was a voice for blacks during a time of war and segregation, aside of leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X.. As stated by a historian Peter Guralnick, â€Å"It was as if the rhythm and blues singer, like the jazz musician and professional athlete before him, were being sent out as an advance scout into hostile territory†. (Santoro,2003). John Ponomarenko says Soul music originated from African Spirituals, â€Å"the first references to spiritual songs sung by black slaves dated as far back as 1828-1850†. Black spirituals were often used as work songs and sometimes contained coded information s form of secret communication, songs such as â€Å"Deep River, Roll Jordan Roll, and Wade in the Water to name a few. Soul Music began in the late 1950’s and the early 1960’s. Many studios developed in inner cities such as Detroit, Chicago, and Memphis and each had a sound of its own. This also encouraged competition and talent from all over the world. Soul music came at a time of the civil rights movement and gave all blacks a voice for their many battles within their neighborhoods and overseas as well. The staggering war on segregation was a major driving force for soul music during that time. The events in the Deep South inspired many musicians, for example; seeing black protestors hosed down in the streets with fire hydrants and beaten repeatedly with clubs as if their voices were lethal weapons. Soul music was originated in the United States primarily by African American musicians starting with the blending of gospel, rhythm, and blues. Gospel sounds and Christianity were far from the sounds of Ray Charles and James Brown singing of love, women, and good times. Piero Scaruffi stated, â€Å"James Brown, known as the King of soul, began a movement all on his own, captivating people with is powerful voice and his electrifying dance moves. â€Å"Say it aloud I’m Black and proud† was blazing from the radio sound in 1968, and said it all in the title. It became the new black national anthem. One of the first to enhance the use of a live band and gave his first choreographed show on Live at the Apollo†. Developed from a merge of gospel, blues, and jazz it came with emotions that could move anyone. Gene Santoro stated, â€Å"soul music was known as â€Å"white crossover music†, it was suddenly a way for blacks to be seen on television and most teen oriented music programs with close to no white stars†. This music was something of their own that was uplifting during a depressing time in history that everyone could dance with. Whites and blacks alike related for once because of the sounds of great soul music. The pioneers of soul music were known for their distinctive voices, voices that could only come from people who felt or was feeling traumatizing emotional pain. Their voices truly matched their ongoing struggle. Soul Music was the epitome of music in the 1960’s; many artists emerged as true musical superstars. Artists like Aretha Franklin from Detroit, who made her first recording as a gospel artist when she was the age of 14 with Columbia records signed by John Hammond. Stated by Richie Unterberger, â€Å"she made history with hit songs such as I never loved a man (the way that I love you), Respect, Chain of Fools, and I Say a Little Prayer. Soul music got people off their seats and clapping their hands, something that people could feel all through your body. Marvin Gaye was another soul singer that paved the way for musicians young and old, while also redefining soul. As stated by (Ankeny, 2008) â€Å"with one of the greatest songs to hit the charts that altered the face of black music â€Å"What’s going On† forged a sophisticated sound and incorporated jazz with classical elements†. What’s Going On also brought the sound of the spiritual believe back to the forefront of soul music. Once again soul was singing of the issues ranging from poverty and discrimination of the environment, drug abuse and political corruption, mainly the conflict in the Vietnam War. Other great hits included Ain’t No Mountain High Enough, You Precious Love and Your all I Need to Get By. Marvin sang of the issues of the times like no one else. I recall the day that Marvin Gaye was pronounced dead. My mother cried terribly as I imagine quite a large part of the world did that day. It was if soul was gone from that moment forth. It was sad moments in history that I myself will hold as a paused moment in time. However, this music brings me strength from the many songs that my ancestors before me sang for freedom or of agony; or the stories that are told through rhythm and blues that tell the history of blacks of sorrow and pain. Many songs can make people cry but it takes a mighty strong people to take that sorrow and turn it into something of their own. These artists left huge footsteps for new artist’s to follow in this time of confusion and free agency and free choice. Throughout all the chaos, soul has the few that are paving the way and would make our past icons proud of the music that these artist’s produce. Artists such as Erika Badu, Leela James, and Mary J. Blige are just a few of the icons today that keep the soul alive. For this reason soul music will