Of Mice And Men - Hopes And Dreams Essays - English-language Films

Of Mice And Men - Hopes And Dreams Essays - English-language Films Of Mice And Men - Hopes And Dreams ofmiceandmenthesis Hopes and dreams are both the fuel and fire in Of Mice and Men. Stienbeck uses these to thicken the plot and make the reader take large interest into the characters outcomes. George and Lennie have a dream. Somedaywere gonna get the jack together and were gonna have a little house and a couple of acres an a cow and some pigs. [George, p. 15] Being lowly ranch hands, they dream of a better life, where they dont work for anyone but themselves. George, the much smarter one of the two, is quite optimistic about it. It seems that he has already talked with someone about buying his or her land. Lennie, the mentally retarded brute, is childly amused of the dream. He loves soft things, and touching them; and when George tells of the rabbits they will have on the farm, Lennie shivers in joy. Candy is a much older man, who has lost his hand. He isnt worth as much to the ranchs employer as the other men, so he fears unemployment. He too dreams of a better life. One day, in the bunkhouse, he overhears George and Lennie talking about their future plans. You know a place like that? [Candy, p. 59] George immediately grows suspicious of the man, defending the deal. Candy explains that he hasnt much time left before hes canned and he has no place to go. Candy offers a large sum of money to the two, and asks only to live there until he dies. George accepts and Candy is grateful. Went out to the Riverside Dance Palace his this guy. He said he worked for the pitchers, he said I was a natural, he was gonna put me in a movie [Curlys wife, p. 89] Curlys wife, the symbol of temptation in the novel, has dreams of her own. She wanted badly to become an actress, or work in show business. But, because of a cruel mother, she never met those dreams. Instead, she married Curly, who is a possessive pretty boy, and she is unhappy. Hopes and dreams serve as the main plot. With the loneliness of the setting and situation of the characters in the story, the dreams are quite practical and obtainable. Bibliography Of Mice and Men, John Stienbeck

How to Speak English With an American

How to Speak English With an American Speaking English is not only about using proper grammar. To use English effectively, you need to understand the culture in which it is spoken. Here are a number of important tips to remember when speaking English in the United States. American English Points to Remember Most Americans only speak English: While it is true that more and more Americans speak Spanish, most Americans only speak English. Dont expect them to understand your native language.Americans have difficulties understanding foreign accents: Many Americans are not used to foreign accents. This requires patience from both of you! Conversation Tips Speak about location: Americans love to talk about location. When speaking to a stranger, ask them where they are from and then make a connection with that place. For example: Oh, I have a friend who studied in Los Angeles. He says its a beautiful place to live. Most Americans will then willingly talk about their experiences living or visiting that particular city or area.Talk about work: Americans commonly ask What do you do?. Its not considered impolite (as in some countries) and is a popular topic of discussion between strangers.Talk about sports: Americans love sports! However, they love American sports. When speaking about football, most Americans understand American Football, not soccer.Be careful when expressing ideas about race, religion, or other sensitive topics: The United States is a multi-cultural society, and many Americans are trying very hard to be sensitive to other cultures and ideas. Talking about sensitive topics like religion or beliefs is often avoided in order to be sure not to offend someone of a different belief system.   Addressing People Use last names with people you do not know: Address people using their title (Mr, Ms, Dr) and their last names.Always use Ms when addressing women: It is important to use Ms when addressing a woman. Only use Mrs when the woman has asked you to do so!Many Americans prefer first names: Americans often prefer using first names, even when dealing with people in very different positions. Americans will generally say, Call me Tom. and then expect you to remain on a first name basis.Americans prefer informal: In general, Americans prefer informal greetings and using first names or nicknames when speaking with colleagues and acquaintances. Public Behavior Always shake hands: Americans shake hands when greeting each other. This is true for both men and women. Other forms of greeting such as kissing on the cheeks, etc., is generally not appreciated.Look your partner in the eye: Americans look each other in the eyes when they are speaking as a way of showing that they are sincere.Dont hold hands: Same-sex friends do not usually hold hands or put their arms around each other in public in the United States.Smoking is out!!: Smoking, even in public places, is strongly disapproved of by most Americans in the modern United States.

