The Long History of Perfume

Perfume is thousands of years old, with evidence of the first perfumes dating back to Ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia and Cyprus. The English word perfume comes from the Latin per fume, meaning through smoke. History of Perfume Around the World The Ancient Egyptians were the first to incorporate perfume into their culture, followed by the ancient Chinese, Hindus, Israelites, Carthaginians, Arabs, Greeks, and Romans.   The oldest perfumes ever found were discovered by archeologists in Cyprus. They were more than four thousand years old. A cuneiform tablet from Mesopotamia, dating back more than three thousand years, identifies a woman named Tapputi as the first recorded perfume maker. But perfumes could also be found in India at the time. The earliest use of perfume bottles is Egyptian and dates to around 1000 BCE. The Egyptians invented glass and perfume bottles were one of the first common uses for glass. Persian and Arab chemists helped codify the production of perfume and its use spread throughout the world of classical antiquity. The rise of Christianity, however, saw a decline in the use of perfume for much of the Dark Ages. It was the Muslim world that kept the traditions of perfume alive during this time—and helped trigger its revival with the onset of international trade. The 16th century saw the popularity of perfume explode in France, especially among the upper classes and nobles. With help from â€Å"the perfume court,† the court of Louis XV, everything got perfumed: Furniture, gloves, and other clothing.   The 18th-century invention of eau de cologne helped the perfume industry continue to grow.   Uses of Perfume One of the oldest uses of perfume comes from the burning of incense and aromatic herbs for religious services, often the aromatic gums, frankincense and myrrh gathered from trees.  It did not take long, though, for people to discover perfume’s romantic potential and it was used both for seduction and as preparation for love-making. With the arrival of eau de cologne, 18th-century France began using perfume for a broad range of purposes. They used it in their bath water, in poultices and enemas, and consumed it in wine or drizzled on a sugar lump. Although niche perfume makers remain to cater to the very rich, perfumes today enjoy widespread use—and not just among women. The selling of perfume, however, is no longer just the purview of perfume makers. In the 20th century, clothing designers began marketing their own lines of scents, and almost any celebrity with a lifestyle brand can be found hawking a perfume with their name (if not smell) on it.

Juvenile Justice System Is Not The Punishment Of The...

Restore the Youth, Restore the Community A Collaborative Action Plan to Reduce Recidivism in Englewood LuGary Davis Urban Community Development- PPA 505 Professor James L. Miles Sr. March 17, 2015 Overview â€Å"The chief problem in any community cursed with crime is not the punishment of the criminals, but the preventing of the young from being trained to crime† (Du Bois, 1903). Though W.E.B. Du Bois wrote this quote well over a century ago, it still reflects the truth we hold today. This is especially apparent when we examine the intent of the modern juvenile justice system. The juvenile justice system operates under a system referred to as juvenile court. Although this system was developed in Cook County, Illinois in the late†¦show more content†¦These reforms encompass everything from the use of solitary confinement to guidelines that prevent a youth from even entering the institutional side of juvenile justice by using community resources (E. Blaskey, personal communication, February 28, 2015). One of the most popular ideas motivating this reform is the concept of restorative justice. Restorative justice looks at accountability a bit differently from previous classic models. In the past, accountability was about the punishment matching the crime which boils down to the classic biblical thought, â€Å"an eye for an eye.† Restorative justice defines accountability as taking responsibility for your behavior and taking action to repair the harm (BARJ, 1995). Instead of completing a punishment unrelated to the victims, in restorative justic e, an offender must come to terms with the outcome of their behavior to the victims and other vital stakeholders in an effort to help heal all parties. The neighborhood of Englewood in Chicago, Illinois definitely knows the effects of juvenile crime on their community. Englewood is located on Chicago’s south side and is bordered by Garfield Boulevard to the north, 75th Street to the south, Racine Avenue to the west and State Street to the east. According to the Social IMPACT Research Center (2014), Englewood has a poverty rate percentage of 42.5%, second only to Riverdale. This means that nearly half of the residents in Englewood live below the poverty

A History of the Globe Theatre Free Essays

The Globe Theatre, also well-known as Shakespeare’s theater and Elizabeth’s theater, is one of the oldest theaters in Europe. Researchers divide its history in two periods: the old Globe and the modern Globe. The old Globe was built in 1599. We will write a custom essay sample on A History of the Globe Theatre or any similar topic only for you Order Now From 1599 to 1608 or 1609 the Globe playhouse was the home of the Chamberlain-King’s company and the only theater where it publicly presented its plays in. London. The Globe was imitated by Henslowe, the Globe magnate, and lauded by Dekker, the playwright. Upon its stage Shakespeare’s major tragedies enjoyed their first performances. Located among the stews and marshes of the Bankside, it drew across the Thames its audience, men and women, gentlemen and journeymen, sightseeing foreigners and native playgoers (Adams 2). Shortly after the 26th of February, 1599, construction of the Globe commenced under the supervision of Peter Streete, the man with whom Philip Henslowe and Edward Alleyn contracted a year later to erect the Fortune theater along the same lines. From Streete’s building schedule for the Fortune, we can estimate that the Globe took twenty-eight to thirty weeks to complete, and thus the earliest opening date would have been in late August or early September, 1599 (Adams 2-3). Yet the playhouse signifies more than a physical structure for the presentation of plays. It has become the symbol of an entire art. Its construction initiated a glorious decade during which the company achieved a level of stability and a quality of productivity rarely matched in the history of the theater. So rich was the achievement that virtually all interest in the Elizabethan drama radiates from the