not die for years to come. Soul music began with words that tell of history and how to achieve freedom. It tells Americas who we are, were we came from and where we want to go. So sing with me. References Ponomarenko, J. (2005, August) retrieved from ttp://www. localdial. com/users/jsyedu133/Soulreview/Understandingpages/the5. htm Peiro Scaruffi. (2005). A brief history of soul music. Retrieved from http://www. scaruffi. com/history/soul. html Santoro, G. (2003). Sweet Soul Music. Retrieved from  University of Phoenix eBook Collection database. Ponomarenko, J. (2005). The history of Soul. Retrieved from www. localdial. com/users/jsyedu133/soulreview/understandingpages/the5. htm Unterb erger, R. (2010). The Queen of Soul, Aretha Franklin. Retrieved from www. aretha-franklin. com/bio. htm

English Language and Composition

AP ® English Language and Composition 2011 Free-Response Questions About the College Board The College Board is a mission-driven not-for-profit organization that connects students to college success and opportunity. Founded in 1900, the College Board was created to expand access to higher education. Today, the membership association is made up of more than 5,900 of the world’s leading educational institutions and is dedicated to promoting excellence and equity in education.Each year, the College Board helps more than seven million students prepare for a successful transition to college through programs and services in college readiness and college success — including the SAT ® and the Advanced Placement Program ®. The organization also serves the education community through research and advocacy on behalf of students, educators and schools.  © 2011 The College Board. College Board, Advanced Placement Program, AP, AP Central, SAT and the acorn logo are registered trademarks of the College Board.Admitted Class Evaluation Service and inspiring minds are trademarks owned by the College Board. All other products and services may be trademarks of their respective owners. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. Permission to use copyrighted College Board materials may be requested online at: www. collegeboard. org/inquiry/cbpermit. html. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. AP Central is the official online home for the AP Program: apcentral. collegeboard. om. 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION SECTION II Total time—2 hours Question 1 (Suggested time—40 minutes. This question counts for one-third of the total essay section score. ) Locavores are people who have decided to eat locally grown or produced products as much as possible. With an eye to nutrition as well as sustainability (resource use that preserves the environment ), the locavore movement has become widespread over the past decade.Imagine that a community is considering organizing a locavore movement. Carefully read the following seven sources, including the introductory information for each source. Then synthesize information from at least three of the sources and incorporate it into a coherent, well-developed essay that identifies the key issues associated with the locavore movement and examines their implications for the community. Make sure that your argument is central; use the sources to illustrate and support your reasoning. Avoid merely summarizing the sources.Indicate clearly which sources you are drawing from, whether through direct quotation, paraphrase, or summary. You may cite the sources as Source A, Source B, etc. , or by using the descriptions in parentheses. Source A Source B Source C Source D Source E Source F Source G (Maiser) (Smith and MacKinnon) (McWilliams) (chart) (Gogoi) (Roberts) (cartoon)  © 2011 The College Board . Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -2- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Source A Maiser, Jennifer. 10 Reasons to Eat Local Food. † Eat Local Challenge. Eat Local Challenge, 8 Apr. 2006. Web. 16 Dec. 2009. The following is an article from a group Weblog written by individuals who are interested in the benefits of eating food grown and produced locally. Eating local means more for the local economy. According to a study by the New Economics Foundation in London, a dollar spent locally generates twice as much income for the local economy. When businesses are not owned locally, money leaves the community at every transaction. Locally grown produce is fresher.While produce that is purchased in the supermarket or a big-box store has been in transit or cold-stored for days or weeks, produce that you purchase at your local farmer’s market has often been picked within 24 hours of your purchase . This freshness not only affects the taste of your food, but the nutritional value which declines with time. Local food just plain tastes better. Ever tried a tomato that was picked within 24 hours? ’Nuff said. Locally grown fruits and vegetables have longer to ripen. Because the produce will be handled less, locally grown fruit does not have to be rugged† or to stand up to the rigors of shipping. This means that you are going to be getting peaches so ripe that they fall apart as you eat them, figs that would have been smashed to bits if they were