Family Medical Leave Act Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Family Medical Leave Act - Essay Example It is important to notice that any federal employee or officer, who has been covered under subchapter V of chapter 63 under title 5, would not be eligible for this leave. Moreover if the employee has been working at such a worksite where the total number of employees is less than 50 then also that employee would not be eligible for family and medical leave. There are certain conditions due to which any eligible employees would be entitled to leave. An eligible employee would be entitled to leave in case of birth of son or daughter or in case of taking care of the same. If spouse, parent, son or daughter of an employee is having serious health condition then the employee would be entitled to leave in order to take care of them. If the employee himself/herself is seriously ill and as a result he/she could not perform properly then also he/she would be entitled to such leave. One of the main purposes of FMLA is to create the balance between the need of the families and demand of the workplace. Other important purposes include promoting economic stability and security of families, promoting the importance of family integrity which is a national interest. One of the most important purposes of FMLA is to entitle employees for taking reasonable leave so that they can care their son or daughter, spouse or parent who are having serious health condition. Employees would be entitled to this leave for their own health condition also (United States Department of Labor, n.d.). In case of FMLA employers do not need to pay wages during the leave periods. Total duration of this leave could be at the most 12 weeks. Sometimes health insurance premiums of workers’ are paid by the employers. As per FMLA these employers must continue to pay these premiums for their workers during the leave

Principles of accounting Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Principles of accounting - Assignment Example Each journal entry must have a credit and debit of equal amount. There are different ledgers accounts used in an accounting system such as the cash, expense, account receivable, equity, accounts payable, sales, and depreciation account among others. Each account has a normal balance. If the normal account is a debit the account increases through debit and decreases by way of a credit. When the normal account is credit the account increases through a credit and decreases by a debit. The income statement is a very important financial statement that provides information regarding the profitability of a company during an accounting period. All financial statements are prepared at the end of the accounting cycle. There a certain journal entries that affect only the income statement. An example of a journal entry that affects the income statement is recording a cash sale. For instance if the business makes a sale and the customer pays by cash the corresponding journal entry is a debit to c ash and a credit to sales. Based on the assumption that the normal balance of cash is debit this transaction increases the cash account of the company because the firm received money. The balance sheet is another major financial statement that is regarded as a statement of position.

Short Term vs Long Term Goals Essay Example for Free

Short Term vs Long Term Goals Essay Former US vice-president Al Gore has hit out at company bosses and fund managers for damaging the environment by focusing on short-term goals. Speaking at the National Association of Pensions Funds annual investment conference in Edinburgh, Gore warned that companies obsession with meeting short-term profit targets rather than taking a longer term view, was hampering work to combat climate change. Goals Goal-setting ideally involves establishing specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time-targeted objectives. Work on the goal-setting theorysuggests that it can serve as an effective tool for making progress by ensuring that participants have a clear awareness of what they must do to achieve or help achieve an objective. On a personal level, the process of setting goals allows people to specify and then work towards their own objectives — most commonly financial or career-based goals. Goal-setting comprises a major component of Personal development. Short Term Goals Short-term goals expect accomplishment in a short period of time, such as trying to get a bill paid in the next few days. The definition of a short-term goal need not relate to any specific length of time. In other words, one may achieve (or fail to achieve) a short-term goal in a day, week, month, year, etc Long-term goals are ones that you will achieve over a longer period of time Long-term goals often are our most meaningful and important goals. One problem, however, is that the achievement of these goals is usually far in the future. As a result, we often have trouble staying focused and maintaining a positive attitude toward reaching these goals. â€Å"If one of your long-term goals is to get an electrical engineering degree in five years, you can set up enabling goals for each semester or quarter of college that supports this long-term goal. These goals could include attending classes, participating in professional development and internship opportunities at your school, maintaining a certain grade point average, and staying up-to-date in your readings and assignments.† the end toward which effort is directed. You must be able to measure the outcome of your goals. When you set a goal you must include a time frame for achieving it. You can also specify amounts Dont be negative. Make sure your goal is something you want rather than something you want to avoid. Keep your goals realistic. Make sure you have the ability and skills necessary to reach your goal Many long term goals will have short term goals that lead to them. Your short term goals will relate to your long term goal. 6 Steps to Creating Achievable Goals: With every goal you must follow the 6 P’s:  Prioritize: You may have several goals. Prioritize them on your list. Positive: Use positive language. I will †¦, I’ll be†¦, I’ll have†¦ Precise: Be precise. I will have supper with my family three nights a week rather than I will be home earlier Performance: Measure your performance. Set time for starting and completing your goal. May 1 – I will be home at 5:30 three nights this week Practical: Make your goals practical. Do you have the control to make this work or do you rely on other people to meet your goal? Personal: Is this goal a personal goal or someone else’s desire for you?