work of these years. Circumstances attendant on the building of the Globe playhouse were instrumental in developing the distinctiveness of this endeavor. The new playhouse itself was regarded as the last word in theaters. Alleyn and Henslowe modeled the Fortune upon it. In the design of the theater there were significant changes from former playhouses (Adams 20, 22). It was a theater built by actors for actors. To subsidize it a new financial system was instituted which more fully than heretofore interrelated theater and actors. Furthermore, young men had recently taken over the entire enterprise, playhouse and company. Until 1597 James Burbage had maintained some connection with the Lord Chamberlain’s men (Adams 84). Builder and owner of the Theatre, lessor of Blackfriars, he had exercised a strong influence on the course the company took. One more significant change occurred at this time. Either a dispute with his fellows or an irrepressible wanderlust led the leading clown, Will Kempe, to break with the company (Binelli 56). Apparently before the stage of the Globe was painted and the spectators admitted, he severed his connection with the Lord Chamberlain’s men, though he had been among the original five who had taken a moiety of the lease on the projected playhouse. After his departure, there followed a period of great stability in the acting company. In the entire decade there were only two replacements, owing to the deaths of actors, and three additions with an expansion from nine to twelve members in 1603 (Adams 83, 96). I suppose that until now the discussion of the Globe playhouse has proceeded from dramatic function to theatrical realization. No one really can reconstruct the design of the Globe playhouse. All hypotheses, some reasonable, some farfetched, lack supportive materials and proofs about construction and design of the theater. Each scholar, selecting for his research certain scraps of evidence, has painted a hypothetical image of the Elizabethan playhouse. Following John Adams, it was How to cite A History of the Globe Theatre, Papers

Bank Specific and Dynamic Determinants †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Bank Specific and Dynamic Determinants. Answer: Introduction: The overall assessment is focused on delivering the changing financial regulations, which has evolved over the period for the banking sector. The assessment also focuses on detecting the current capital based regulatory system that is used for the banking industry has relatively helped in improving the level of business, which is conducted by banks. The significance and effect of the regulations on the operations of the banking system is evaluated, which could relatively help in understanding the systematic risk and returns generated by the banks. The major changes made in capital regulation directly allow banks to conduct adequate business, which is conducted ethically. Evolution of capital regulations is relatively conducted in the assessment, which allows the detection of relevant effects on banking operations. The proposition of capital regulations that has restricted the returns of banks is evaluated in the assessment. Furthermore, the effect of capital regulations on the lendin g process of banks is evaluated post-global financial crisis era. This overall evaluation relatively helps in detecting whether Banking Regulation are Countercyclical. The analysis of banking operations before and after the financial crisis relatively helps in understanding the overall regulations that was conducted on banks. This evaluation of regulatory system would eventually help in understanding the financial condition of banks and their ability to generate revenue from operations. Furthermore, adequate evaluation on capital regulations is conducted with its overall evolution, which regulates Financial Institutions and banks to conduct adequate businesses in the current market. Consider the evolution of capital regulation and the review the current capital based regulatory system and evaluate the effect regulation has had on banking operations, systemic risk, and bank returns: The evolution of capital regulations has effectively conducted over the previous fiscal yes years, where different types of regulations of past to control and the overall systematic risk involved in banking operations. The evolution of the regulation relatively increased or started after the financial crisis, which mainly portrayed the loopholes in the current capital regulation system. Moreover, these economic regulations were held to increase the control on banks that were greedy enough to ignore their capacity and incur more debt than required. Capital regulations has relatively improved from Basel I to Basel III, which relatively helps in reducing the overall occurrence of second financial crisis due to the greediness of banks. The current Basel III regulations are mainly based on the international capital standard for banks, which helps in assessing the different levels of risk involved in investments. Therefore, with the help of Basel III the overall reduction in risk from inve stments are conducted, which was previously not present in the banking regulations. On the contrary, Bruno and Shin (2015) argued that with the implementation of more strict capital regulations banks are still able to increase their operations by acquiring more risk, while increasing the chance of default. Berger et al. (2016) further stated that the control measures conducted on Financial Institutions relatively restrict the banking sector to conduct business, which might directly hamper the overall capital regulation system of the country. The focus of the changes on capital regulations was mainly conducted to increase banks equity capital requirements, which was previously not present and increase the overall risk of the banks. Moreover, the non-fulfillment of relevant just assessment, which was not conducted by Basel I was mainly supported by Basel II. Basel II was mainly used for assessing different types of risk for assets, which relatively helped Bank to reduce their risk from operations and conduct ethical business. However, Basel II was updated to Basel III, which relatively comprised all the regulations that needs to be followed by banks while conducting business. These capital regulations are a reflection of the conclusion that was drawn from financial crisis, where the banks became fragile due to the low capital regulations implemented in their operations. The progress and evolution of the capital regulations was mainly triggered by the financial crisis, where the actual loopholes in the capital regulations i dentified. Hilscher and Raviv (2014) stated that with the implementation