speedyparadisewhispers

[speedyparadisewhispers]

Comparative Essay

Comparative Essay

Author's Name

Institutional Affiliation

Instructor's Name

Course

Date

            Comparative Essay

Indigenous Peoples and the Europeans During Exploration Age of Turtle Island

           Every person within a culture have his/her own understanding and interpretation on the collective culture code. Nonetheless, a person’s worldview originated from the culture. Meaning, individuals’ worldview has its roots from the values, philosophies, and customs shared. Hence, if there is need to comprehend how the indigenous peoples and the Europeans worldviews clash, then it is necessary to understand how the customs, philosophies, and values of the indigenous peoples differ, or are similar to the Europeans during the exploration age of Turtles Island. In short, the world consists of a different multicultural individual with a corresponding plethora of worldviews. Therefore, this essay intends to draw a clear comparison between the Indigenous Peoples and the Europeans During Exploration Age of Turtle Island. Generally, understanding the key differences between the Europeans and the indigenous peoples are essential aspects in accomplishing respectful relationships and cultural harmony.

           First, the original differences between the indigenous peoples and the Europeans’ worldviews is subscribed to their converse approaches to science, understanding, and connectedness. According to Hickey (2020), the cultures of the indigenous peoples focuses on the holistic comprehension of what arose from their experiences and existence in the millennium. On the contrary, the Traditional Europeans worldview seem to be more concerned with the science (Hickey, 2020). Also, the Europeans tends to pay more attention on the classification knowledge, and further explores the bigger related picture. In brief, the society always operate on a state of relatedness. Everything in the world is related in one way or another.

           Secondly, the indigenous worldview and the European worldview shares some similarities. Typically, the indigenous worldview is viewed as a circle that has everything in the world connected. Specifically, in this circle, there are several things, including culture, values, knowledge, spirituality, language, natural world, and governance. In essence, this is an indication that, everything in the world are connected spiritually and are animate. In short, in the indigenous worldview, the culture is embodied by the endless search of knowledge, the significance of exploring knowledge, and the use of language and storyline ("Indigenous education: Affirming Indigenous knowledges and languages from a turtle island Indigenous scholar’s perspective: Pikiskēwinan (Let us voice)," 2019) Similarly, just as the indigenous worldviews varies, the European worldviews varies as well. For instance, the worldview of the Europeans is built on hierarchy, instead of the circles. According to Majid (2020), the historical worldview of the Europeans is built on three key outcomes, including spirituality, economic, and political customs.

           Thirdly, in the Europeans worldview, the natural environment was something that could be utilized for individual’s gain (Majid, 2020). The organizations and individuals could become rich through managing the “New World’s” resources. On the other hand, the indigenous people put more value groups more compared to individuals. According to Hickey (2020), every person in the indigenous community had its own role, and each of these activities always contributes to the success of then group.

           In conclusion, worldview includes the manner in which groups, communities, and individuals coexists with one another and with things around them, including animals and environment. Many societies pass their worldviews to the next generations. Hence, the study of the Europeans and the indigenous worldview is important since it helps understand the relationship between them.

  References

Hickey, D. (2020). Indigenous Epistemologies, worldviews and theories of power. Turtle Island Journal of Indigenous Health, 1(1), 14-25. doi:10.33137/tijih.v1i1.34021

Indigenous education: Affirming Indigenous knowledges and languages from a turtle island Indigenous scholar’s perspective: Pikiskēwinan (Let us voice). (2019). Perspectives on Indigenous writing and literacies, 29-66. doi:10.1163/9789004298507_004

Majid, A. (2020). Turtle island to Babylon. Indigenous Reconciliation and Decolonization, 36-37. doi:10.4324/9781003141860-4

[speedyparadisewhispers]

Comparative Essay

Comparative Essay

Author's Name

Institutional Affiliation

Instructor's Name

Course

Date

            Comparative Essay

Indigenous Peoples and the Europeans During Exploration Age of Turtle Island

           Every person within a culture have his/her own understanding and interpretation on the collective culture code. Nonetheless, a person’s worldview originated from the culture. Meaning, individuals’ worldview has its roots from the values, philosophies, and customs shared. Hence, if there is need to comprehend how the indigenous peoples and the Europeans worldviews clash, then it is necessary to understand how the customs, philosophies, and values of the indigenous peoples differ, or are similar to the Europeans during the exploration age of Turtles Island. In short, the world consists of a different multicultural individual with a corresponding plethora of worldviews. Therefore, this essay intends to draw a clear comparison between the Indigenous Peoples and the Europeans During Exploration Age of Turtle Island. Generally, understanding the key differences between the Europeans and the indigenous peoples are essential aspects in accomplishing respectful relationships and cultural harmony.