Oedipus, The King And Allegory Of The Cave - Comparative Analysis Essa

In Sophocles’ play, Oedipus, the King, there are various instances where Oedipus tries to escape his destiny—enlightenment—only to discover the truth that he cannot. Similarly, in Plato’s â€Å"Allegory of the Cave† the prisoner travails to understand and adjust to his newly visited environment. In both works, the men first had to realize their ignorance before they could begin to acquire knowledge and true understanding of the complexities of the human condition. Specifically, in Oedipus, the King, it was Oedipus’ illusion of himself as a man unequaled in leadership whereas in â€Å"Allegory of the Cave† it was the prisoner’s initial refutations of enlightenment being shown him until he realizes its intellectual, spiritual, and social significance. In both articles of literature, there are places where their ignorance and eventual achievement of enlightenment is highlighted. In Oedipus, the King it is when he is accusing Creon of conspiring against him, calling him a â€Å"murderer† and supposedly having exposed him as a â€Å"robber attempting to steal†¦[his] throne.† Here, he does not yet realize that not only has not Creon attempted to overthrow him, but also that he is not the man who has already figured everything out about humanity as he thinks. He later does, fortunately, discover that he was not the true ill-fated man who never learned anything because he knew everything too soon. He discovers, after piercing out his eyes, that he has finally ar-rived at the truth of his life and that ...