sold using traditional methods, and melons that were allowed to ripen until the last possible minute on the vine. Eating local is better for air quality and pollution than eating organic. In a March 2005 study by the journal Food Policy, it was found that the miles that organic food often travels to our plate creates environmental damage that outweighs the benefit of buying organic.Buying local food keeps us in touch with the seasons. By eating with the seasons, we are eating foods when they are at their peak taste, are the most abundant, and the least expensive. Buying locally grown food is fodder for a wonderful story. Whether it’s the farmer who brings local apples to market or the baker who makes local bread, knowing part of the story about your food is such a powerful part of enjoying a meal. Eating local protects us from bio-terrorism. Food with less distance to travel from farm to plate has less susceptibility to harmful contamination.Local food translates to more variety. When a farmer is producing food that will not travel a long distance, will have a shorter shelf life, and does not have a high-yield demand, the farmer is free to try small crops of various fruits and vegetables that would probably never make it to a large supermarket. Supermarkets are interested in selling â€Å"Name brand† fruit: Romaine Lettuce, Red Delicious Apples, Russet Potatoes. Local producers often play with their crops from year to year, trying out Little Gem Lettuce, Senshu Apples, and Chieftain Potatoes.Supporting local providers supports responsible land development. When you buy local, you give those with local open space—farms and pastures—an economic reason to stay open and undeveloped. Jennifer Maiser, www. eatlocalchallenge. com  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -3- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Source B Smith, Alisa, and J. B. MacKinnon. Plenty: One Man, One Woman, and a Raucous Year of Eating Locally.New York: Harmony, 2007. Print. The following passage is excerpted from a book written by the creators of the 100-Mile Diet, an experiment in eating only foods grown and produced within a 100-mile radius. Food begins to lose nutrition as soon as it is harvested. Fruit and vegetables that travel shorter distances are therefore likely to be closer to a maximum of nutrition. â€Å"Nowadays, we know a lot more about the naturally occurring substances in produce,† said [Cynthia] Sass. It’s not just vitamins and minerals, but all these phytochemicals and really powerful disease-fighting substances, and we do know that when a food never really reaches its peak ripeness, the levels of these substances never get as high. † . . . Yet when I called to confirm these facts with Marion Nestle, a professor and former chair of nutrition, food studies, and public health at New York University, she waved away the nutrition issue as a red herring. Yes, she said, our 100-mile diet—even in winter—was almost certainly more nutritious than what the average American was eating.That doesn’t mean it is necessary to eat locally in order to be healthy. In fact, a person making smart choices from the global megamart can easily meet all the body’s needs. â€Å"There will be nutritional differences, but t hey’ll be marginal,† said Nestle. â€Å"I mean, that’s not really the issue. It feels like it’s the issue— obviously fresher foods that are grown on better soils are going to have more nutrients. But people are not nutrient-deprived. We’re just not nutrient-deprived. † So would Marion Nestle, as a dietician, as one of America’s most important critics of dietary policy, advocate for local eating? Absolutely. † Why? Because she loves the taste of fresh food, she said. She loves the mystery of years when the late corn is just utterly, incredibly good, and no one can say why: it just is. She likes having farmers around, and farms, and farmland.  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -4- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Source C McWilliams, James E. â€Å"On My Mind: The Locavore Myth. † Forbes. com. Forbes, 15 J ul. 2009. Web. 16 Dec. 2009.The following is excerpted from an online opinion article in a business magazine. Buy local, shrink the distance food travels, save the planet. The locavore movement has captured a lot of fans. To their credit, they are highlighting the problems with industrialized food. But a lot of them are making a big mistake. By focusing on transportation, they overlook other energy-hogging factors in food production. Take lamb. A 2006 academic study (funded by the New Zealand government) discovered that it made more environmental sense for a Londoner to buy lamb shipped from New Zealand than to buy lamb raised in the U.K. This finding is counterintuitive—if you’re only counting food miles. But New Zealand lamb is raised on pastures with a small carbon footprint, whereas most English lamb is produced under intensive factory-like conditions with a big carbon footprint. This disparity overwhelms domestic lamb’s advantage in transportation energy. N ew Zealand lamb is not exceptional. Take a close look at water usage, fertilizer types, processing methods and packaging techniques