of Basel II the overall unethical measures that could be conducted by banks for increasing their profits would reduce substantial, which help in protecting the depositors money in case of cash stagnation. The changes in capital regulations relatively help in improving the overall measures and structure of banks for the period. Before the financial crisis the overall requirements for the banks to hold cash, reserves were relatively low, which boosted the banks to increase their capacity to generate higher Returns. However, after evaluating the mistakes that was conducted during and before the financial crisis adequate changes in the capital standards were conducted. The evolution on the Minimum capital requirements that needs to be followed by the banks to conduct the operation relatively produced the possibility of future financial crisis. The changes in minimum common equity capital, capital conservation buffer, minimum Tier 1 capital, minimum total capital and countercyclical buffer regime was a relatively changed from 2013 to 2018, where the overall projections of the changes are also depicted. This relatively indicates the overall progress evolution on the capital regulations that was imposed on banks post financial crisis. Berger, Kick and Schaeck (2014) mentioned that with the changes in capital regulations the operations conducted by banks became more prominent and riskless, which eventually help in strengthening the financial sector and minimizing the chance of another financial crisis. The relevant changes in capital standard have been implemented by Basel III, which would eventually help banks to reduce their overall risk. Moreover, the current capital base regulatory system relatively falls under Basel III, Tier 1 and Tier 2 ratios, which needs to be conducted by banking companies to improve the level returns in comparison to risk. In addition, the method would eventually help in supporting the current capital based regulatory system used by the banks (Jimenez et al. 2014). The implementation of Basel III relatively restricts the banks to go beyond their ability to support their operations for generating high returns. Moreover, Minimum requirements are needed by banks to fulfill conduct business in the presence of capital regulations without which they would not be provided with the license to continue their operations. The minimum regulation is mainly implemented by Basel III, which is continuously changing to Increase new safety and soundness regulation such as new standards for capital and advantage of banks (Dell'Ariccia, Laeven and Suarez 2017). The evolution in minimum capital requirements relatively portrays the changing perception of policymakers regarding the financial stability risk of those, which could hamper operations of the bank. The current capital regulations are to minimize this is taking capability of banks, as previously it leads to the financial crisis and cash stagnation. The regulations imposed on the banking system have relatively affected their operational capability, while changing the systematic risk and return that it could generate from operations. The restrictions laid down by the capital regulatory system has mainly reduced the overall operational capability of banks, which directly helps in reducing the risk involved in operations. The systematic risk is mainly incurred due to the decision that is made by banks onto the relevant Investments, which were relatively increases when banks tend to increase the accumulation of risk to generate higher returns. The current capital based regulatory system has a relatively helped and improving the operations of the bank while reducing systematic risk (Laeven, Ratnovski and Tong 2016). Banks now provide loans with a proper Understanding of the disk attributes that is in Gulf in providing loans to a certain individual. This relatively helps in reducing the overall chances of cash stagnation and losses fr om operations. The capital regulatory system has been the minimizing the banking operations to the level which was needed to sustain the financial market. However, this relatively reduced the systematic risk for the banking sector, while declining its actual Returns. The main problems that occurred with the implementation of capital regulatory systems were the production in returns generated by banks. Banks were not able to increase their systematic risk to generate high returns, which reduced the profits generated by banks. In this context, Dell?Ariccia, Laeven and Marquez (2014) stated that with low systematic risk banks could adequately their operations in the financial market, while reducing the chances of cash stagnation the current regulations are still evolving to support the overall banking system, while reducing their high risk-taking capability. Therefore, more changes in the minimum requirement capital and other attributes laid down by Basel III are being conducted improve the banking system. The overall systematic risk involved in operations of the bank has a relatively reduced after the financial crisis, where the banks provided loans to anyone for increasing the returns on investment. The slow systematic risk has a relatively reduce d the return generation capacity of banks in the current era. Evaluate the proposition that capital regulations have restricted return and whether regulation is reduced to the operations of banks: There are many reasons behind the restriction that is imposed by capital regulations on banks, as it directly helps in reducing the problems that might arise in future. There are segmented reasons behind the need of adequate regulations for controlling banks or they might conduct operations to generate higher returns from investment. There were significant habits of the Banks, which would be identified as the most problematic condition faced by capital regulator. From the evaluation, it could be detected that banks have a tendency to take on higher risk for achieving or enhancing their profits, which relatively increases the risk from investment. Without regulations, banks would only focus on creating enhancing the profit while taking on more risk with the capital that is provided by depositors. Moreover, the regulation also imposed due to the private incentive that is made by bankers for conducting operations. The bankers tend to increase the compensation and incentives, while condu cting business, which is not adequate according to the regulations. Likewise, the bank use clients money to generate profits, which relatively increases their capacity for risk, as the investment capital is of depositors. Flannery (2016) criticizes that the problems faced by regulators, in controlling the banking regulations and