European Politics Essay

Not long after taking office as President, Nicolas Sarkozy initiated a bold agenda of sweeping governmental and economic reform which enflamed controversy and engendered violent confrontation within the French government and among the French population regarding both the state of economic parity within French society, and France’s role in a swiftly changing global-political climate. Sarkozy, a former member of the National Assembly, a two-time appointee as Minister of the Interior, and a past President of the UMP, rose to prominence as a widely popular (and also widely unpopular) figure in the conservative wing of French politics. Although Sarkozy’s personal and romantic life as well as his financial dealings and his â€Å"public image† have all fallen under the intense scrutiny of the French and International media, the most controversial issues associated with President Sarkozy have generally been and continue to be issue and policy oriented. Prior to being elected President, Sarkozy made International news headlines when, as Minister of the Interior, â€Å"Sarkozy, insisted that Muslim women pose bare-headed for official identity photographs† (Scott, 2005), a move which provoked a storm of opposition within France and throughout the globe. However, Sarkozy’s intentions were even much wider than revealed by his policy regarding identity photos; Sarkozy’s â€Å"main recommendation, accepted by Chirac in January 2004, was for a law prohibiting the wearing of ostentatious signs of religious affiliation in public schools. This is now the law of the land† (Scott, 2005). Sarkozy’s record prior to becoming President indicated that he was a man unafraid to pursue a controversial course of action. As president, one of Sarkozy’s first publically criticized actions was his handling of a Libyan hostage crisis which involved the retrieval of Belgian health-care workers who had been held in Libya. In return for releasing the Belgians, the Libyan dictator Gaddafi was able to gain President Sarkozy’s signature on a treaty which transferred hundreds of millions of euros, along with important military equipment to Libya. This move was met not only with criticism but with a call for an investigation at the parlimentary level which was requested by the head of the French Socialist Party. Although this single example may seem slight in light of the forthcoming discussion regarding governmental reform and the EU policy on climate change which will form the heart of the present study of Sarkozy’s administration, the incident is illustrative of the odd duality which seems to stamp itself on many of Sarkozy’s policies, programs, and initiatives. The duality is one rooted on one side in what many might consider a superficial, yet effective, understanding of public image and political theater; on the other side, it is rooted in what many might call brutally pragmatic economics. Critics of Sarkozy go further than to call the President an economic pragmatist. Many members of Sarkozy’s own conservative party, the UMP, have criticized the President for being a strong advocate of free-trade while simultaneously backing sweeping reforms in the working-class sector including his â€Å"loi de modernisation de l’economie† (Lawday, 2007), or â€Å"Modernization of the Economy Law† which in addition to relaxing federal restrictions on retail prices and work-regulations, allowed workers who worked over thirty-five hours a week to collect their overtime pay tax-free. If, basically, Sarkozy’s economic policies reflect â€Å"a free-market, self-responsibility venture that he claims every advanced country in Europe, from Britain to those in Scandinavia, and lately Germany, has adopted to its advantage† (Lawday, 2007) they also reflect an essentially conservative philosophy which stands in odd contrast to Sarkozy’s iconoclastic image as an agent of change. As one observer phrased it, Sarkozy’s economic philosophy and national economic program â€Å"represents not so much novelty as catch-up politics with a conservative twist† (Lawday, 2007) and, as such, Sarkozy’s economic programs include the curbing of labor unions and their power. These aspects of Sarkozy’s approach to government and economic matters leaves little room for doubt that — at least in relation to financial matters — the President is a true conservative, although his vision may be, overall, a bit more modern than that which is commonly associated with conservatism, the end-result is the same. Sarkozy’s economic philosophies are important not only because they impact one of the most crucial sectors of public policy and governmental influence in France — the economy — but also because they indicate the aforementioned duality of purpose and bearing which seems to stand as part and parcel of Sarkozy’s political career. If on e the one hand, Sarkozy wanted to â€Å"amend the 35-hour working week so that it is no longer the reposeful regulation it implies† (Lawday, 2007), he also sought to simultaneously â€Å"force strikers to maintain a minimum service for trains, buses and other public services† (Lawday, 2007) and to â€Å"slice into the bloated state bureaucracy, where the unions are strongest, by permitting one replacement for every two retiring government office workers† (Lawday, 2007) while at the same time admitting — in the face of the recent global economic crisis — that laissez faire capitalism is dead. The economic platform and policies which Sarkozy has advocated indicate that — above all else — Sarkozy is a pragmatist. This fact is s very useful fact because, by keeping it firmly in mind, a more complete understanding of Sarkozy the politician can be gained. In point of fact, most of what passes for â€Å"populism’ in Sarkozy’s public image is precisely due to his pragmatic approach. His populist reputation as a French nationalist who is for robust immigration reform may collide somewhat uncomfortably with his status as the (rotating) President of the European Union, just as his stand on unions collides with his recent, public statements regarding socialism where Sarkozy responded to the