and you discover that factors other than shipping far outweigh the energy it takes to transport food.One analysis, by Rich Pirog of the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, showed that transportation accounts for only 11% of food’s carbon footprint. A fourth of the energy required to produce food is expended in the consumer’s kitchen. Still more energy is consumed per meal in a restaurant, since restaurants throw away most of their leftovers. Locavores argue that buying local food supports an area’s farmers and, in turn, strengthens the community. Fair enough. Left unacknowledged, however, is the fact that it also hurts farmers in other parts of the world.The U. K. buys most of its green beans from Kenya. While it’s true that the beans almost always arrive in airplanes— the form of transportation that consumes t he most energy—it’s also true that a campaign to shame English consumers with small airplane stickers affixed to flown-in produce threatens the livelihood of 1. 5 million sub-Saharan farmers. Another chink in the locavores’ armor involves the way food miles are calculated. To choose a locally grown apple over an apple trucked in from across the country might seem easy. But this decision ignores economies of scale.To take an extreme example, a shipper sending a truck with 2,000 apples over 2,000 miles would consume the same amount of fuel per apple as a local farmer who takes a pickup 50 miles to sell 50 apples at his stall at the green market. The critical measure here is not food miles but apples per gallon. The one big problem with thinking beyond food miles is that it’s hard to get the information you need. Ethically concerned consumers know very little about processing practices, water availability, packaging waste and fertilizer application.This is a n opportunity for watchdog groups. They should make life-cycle carbon counts available to shoppers. Reprinted by Permission of Forbes Media LLC  © 2010  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -5- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Source D Loder, Natasha, Elizabeth Finkel, Craig Meisner, and Pamela Ronald. â€Å"The Problem of What to Eat. † Conservation Magazine. The Society for Conservation Biology, July-Sept. 2008. Web. 16 Dec. 2009.The following chart is excerpted from an online article in an environmental magazine.  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -6- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Source E Gogoi, Pallavi. â€Å"The Rise of the ‘Locavore’: How the Strengthening Local Food Movement in Towns Across the U. S. Is Reshaping Farms and Food Retailing. † Bloomberg Businessweek. Bloomberg, 20 May 2008. Web. 17 Dec. 2009. The following is excerpted from an online article in a business magazine.The rise of farmers’ markets— in city centers, college towns, and rural squares—is testament to a dramatic shift in American tastes. Consumers increasingly are seeking out the flavors of fresh, vine-ripened foods grown on local farms rather than those trucked to supermarkets from faraway lands. â€Å"This is not a fringe foodie culture,† says [Anthony] Flaccavento. â€Å"These are ordinary, middle-income folks who have become really engaged in food and really care about where their food comes from. † It’s a movement that is gradually reshaping the business of growing and supplying food to Americans.The local food movement has already accomplished something that almost no one would have thought possible a few years back: a revival of small farms. After declining for more than a century, the number of small farms has increased 20% in the past six years, to 1. 2 million, according to the Agriculture Dept. . . . The impact of â€Å"locavores† (as local-food proponents are known) even shows up in that Washington salute every five years to factory farming, the Farm Bill. The latest version passed both houses in Congress in early May and was sent on May 20 to President George W.Bush’s desk for signing. Bush has threatened to veto the bill, but it passed with enough votes to sustain an override. Predictably, the overwhelming bulk of its $290 billion would still go to powerful agribusiness interests in the form of subsidies for growing corn, soybeans, and cotton. But $2. 3 billion was set aside this year for specialty crops, such as the eggplants, strawberries, or salad greens that are grown by exactly these small, mostly organic farmers. That’s a big bump-up from the $100 million that was earmarked for such things in the previous legislation.Small fa rmers will be able to get up to 75% of their organic certification costs reimbursed, and some of them can obtain crop insurance. There’s money for research into organic foods, and to promote farmers’ markets. Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said the bill â€Å"invests in the health and nutrition of American children . . . by expanding their access to farmer’s markets and organic produce. † Reprinted from the May 20, 2008 issue of Bloomberg BusinessWeek by special permission, copyright  © 2008 by Bloomberg L. P.  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. ollegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -7- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Source F Roberts, Paul. The End of Food. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2008. Print. The following is excerpted from a book about the food industry. [T]he move toward local food, for all its trendiness (the more adamant adherents, known as â€Å"localvores,† strive to buy products that have traveled the least â€Å"food miles†), highlights one of the problematic pieces of the modern food economy: the increasing reliance on foods shipped halfway round the world.Because long-distance food shipments promote profligate fuel use and the exploitation of cheap labor (which compensates for the profligate fuel use), shifting back to a more locally sourced food economy is often touted as a fairly straightforward way to cut externalities, restore some measure of equity between producers and consumers, and put the food economy on a more sustainable footing. Such a shift would bring back diversity to land that has been all but destroyed by chemical-intensive mono-cropping, provide much-needed jobs at a local level, and help to rebuild community,† argues the UK-based International Society for Ecology and Culture, one of the leading lights in the localvore movement. â€Å"Moreover, it would allow farmers to make a decent living while giving consumers access to healthy, fresh food at affordable prices. † While localvorism sounds superb in theory, it is proving quite difficult in practice.To begin with, there are dozens of different definitions as to what local is, with some advocates arguing for political boundaries (as in Texas-grown, for example), others using quasi-geographic terms like food sheds, and still others laying out somewhat arbitrarily drawn food circles with radii of 100 or 150 or 500 miles. Further, whereas some areas might find it fairly easy to eat locally (in Washington State, for example, I’m less than fifty miles from industrial quantities of fresh produce, corn, wheat, beef, and milk), people in other parts of the country and the world would have to look farther afield.And what counts as local? Does food need to be purchased directly from the producer? Does it still count when it’s distributed through a mass marketer, as with Wal-Mart’s Salute to America’s F armer program, which is now periodically showcasing local growers? The larger problem is that although decentralized food systems function well in decentralized societies—like the United States was a century ago, or like many developing nations still are—they’re a poor fit in modern urbanized societies.The same economic forces that helped food production become centralized and regionalized did the same thing to our population: in the United States, 80 percent of us live in large, densely populated urban areas, usually on the coast, and typically hundreds of miles, often thousands of miles, from the major centers of food production.  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -8- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONSSource G Hallatt, Alex. â€Å"Arctic Circle. † Comic strip. King Features Syndicate, Inc. 1 Sept. 2008. Web. 12 July 2009. The following is a ca rtoon from an environmentally themed comic strip. ARCTIC CIRCLE  © 2008 MACNELLY. DISTRIBUTED BY KING FEATURES SYNDICATE  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -9- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Question 2 (Suggested time—40 minutes.This question counts for one-third of the total essay section score. ) Florence Kelley (1859-1932) was a United States social worker and reformer who fought successfully for child labor laws and improved conditions for working women. She delivered the following speech before the convention of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in Philadelphia on July 22, 1905. Read the speech carefully. Then write an essay in which you analyze the rhetorical strategies Kelley uses to convey her message about child labor to her audience.Support your analysis with specific references to the text. We have, in this country, two million childr en under the age of sixteen years who are earning their bread. They vary in age from six and seven years (in the cotton mills of Georgia) and eight, nine and ten years (in the coal-breakers of Pennsylvania), to fourteen, fifteen and sixteen years in more enlightened states. No other portion of the wage earning class increased so rapidly from decade to decade as the young girls from fourteen to twenty years.Men increase, women increase, youth increase, boys increase in the ranks of the breadwinners; but no contingent so doubles from census period to census period (both by percent and by count of heads), as does the contingent of girls between twelve and twenty years of age. They are in commerce, in offices, in manufacturing. Tonight while we sleep, several thousand little girls will be working in textile mills, all the night through, in the deafening noise of the spindles and the looms spinning and weaving cotton and wool, silks and ribbons for us to buy.In Alabama the law provides t hat a child under sixteen years of age shall not work in a cotton mill at night longer than eight hours, and Alabama does better in this respect than any other