           First, the original differences between the indigenous peoples and the Europeans’ worldviews is subscribed to their converse approaches to science, understanding, and connectedness. According to Hickey (2020), the cultures of the indigenous peoples focuses on the holistic comprehension of what arose from their experiences and existence in the millennium. On the contrary, the Traditional Europeans worldview seem to be more concerned with the science (Hickey, 2020). Also, the Europeans tends to pay more attention on the classification knowledge, and further explores the bigger related picture. In brief, the society always operate on a state of relatedness. Everything in the world is related in one way or another.

           Secondly, the indigenous worldview and the European worldview shares some similarities. Typically, the indigenous worldview is viewed as a circle that has everything in the world connected. Specifically, in this circle, there are several things, including culture, values, knowledge, spirituality, language, natural world, and governance. In essence, this is an indication that, everything in the world are connected spiritually and are animate. In short, in the indigenous worldview, the culture is embodied by the endless search of knowledge, the significance of exploring knowledge, and the use of language and storyline ("Indigenous education: Affirming Indigenous knowledges and languages from a turtle island Indigenous scholar’s perspective: Pikiskēwinan (Let us voice)," 2019) Similarly, just as the indigenous worldviews varies, the European worldviews varies as well. For instance, the worldview of the Europeans is built on hierarchy, instead of the circles. According to Majid (2020), the historical worldview of the Europeans is built on three key outcomes, including spirituality, economic, and political customs.

           Thirdly, in the Europeans worldview, the natural environment was something that could be utilized for individual’s gain (Majid, 2020). The organizations and individuals could become rich through managing the “New World’s” resources. On the other hand, the indigenous people put more value groups more compared to individuals. According to Hickey (2020), every person in the indigenous community had its own role, and each of these activities always contributes to the success of then group.

           In conclusion, worldview includes the manner in which groups, communities, and individuals coexists with one another and with things around them, including animals and environment. Many societies pass their worldviews to the next generations. Hence, the study of the Europeans and the indigenous worldview is important since it helps understand the relationship between them.

  References

Hickey, D. (2020). Indigenous Epistemologies, worldviews and theories of power. Turtle Island Journal of Indigenous Health, 1(1), 14-25. doi:10.33137/tijih.v1i1.34021

Indigenous education: Affirming Indigenous knowledges and languages from a turtle island Indigenous scholar’s perspective: Pikiskēwinan (Let us voice). (2019). Perspectives on Indigenous writing and literacies, 29-66. doi:10.1163/9789004298507_004

Majid, A. (2020). Turtle island to Babylon. Indigenous Reconciliation and Decolonization, 36-37. doi:10.4324/9781003141860-4

[speedyparadisewhispers]

Assignment, Essay, Research

Hello, you need help with your essay, or any academic assignments?? worry not, Lets have a chat.

[speedyparadisewhispers]

PERFORMANCE AND REWARD MANAGEMENT

PERFORMANCE AND REWARD MANAGEMENT

  By {NAME}

  1.0 Introduction

McDonald Corporation is a multinational Company whose management makes full utilization of the 360-degree feedback. The management of the McDonald Corporation consists a significant number of management departments which include: Quality management, Design of goods and services, location strategy, process and capacity design, layout and design strategy, Inventory management, supply chain management, and other essential departments. Therefore, the McDonald Corporation makes use of the 360-degree feedback to enhance improvement of the performance of all these departments.