question: have you become a socialist? — with the answer â€Å"Maybe† (Lawday, 2007). Sarkozy’s radicalism — which stands in sharp contrasts to his fiscal conservatism and his conservatism on issues such as immigration and unions — manifests itself not in ideology, necessarily, but within the framework of his aforementioned pragmatism. In other words, Sarkozy may be a populist to the extent that he adopts positions which will curry favor with French Nationalists, such as the â€Å"headscarf† legislation mentioned at the opening of this paper, he may be a fiscal conservative bent on busting the unions and generating a productive working class base for French society, but in each case his convictions, while arguably difficult to pin down under a single umbrella of ideology, are always enacted by way of robust action. Sarkozy may be many things, but one thing he certainly is not is a dawdler. One of the most illustrative examples of Sarkozy’s style and substance as a leader, and specifically as the President of France, is his massive reform of French government and the displacement of governmental power. Although — as will be demonstrated shorty — Sarkozy’s controversial reforms to French government have the design and purpose of bringing the government into the modern era of global-politics and allowing for a more efficiently run government within France itself, the same reforms have been assailed by Sarkozy;’s critics, primarily by the French Socialist party, as being tantamount to instating a dictatorship in France with Sarkozy himself enthroned as dictator. Although the specificities and complexities of Sarkozy’s reforming of French government pose much too vast a too vast to exhaust within the confines of this short discussion, the overall impact and intention of his reform policies offer profound insight into not Sarkozy’s ambitions as President but into the potentially radical reshaping of French government as well as France’s relationship to the EU. Before delving into the specifics of the reform legislation, it is useful to remember just how the French Constitution regarded the separation of governmental powers and — more importantly — what role the President of France was accorded by the Fifth Republic’s Constitution. Because Sarkozy’s program of governmental reform offers, as a centerpiece, the apparent expansion of Presidential power and authority, while simultaneously strengthening the role and power of parliament, sorting out the specific angles by which Sarkozy enabled the expansion of Presidential power can be quite difficult to achieve. However, the role of the French President, according to the Fifth Republic’s Constitution was limited: â€Å"Article 5 [†¦ ] states that the President â€Å"‘Provides by their arbitration for the regular functioning of the public authorities and the continuity of the State’† (Bell, 2000, p. 15), with nothing mentioned about the President’s own power to legislate. This aspect of the Constitution is the key area by which Sarkozy sought to expand, in the eyes of the anti-reformers, Presidential power. Specifically, the most controversial aspect of the reform-laws was Sarkozy’s † plan to allow the president to address parliament, opening up the possibility of a US State of the Union-style address. That has not been permitted since 1875, in an attempt to keep the executive and legislative branches separate† (BBC News), and it is by this seemingly simple move that Sarkozy expanded Presidential authority while simultaneously seeming to limit that same authority. Because the Fifth Republic’s Constitution calls for the President to function as an â€Å"arbitrator† the American-style Presidency of the President as the leader of the legislature, addressing parliament, becomes a specter of dread to those who view this as an incursion on the Constitutional separation of powers. While it is true that â€Å"Article 5, which implicitly restricts the Presidency, has been a subject of controversy† (Bell, 2000, p. 15), Sarkozy’s expansion of Presidential authority has proven to be even more divisive. Sarkozy’s plan to rewrite the Fifth Republic’s Constitution represents the two primary aspects of his governing style which have formed the roots of the current discussion; these aspects are his inherent conservatism and his obvious pragmatism. The reform legislation introduced radical, pragmatic steps toward affecting sweeping change in France and rewrote the French Constitution, but while Sarkozy verbalized his assurances that the reforms represented â€Å"‘Movement, change, modernity,'† (BBC News) as well as a victory for French democracy, the same reforms also contributed to the strengthening of Presidential authority and resulted in a divided parliament with Sarkozy’s reform bill passing â€Å"by 539 votes to 357 – one vote more than the three-fifths majority of the combined Assembly and Senate required to pass the reforms† BBC News), so if strengthening democracy was Sarkozy’s intention, his initial result was to divide the parliament and pass a sweeping reform to the French Constitution with next-to-no consensus. This fact in itself would seem to confirm the trepidation regarding his proposed reforms (now law) which engulfed his detractors in parliament. One of these detractor s, â€Å"Socialist senator Bernard Frimat told lawmakers before the vote at a special session at the Chateau of Versailles† (BBC News) that Sarkozy had offered a † â€Å"consolidation of ‘monocracy’,† (BBC News) but Sarkozy, always careful to play to populist ideas and ideals, counter-weighted the expansion of Presidential authority with corresponding limits and restrictions on the French Presidency. The reform laws while strengthening the President’s role in the legislature also limit the President to two five year terms, â€Å"gives parliament a veto over some presidential appointments, ends government control over parliament’s committee system, allows parliament to set its own agenda, and ends the president’s right of collective pardon† (BBC News). Seemingly, by these latter reforms, Sarkozy was interested in limiting not expanding the