southern state. North and South Carolina and Georgia place no restriction upon the work of children at night; and while we sleep little white girls will be working tonight in the mills in those states, working eleven hours at night. In Georgia there is no restriction whatever! A girl of six or seven years, just tall enough to reach the bobbins, may work eleven hours by day or by night.And they will do so tonight, while we sleep. Nor is it only in the South that these things occur. Alabama does better than New Jersey. For Alabama limits the children’s work at night to eight hours, while New Jersey permits it all night long. Last year New Jersey took a long backward step. A good law was repealed which had required women and [children] to stop work at six in the evening and at noon on Friday. Now, therefore, in New Jersey , boys and girls, after their 14th birthday, enjoy the pitiful privilege of working all night long.In Pennsylvania, until last May it was lawful for children, 13 years of age, to work twelve hours at night. A little girl, on her thirteenth birthday, could start away from her home at half past five in the afternoon, carrying her pail of midnight luncheon as happier people carry their midday luncheon, and could work in the mill from six at night until six in the morning, without violating any law of the Commonwealth. If the mothers and the teachers in Georgia could vote, would the Georgia Legislature have refused at every session for the last three years to stop the work in the mills of children under twelve years of age?Would the New Jersey Legislature have passed that shameful repeal bill enabling girls of fourteen years to work all night, if the mothers in New Jersey were enfranchised? Until the mothers in the great industrial states are enfranchised, we shall none of us be able to free our consciences from participation in this great evil. No one in this room tonight can feel free from such participation. The children make our shoes in the shoe factories; they knit our stockings, our knitted underwear in the knitting factories.They spin and weave our cotton underwear in the cotton mills. Children braid straw for our hats, they spin and weave the silk and velvet wherewith we trim our hats. They stamp buckles and metal ornaments of all kinds, as well as pins and hat-pins. Under the sweating system, tiny children make artificial flowers and neckwear for us to buy. They carry bundles of garments from the factories to the tenements, little beasts of burden, robbed of school life that they may work for us. We do not wish this. We prefer to have our work done by men and women.But we are almost powerless. Not wholly powerless, however, are citizens who enjoy the right of petition. For myself, I Line 5 45 50 10 55 15 60 20 65 25 70 30 75 35 80 40  © 2011 The Colleg e Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -10- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS shall use this power in every possible way until the right to the ballot is granted, and then I shall continue to use both. What can we do to free our consciences? There is one line of action by which we can do much.We can enlist the workingmen on behalf of our enfranchisement just in proportion as we strive with them to free the children. No labor organization in this country ever fails to respond to an appeal for help in the freeing of the children. For the sake of the children, for the Republic in which these children will vote after we are dead, and for the sake of our cause, we should enlist the workingmen voters, with us, in this task of freeing the children from toil! 85 90 95  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org.GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE. -11- 2011 AP ® ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS Question 3 (Suggested time—40 minutes. This question counts for one-third of the total essay section score. ) The following passage is from Rights of Man, a book written by the pamphleteer Thomas Paine in 1791. Born in England, Paine was an intellectual, a revolutionary, and a supporter of American independence from England. Read the passage carefully. Then write an essay that examines the extent to which Paine’s characterization of America holds true today.Use appropriate evidence to support your argument. If there is a country in the world, where concord, according to common calculation, would be least expected, it is America. Made up, as it is, of people from different nations, accustomed to different forms and habits of government, speaking different languages, and more different in their modes of worship, it would appear that the union of such a people was impracticable; but by the simple operation of constructing g overnment on the principles of society and the rights of man, every difficulty retires, and all the parts are brought into ordial unison. There, the poor are not oppressed, the rich are not privileged. . . . Their taxes are few, because their government is just; and as there is nothing to render them wretched, there is nothing to engender riots and tumults. STOP END OF EXAM  © 2011 The College Board. Visit the College Board on the Web: www. collegeboard. org. -12-