operations, is persisting, which relatively increases the chance of another financial crisis. Furthermore, the sophisticated products that are sold by the banks to the customers have relevant knowledge gap, which relatively favors the bank. Measure was a relatively scene during the financial crisis, when the faulty CDOs were transferred from banks to investors without the prior knowledge. Besides, the externalities make banking a very sensitive business, as a failure of bank would eventually affect the whole economy due to its operations tangled all around the economy. These are the main reasons behind the restrictions that need to import on banking before t he conduct adequate business in the economy (Berg and Kaserer 2015). The current propositions of capital regulations that have been imposed on banks have adequately restricted them to conduct risky business. Implementation of Basel II and Basel III Accord has relatively regulated the banking system while imposing different restrictions on them to conduct business. On the other hand, Khan, M.S., Scheule and Wu (2017) criticizes that potential negative ramification can be conducted if restrictions on the Banking Regulation increases, as it might directly transfer into a regulated Shadow banking system. This regulated Shadow banking system would eventually hamper the economic condition and increase the operations in black market. Therefore, it could be indicated that the current capital regulations that is imposed on operations of Banks is relatively adequate as it helps in reducing the additional risk that might be accumulated by banks (Baker and Wurgler 2015). The overall implementation of macro prudential regulations that is conducted on banks relatively increases the restrictions of activities that need to be ignored by the banks. Moreover, the restrictions or preventions that are imposed on banks are a measure that is conducted on a day-to-day control basis for resolving any kind of crisis, which might incur in future. Additionally, the activity restrictions are conducted where the authorities directly limit The Financial Institutions actions that could be taken by them. The overall Glass Steagall Act listed in 1933 mainly sliced the investment banks and commercial banks, which helped in segregating the operations of the bank and the capability to lend to an individual borrow. the restrictions on the lending process relatively post the banks to not increase the amount of loan more than 10% of the banks overall assets for an individual borrower. Acharya and Steffen (2015) argued that the overall increment in regulations has mainly reduce d the operation capability of banks, while the risk involved in investments is still high, which might in turn hamper depositors money. This restriction relatively allowed the banks to reduce the overall risk from investment is restricting the loan amount for an individual investor. Likewise, restrictions imposed by the capitol regulators are only on risk that can be accumulated by banks for conducting operations. The restrictions of how much are just a bank antique is conducted by limiting the advantage of the particular Bank. In addition, banks for reducing the overall risk and advantage from operations needs to increase higher capital accumulation (Bougatef and Mgadmi 2016). The capital regulations have mainly indicated the criteria for capital that need to be implemented by banks, where changes in capital need to be conducted for improving its protection. Moreover, the restrictions on banks relatively allow the creditors protection in case the bank default and is not able to provide the overall loan amount. This restriction directly changes the overall perspective of banks in conducting business, which in Limit their capability to conduct business according to that its attributes. After evaluating the capital regulations restrictions on the operations of banks could be identified, this is conducted with the help of Basel II and Basel III accord (Gersbach and Rochet 2017). The restrictions are mainly based on the overall return and risk attribute of the capital regulations, which relatively reduces the overall capability of the banks to minimize risk from operations. The capital regulations are only imposed on banks for regulating their operations accord ing to the measures, which might help in reducing the accumulation of excessive systematic risk within its operations. The restrictions relatively reduce the advantage condition of banks while conducting the business, which helps in safeguarding the overall depositors money, which is used by banks in conducting business. The legislation that is currently present relatively allows banks to use depositors money for conducting business without the consequence of loss. However, the restrictions of capital regulations relatively minimize the chance of loss that might in curve by the banks due to gas stagnation. The measures depicted in Basel III relatively increase the minimum requirements of capital that needs to be present within the operations of bank to conduct smooth operations (Gambacorta and Shin 2016). Therefore, the restrictions conducted on bank has a relatively reduced their overall operations,which reduces financial operations of banks. The restrictions are mainly based on the operations which increases risk attributes of the bank, which in turn helps in securing the depositors money. Moreover, the restrictions depicted by regulations mainly decline the overall operations such as providing loans to individuals and groups. This restriction relevantly reduces the capability of bank for issuing the entire loan to one individual (Faccio, Marchica, and Mura 2016). Furthermore, the preposition of increasing the relevant restriction on the operations of bank is conducted, where the minimum Capital requirement increased every year to reduce the substantial risk involved in the banking system. Besides, the input of capital conversion buffer has relatively helped in maintaining the level of adequate capital within the banking system. The minimum Tier 1 capital required for the operations has a relatively increased over the period, which restricts banks to conduct the business. The minimum total Capital requirement has also increased with the minimum common equity that needs to be maintained by banks in their financial records. This restrictions and Minimum requirements that is imposed on banks buy capital regulations has a relatively reduce the capability of bank to conduct operations (Hugonnier and Morellec 2017). Analyse the effect of capital regulation has had on lending in the post global crisis era and banking regulations countercyclical: The relevant evaluation of the capital regulations