powers of the French President; however the telling point of the reform laws as they relate to the French Presidency lies within the mere expansion of the President’s role as a lawmaker rather than, as the Fifth Republic’s Constitution advocated, a â€Å"a neutral ‘umpire’ who has three principal tasks: i) to see that the Constitution is respected; ii) to ‘arbitrate’ to ensure the continuity of the state; iii) to be vigilant on the issues of national independence, territorial i ntegrity and the respect for treaties† (Bell, 2000, p. 16). Sarkozy’s vision of the President — and the reform legislation he was able to enact to realize this vision — stands in direct opposition to Article 5 of the French Constitution. Sarkozy’s radical pragmatism extends beyond the parameters and confines of French domestic issues into the realm of International affairs. As the acting President of the European Union, Sarkozy has applied a similarly â€Å"hands on† approach to issues of international importance such as climate change. As illustrated by Sarkozy’s reform legislation and the somewhat concealed agenda therein which provided for the expansion of Presidential authority, Sarkozy seems to have adopted a similar approach to his position as EU President. On the topic of global warming and climate change, Sarkozy has proven to be as pragmatic and as forceful as he was on the issues of crime, immigration, and government reform in France. At the thirty-third summit of the G8, Sarkozy offered a plan to reduce French CO2 emissions by half and what followed was the adoption of this concept by the G8 nations as a whole. Although the agreement which was reached at the summit was non-binding, Sarkozy’s lead enabled the G8 nations to put forth a collective plan to cut in half the global emissions of greenhouse gasses. Sarkozy continued to push for a binding agreement, but his efforts proved futile. Nevertheless, his approach to the issue of climate change represented, as his approach to governmental reform. a pragmatic and comprehensive approach to a hard problem. Of interest is the fact that the binding agreement regarding greenhouse gas emissions was apparently blocked by the United States with its President, George W, Bush, citing the refusal of third-world nations to also enter into the agreement. Responding tot his obstacle, Sarkozy turned his efforts not toward America or the Third World, but to China, utilizing his status as EU President to put forward a comprehensive and progressive energy policy which included a collaborative effort with the Chinese. Sarkozy’s successful brokering of a deal on energy adn climate change between the EU adn China marks one of the most important accomplishments of his pragmatic and often radical approach to governing. It is due to this combination of tenacity and creativity that Sarkozy has evolved from a controversial cabinet member in the French government known mostly for being a strong conservative to an actor on the world stage who seems to be equal parts populist and conservative. It is, perhaps, not necessary, to understand which of the aspects, conservative or populist is dominant in Sarkozy, it is possibly not even that important to understand, at a personal, human level, which aspect represents more honestly Sarkozy’s own world-view. While some observers may claim that Sarkozy’s populism is merely a smokescreen to conceal his ambitious moves toward a consolidation of personal power, others may claim, with good reason, that Sarkozy’s populism represents a genuine attempt to represent the global sea-change which has currently cast global economics and world-affairs into an ambiguous and dangerous place. No matter which of these perspectives lies closer to the objective truth of Sarkozy the man, the result of Sarkozy’s actions as a world-leader will involve much more than a consideration of President Sarkozy’s motives. One of the most compelling aspects of Sarkozy as a world leader is his simultaneous insistence of modernity while maintaining an acute, almost reverential, respect for the past. Like the other dualities apparent in Sarkozy’s governing style adn thinking style, this duality of â€Å"past vs. future† manifest, in Sarkozy, not as an abstract idealogy but in pragmatic application. In addition to his highly controversial reforms in regard to economics, government, unions, immigration, and climate change, Sarkozy has also generated a great deal of controversy regarding his position of cultural subjects and education in France. While seeming to be a strong nationalist with a true conservative’s reverence for tradition, Sarkozy has readily admitted that France has failed to â€Å"democratize† its culture and that in doing so, accomplished â€Å"one of the chief failures of the past 50 years of French government† (â€Å"Sarkozy out to ‘Democratize’,† 2007, p. B01). As always, his suggested course of action revealed a blend of populism and conservatism and fused the cultural concerns of France with the power of the French government: â€Å"Sarkozy defined â€Å"democratisation de la culture† as providing the means for the largest number of people to understand and appreciate Sophocles, Shakespeare and Racine. He added that the purpose of education is to â€Å"teach you how to tell the difference between ‘Madame Bovary’ and a police blotter, or between ‘Antigone’ and ‘Harry Potter. ‘ Later, you can read what you like. † (â€Å"Sarkozy out to ‘Democratize’,† 2007, p. B01) In conclusion, Sarkozy’s style of governing offers a curious and sometimes uncomfortable blend of populism and conservatism. In the area of domestic policy, he has proven to be both radical in his approach and keenly aware of the political impact of his pragmatic reforms, on international issues he has proven to be creative, opportunistic, and decisive. While Sarkozy’s bold embracing of â€Å"modernity† may be authenticated by his actions in some cases, many of his policies and programs reveal an essentially conservative politician who seeks, not merely reform, but the type of reform which ensures the continuation of his carefully crafted ideological beliefs.