on lending process of banking sector could be identified by evaluating the post and pre-lending conditions of banks. Before the financial crisis, the overall lending process of banks was relatively different, as their focus was to maximize their profits from investment. The banks would eventually provide loans to everyone whoever would approach them for a particular loan without collateral or income proof. This was mainly conducted to initiate loan with higher interest rate, which could provide rising profits for the banking system. However, the lending process had relatively different types of flowers, which was identified after the financial crisis. In this context, Schepens (2016) stated that banks provided bad loans to individuals and accumulated the loans on a particular Bond known as CDOs, which led to the decline of image of financial sectors all around the world. The valuation of bonds was relatively conducted based on credit ratings, which was always high regardless of risk and return attributes of the instrument. On the other hand, Bessis (2015) argued that banks due to the availability of capital from the market were conducting unethical measure to increase the returns from investment by transferring the loans from them to the investors. However, the current lending process is mainly restricted by the capital regulations imposed on banks, which substantially reduces the risk from Investments. The restrictions on the lending process have relatively increased with background checks and thorough income tax of borrowers is conducted before issuing loans. This measure was relatively imposed on the banking system after the financial crisis, which relatively helped in improving the current financial position of banks. However, the banks previously would never check the actual background and income proof of the individuals getting the loans. On the contrary, Paligorova and Santos (2017) argued that banks were able to manipulate the risk attributes due to the lack of adequate regulations and monitoring conducted on their operations. Therefore, the current banking system mainly neglects all the measures that were taken pre-financial crisis, which reduces the overall risk attributes of the operations conducted by banks. After the financial crisis Basel accord was mainly changed and updated to Basel III, which relevantly has three main pillars such as minimum Capital requirement, risk management supervision, and market discipline (Nguyen 2014). These three pillars mainly help in evaluating the Minimum Requirements That needs to be followed by banks before initiating the learning process. This relatively minimizes the capability of the banks in issuing loans to borrow without conducting adequate research and evaluation. With implementation of the three pillars, there are different attributes of Basel III, which needs to be followed by banks such as capital base, risk coverage, advantage ratio, and capital buffers. With implementation of above attributes, the oral bank is relatively restricted to conduct adequate evaluation before providing loans to the borrower. Moreover, the lending supervision act relatively provides Basel III to force capital requirements on banks, which helps in reducing the exce ssive Risk that could be taken by banking institutions (Mollah et al. 2017). Moreover, the capital regulations authority, which could help in improving the risk, has changed the lending process that was used by banks before the financial crisis and return attributes of the banking sector. Currently banks need adequate proof from the borrower regarding the income and property that is we mortgage for the loan. In addition, the credit ratings of borrowers are also evaluated before providing them any kind of loan, as it helps in identifying the capability to return the borrowed money. Furthermore, the implementation of adequate measure conducted by capital regulator's eventually help improve the banking sector and reduce the negative impact of systematic risk (Mankai and Belgacem 2016). With the lending process, the overall conversion of loans from banks to investors is also regulated by the capital activities. previously the banks for conducting unethical measures by ranking B+ bonds as AAA and selling them to investors. The regulations after the financial crisis has a relatively frequent the bond valuation system, which is been used to evaluate the mortgage bonds in the current era. Moreover, the banks are not able to convert all its loans to Bond and transfer them to potential investors. This restrictions on transfer of loans has a relatively restricted the lending process of banks, as after providing the loans the bank needs to hold them on books and not transfer them in the capital market (Efing et al. 2015). Bushman, Hendricks and Williams (2016) argued that the overall financial banks were regulated to minimize the risk that they could undertake from operations, which might hamper the actual depositorys money. In addition, the Basel III accord mainly helps in reducing the overall risk from investment, which could be generated by banks after the financial crisis. The current banking regulations are also not countercyclical, as the overall countercyclical buffer regime is introduced in Basel III. This buffer regime is mainly introduced to counter the overall pro-cyclical measures, which is conducted by banks during a favorable economic condition. During the economic boom banks, tend to provide loans to individuals for increasing their profits, whereas the lack of good borrowers relatively increases their thirst for providing loans to anyone. This increases the risk attributes of the banking system, which was previously conducted before the financial crisis. The banks were trying to provide loans to individuals with no credibility based on property (Waemustafa and Sukri 2015). This increases the chance of pro-cyclical, which relatively increases the risk of operations that is conducted by banks. However, in Basel III countercyclical buffer regime directly allows the banks to retain adequate profits in their business for improving their financia l stability. The overall measure has a relatively increased over the period after its introduction in 2016. The banks are mainly forced to retain decent share of profit and built-up reserves for reducing the negative impact from any financial crisis. Plantin (2014) criticizes that the reduction in banks capability to provide loans would eventually hamper the economic condition of the country, where businesses would not get adequate support from banks to conduct their operations. Conclusion: The oral assessment was mainly conducted to identify the capital regulations, which was imposed on banking after the financial crisis. There were different levels of changes and evolution witnessed within the capital regulations, which help in reducing the overall risk attributes of banks. Moreover, the capital regulations measures that were taken to control the risk attributes of banks also restricted them to conduct business freely. These restrictions relatively reduced the capability of banks to increase the returns from investment, as higher risk resulted in higher returns. The aim of capital regulations was to understand the banking structure and lay down the relevant rules to restrict the risk-taking capability of banks. Besides, the analysis of continuous restrictions on banking operations and risk is evaluated in the assessment. This analysis helps in identifying the current restrictions that is implemented by Basel III on the operations of banks to reduce the risk from investment. The restrictions is a relatively reducing the capability of banks to continue with its operations freely, while it improves the core operational capability of the banking system. Relevant evaluation of capital regulations on lending process of banks after the Global crisis is evaluated, which is relatively helps in understanding the current capability of banks in issuing loans. The regulations have relatively restricted the lending conditions of banks, while reducing their capability to conduct business. The restrictions on the lending process of banks are relatively conducted after evaluating the pre-Global crisis condition in which they issued loans to anybody with or without credentials. Therefore, the current Regulations relatively help in reducing the risk of banking system, while securing the financial sector of the country. Reference and Bibliography: Acharya, V.V. and Steffen, S., 2015. The greatest carry trade ever? Understanding eurozone bank risks.Journal of Financial Economics,115(2), pp.215-236. Baker, M. and Wurgler, J., 2015. Do strict capital requirements raise the cost of capital? Bank regulation, capital structure, and the low-risk anomaly.American Economic Review,105(5), pp.315-20. Begenau, J., 2016. Capital requirements, risk choice, and liquidity provision in a business cycle model. Behn, M., Haselmann, R. and Wachtel, P., 2016. Procyclical capital regulation and lending.The Journal of Finance,71(2), pp.919-956. Berg, T. and Kaserer, C., 2015. Does contingent capital induce excessive risk-taking?.Journal of Financial intermediation,24(3), pp.356-385. Berger, A.N., Bouwman, C.H., Kick, T. and Schaeck, K., 2016. Bank liquidity creation following regulatory interventions and capital support.Journal of Financial Intermediation,26, pp.115-141. Berger, A.N., Kick, T. and Schaeck, K., 2014. Executive board composition and bank risk taking.Journal of Corporate Finance,28, pp.48-65. Bessis, J., 2015.Risk management in banking. John Wiley Sons. Bougatef, K. and Mgadmi, N., 2016. The impact of prudential regulation on bank capital and risk-taking: The case of MENA countries.The Spanish Review of Financial Economics,14(2), pp.51-56. Bruno, V. and Shin, H.S., 2015. Capital flows and the risk-taking channel of monetary policy.Journal of Monetary Economics,71, pp.119-132. Bushman, R.M., Hendricks, B.E. and Williams, C.D., 2016. Bank Competition: Measurement, Decision?Making, and Risk?Taking.Journal of Accounting Research,54(3), pp.777-826. Dell?Ariccia, G., Laeven, L. and Marquez, R., 2014. Real interest rates, leverage, and bank risk-taking.Journal of Economic Theory,149, pp.65-99. Dell'Ariccia, G., Laeven, L. and Suarez, G.A., 2017. Bank Leverage and Monetary Policy's Risk?Taking Channel: Evidence from the United States.the Journal of Finance,72(2), pp.613-654. Efing, M., Hau, H., Kampktter, P. and Steinbrecher, J., 2015. Incentive pay and bank risk-taking: Evidence from Austrian, German, and Swiss banks.Journal of International Economics,96, pp.S123-S140. Faccio, M., Marchica, M.T. and Mura, R., 2016. CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation.Journal of Corporate Finance,39, pp.193-209. Flannery, M.J., 2016. Stabilizing large financial institutions with contingent capital certificates.Quarterly Journal of Finance,6(02), p.1650006. Gambacorta, L. and Shin, H.S., 2016. Why bank capital matters for monetary policy.Journal of Financial Intermediation. Gersbach, H. and Rochet, J.C., 2017. Capital regulation and credit fluctuations.Journal of Monetary Economics,90, pp.113-124. Hilscher, J. and Raviv, A., 2014. Bank stability and market discipline: The effect of contingent capital on risk taking and default probability.Journal of Corporate Finance,29, pp.542-560. Hugonnier, J. and Morellec, E., 2017. Bank capital, liquid reserves, and insolvency risk.Journal of Financial Economics,125(2), pp.266-285. Jimnez, G., Ongena, S., Peydr, J.L. and Saurina, J., 2014. Hazardous Times for Monetary Policy: What Do Twenty?Three Million Bank Loans Say About the Effects of Monetary Policy on Credit Risk?Taking?.Econometrica,82(2), pp.463-505. Jimnez, G., Ongena, S., Peydr, J.L. and Saurina, J., 2017. Macroprudential policy, countercyclical bank capital buffers, and credit supply: evidence from the Spanish dynamic provisioning experiments.Journal of Political Economy,125(6), pp.2126-2177. Khan, M.S., Scheule, H. and Wu, E., 2017. Funding liquidity and bank risk taking.Journal of Banking Finance,82, pp.203-216. Laeven, L., Ratnovski, L. and Tong, H., 2016. Bank size, capital, and systemic risk: Some international evidence.Journal of Banking Finance,69, pp.S25-S34. Manka, S. and Belgacem, A., 2016. Interactions between risk taking, capital, and reinsurance for propertyliability insurance firms.Journal of risk and insurance,83(4), pp.1007-1043. Mollah, S., Hassan, M.K., Al Farooque, O. and Mobarek, A., 2017. The governance, risk-taking, and performance of Islamic banks.Journal of financial services research,51(2), pp.195-219. Nguyen, T., 2014. Bank capital requirements: A quantitative analysis. Paligorova, T. and Santos, J.A., 2017. Monetary policy and bank risk-taking: Evidence from the corporate loan market.Journal of Financial Intermediation,30, pp.35-49. Plantin, G., 2014. Shadow banking and bank capital regulation. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(1), pp.146-175. Schepens, G., 2016. Taxes and bank capital structure.Journal of Financial Economics,120(3), pp.585-600. Tanda, A., 2015. The effects of bank regulation on the relationship between capital and risk.Comparative Economic Studies,57(1), pp.31-54. Waemustafa, W. and Sukri, S., 2015. Bank specific and macroeconomics dynamic determinants of credit risk in Islamic banks and conventional banks.International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues,5(2).

French Revolution Essays (1499 words) - Knights Of The Golden Fleece

French Revolution The French Revolution changed the face of France and all who were associated with it so drastically that it was almost the exact opposite of what it used to be. Most of the people in France at the time were very upset by the way the government had been being run for so long. Many historians believe that the period of increased knowledge and ideas, or The Enlightenment, was the cause of the revolution. In any case, the people wanted change. King Louis XVI ruled France under an absolute monarchy in 1789, but the government also consisted of three estates, or classes, of people who helped govern France. The first estate was made up of the clergy and Church officials who held much of the power, however they only made up a small percentage of Frances population. The second estate consisted of Frances nobles. The nobles only made up 2% of Frances population, but they owned more than 20% of Frances land. The third estate actually has three separate classes within itself. The first group, the bourgeois, were just as wealthy as the nobles, but had very little power at all. The nobles didnt have to pay taxes, so the bourgeois were angry that they had the wealth, but no political stature to go with it. The farmers and lower-class workers were always subject to huge taxes on literally every thing they owned to help pay for wars, and other political money problems. The poor people of France were outraged at the tremendous prices of bread and could no longer afford to feed their families. The third estate made up 98% of Frances population but had less power than the other two estates. The third estate began screaming revolt and Louis XVI was forced to call the first Estates-General since 1614. The Estates-General met at the Palace of Versailles and each of the three estates presented their problems with the way things were being run. The conference was supposed to be run based on the rules of Frances Old Regime. The Old Regime is a set of governing laws that were established in favor of the nobles and the clergy. For every problem, each estate would vote and then count and then their overall vote would count as one vote. Each estate had one vote, therefore, the third estate would always lose in a vote that the nobles and the clergy didnt like. The third estate had more members than the first two combined, so the third estate demanded a vote where everyone in the each estate counted as a vote. The third estate basically took over the entire Estates-General, changed their name to the National Assembly, and forced them to vote in this way. The National Assembly won a lmost every vote and completely demolished the Old Regime, and almost every taxing law in France. On July 14, 1789, the citizens of Paris stormed the Bastille Fortress. The people were armed with a few guns and some tools, but the soldiers in the fortress had cannons. The citizens were being slaughtered, but then many of Paris soldiers felt sympathy for the people and went to help. They took over Bastille, and gained artillery and ammunition. King Louis XVI was planning on hiring Swedish mercenaries to regain his power and bring peace back to France, but now that the people controlled Bastille, this was impossible. Since King Louis XVI could no longer trust the loyalty of his troops, he fled to the border. He was almost there, when he was recognized by a soldier and brought back to Versailles. He was thrown in jail. The National Assembly stepped down from power now that peace had been achieved. A new group, The National Convention took power and attempted to establish a democracy. This time in history, between September of 1793 and July of 1794, is known as the Reign of Terror. T he National Convention was basically ruled by two men, Georges Danton and Maximilien Robespierre. Robespierre slowly gained more control than Danton. Thousands of suspects against the revolution were executed, by means of the newly invented guillotine, including the kings wife, Marie Antoinette. In the early months of 1794, other leaders were

Soap Operas Essays - Social Realism, Soap Opera, EastEnders

Soap Operas Essays - Social Realism, Soap Opera, EastEnders Soap Operas What forms of pleasure can be found in viewing the continuous serial on TV? The continuous serial is more commonly known as the soap opera, and is peculiar in that each episode cannot be watched and understood on its own; the viewer must watch the episodes before and after to understand what is happening. According to Brown the soap opera has 8 typical characteristics (see appendix 1). Television is becoming an increasingly important part of society. We have more televisions in our homes, and on those televisions there are more soap operas for the viewing public e.g. EastEnders, Coronation Street, Emmerdale, Neighbours, Home and Away, Brookside, London Bridge, and HollyOaks. Individuals undoubtedly get a lot of pleasure from them, and although the soap opera is viewed as entertainment, there should be a cautious approach to this view, because television is an influential part of our society. In this essay I will look at the pleasures and the consequences. Escapism is one form of pleasure. The soap provides an outlet for an individual to escape the responsibilities of their own life. As soon as the familiar theme music begins the viewer is transported to another world, although Mike Clark poses the question (page 19) What sort of escape is it that constantly refers to the very issues that may be troubling the viewer?. Another pleasure of soap operas is the continuity of the characters and settings (Clark, page 19). The familiar settings give a sense of a stability and order to the viewer. Most people know the Rovers Return in Coronation Street or the Old Vic in EastEnders. The individual feels at home with a soap and its characters, of which there can be up to 40; all are old friends to the regular viewer. For the most part they do not set out to shock. Because the characters are ordinary and believable, Mike Clark states that the actors must be the same in their lives outside television. He tells us that: When Peter Adamson, who played Len Fairclough, was charged with sexually molesting a child and subsequently killed off from the program, his crime was not that, precisely (he was acquitted), but rather one of deviating from the unexceptional norms of Coronation Street and of the viewers at home. Seeing someone who had been publicly associated with such an offence, and thinking I wonder what really happened, would be disruptive of the kind of low-key realism attempted by the program, therefore out he had to go. Im not sure that this argument would hold true today. His book was published in 1987 and since then I think the public has become more tolerant, and apart from that, Coronation Street has become more controversial in its storyline; these days generally any publicity is good for a soap. This leads to another pleasure derived from the soap opera. The private lives of the actors, reported in the press and on the television, provide an infinite source of pleasure for the viewing public. In the Evening Standard (Tuesday 3rd March 1998) there were three separate articles about three different actors from EastEnders: Barbara Windsor, Paul Bradley, and Patsy Palmer. However, such public interest can create a problem for the actors, in the form of admirers and stalkers and the public still perceiving them as their on screen character. Empathy with the characters can reduce the viewers own problems as they realise that other people also suffer; another good reason to watch a soap. Biancas abortion storyline, in EastEnders, may have helped people in similar situations think about the relevant issues before making their own decision. Regular soap opera viewers who have followed a particular soap for years, according to Clark acquire an expertise and a fund of archival knowledge, which enable them to experience the programs more fully, and more enjoyably. So, they understand the personalities, strengths and weaknesses of the characters in the soap, and will often know exactly how a particular character would act in a particular situation. For them, this makes soaps more pleasurable. The romantic interest in the soap holds many viewers. Who will fall in love? Who will have an affair? Who will get married? At the time of writing, in Coronation Street the

Daimler organization culture Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Daimler organization culture - Assignment Example 305). Moreover, neither the Americans nor the Germans liked the merger, and it destroyed both companies. Chrysler was faced with falling profits shortly after the merger, which destroyed Chrysler’s market advantage; meanwhile, Daimler was faced with the fact that their products were not as quality as they once were, which destroyed Daimler’s market advantage (Markowitz, 2003). The end result was that the company posted losses almost immediately after merging, and this occurred from the beginning, and Daimler had its biggest loss ever in 2001. The two companies finally de-merged in 2007 (Banal-Estanol & Seldeslachts, 2007, p. 1). Chrysler probably should not have been looking for a merger at this time, however, the CEO of Chrysler, Bob Eaton, felt that the coming years would bring problems for the company for three reasons. First, there was the issue of overcapacity. Chrysler had too much inventory and needed a new market, and wanted inroads into the European market. Two , there was the issue of environmental concerns, which threatened the existence of the internal combustion engine. Three, Eaton saw a retail revolution that would empower buyers (Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, 2002, p. 1). Daimler was also looking for a partner. It had failed to make inroads into the American market, and was longing for a partner that would help it do so (Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, 2002, p. 3). Daimler was also vulnerable, in that its company was dominated by one brand, Mercedes-Benz, which made up 95% of its sales. Therefore, it needed to diversify (Golitsinski, 2000, p. 10). A merger of equals proved not to be the case, however, as the German company Daimler insisted that the new merged company be domiciled in Germany, and Daimler CEO Jurgen Schrempp stated that Daimler would never be a junior member of any merger, and that Daimler must take the lead in the merger (Badrtalei & Bates, 2007, p. 309). Moreover, Schrempp never envisioned the company to be anything but a German entity. Finally, there was the issue of the name. While Bob Eaton, the CEO of Chrysler, wanted the name to be Chrysler-Daimler, the German company once again got its way, and the name was Daimler-Chrysler. Thus, Daimler managed to dominate on all the key issues – domicile & name, while still pretending that the merger of the two companies were equal. Later, Bob Eaton was made co-chair of the organization for three years, and this created a huge leadership vacuum in the United States end of the operations (Badrtalei & Bates, 2007, p. 309). Thus, within a year after the merger, many of the key executives from Chrysler had left the merged company and the stock prices for the company plummeted. In the end, however, much of the problem was that the merger involved a clash of cultures. Culture conflict is one of the leading causes of merger failure (Weber & Camerer, 2003, p. 412). The analysis of this problem, with regards to the failed merger of Daimler and Chrysler, will be conducted by using Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions. These cultural dimensions represent four different ways that countries differ from one another in a fundamental way. The first is individualistic verses collective –