360-degree feedback can be referred to as the process or the system in which employees receive anonymous and confidential information feedback from the individuals who work within their surrounding (Grenier and Rienks 2020). This process involves the peers, employee's manager and the direct reports. 360-degree feedback can involve a random mixture of about eight to twelve individuals who carry out the filling of anonymous online feedback form via the online platform who covers a variety of relevant questions concerning the degree of competency within the workplace. The form of the feedback consists of questions that are measured in terms of scale rating and also provide open room for the respondents to provide their comments. An individual who receives the feedback also practices the filling out of the self-rating survey which involves the similar questions which were captured on the form received by the others. The 360-degree model can consists a number of both the advantages and disadvantages as well. The diagram below shows a summary of the disadvantages and advantages of 360-degree feedback process:

                          Figure 1: Summary of disadvantages and advantages of 360-degree feedback process

The Mangers and the general leaders within the organization make use of the 360-degree feedback to enhance them to have a proper understanding concerning their strengths and weaknesses. The 360-degree feedback system tabulates the results automatically and makes the presentation of the results in a manner that will enhance the recipient of the feedback formulate a development plan (Grenier and Rienks 2020). Responses from an individual are always combined with the other peoples' responses within the similar categorical rater to enhance preservation of anonymity and providing the employees with a clear image of an overview of the strengths and weaknesses.

Figure 2: A sample of 360 model

Therefore, the study of the 360-degree feedback will be done on one of the multinational organization known as McDonald's Cooperation. McDonald's Corporation is an American organization that is widely dealing with fast-moving foods (Bragg et al. 2020). This company was founded in the year 1940 as a restaurant whose operation was brought on board by Maurice McDonald and Richard in California. McDonald’s Corporation is a restaurant that is widely involved fat moving foods such as French fries, Cheeseburgers, desserts, soft drinks, breakfast items and many other forms of meals (Mayes 2019). McDonald’s Corporation is one of the organizations which makes use of 360-degree feedback to enhance quality production and preparation of its meals and also improving the efficiency of its services (Carlos et al. 2020).  The summary diagram of the varieties of stakeholders involved in 360-degree feedback within an organization is as shown below:

Figure 2: Summary of stakeholders involved in 360-degree feedback

 2.0 Main Stages involved in 360-degree feedback

The implementation of the 360-degree feedback process is carried out in different stages. Therefore, this section of the study will put much focus on the 13 main stages of 360-degree feedback applied to McDonald's Corporation as shown below:

 2.1  Design on the purpose of 360-degree feedback

 The initial step of the implementation process is to decide on the purpose of implementing the 360-degree feedback process at McDonald’s Cooperation. The main aim of implementing the 360-degree feedback method at McDonald’s Cooperation is mainly to promote, teamwork, investigate the quality of meals produced and the general performance of the organization (Corbi et al. 2018). At McDonald’s Corporation, it is important to foster development and team building since most of the services at the McDonald’s Cooperation require mutual responsibility such as cooking, serving, collection of payment and cleansing of the utensils (Pedro et al. 2020). Hence, it can be considered as a team which needs mutual responsibility but at the same time, there is the presence of gender imbalance among the staffs since the employees are from the female gender when compared to males. Therefore, the implementation of the 360-degree feedback process will allow the management to devise a strategy regarding the development of the workers as well as to inculcate the collaborative working practice despite the aspect of gender imbalance.

The other challenge experienced in McDonald’s Cooperation is on the disagreements among some employees especially the servers and the Chief-chefs In line with add, the 360-degree feedback can allow the management to assess the performance of the workers and provide performance rewards to the best performed employee and training to those who need to improve their skills. The McDonald’s Cooperation can also choose the 360-degree feedback process since it can restore unity and cooperation among its employees thus improving the general performance of its operations (Fleenor et al. 2020). One great concern regarding the system is that the management had to communicate it to all the related stakeholders. The design can also be made to facilitate the quality of its meals offered to customers.

2.2 Decide on the areas of work and behaviour on which feedback will be given.

 The next step of 360-degree feedback is to determine the departments within the McDonald’s Corporation and behavior on which the feedback will be given. This is an important process as the basis of the system will lie on this. A committee can set up under the leadership of the McDonald’s Cooperation CEO to determine the constructs that will be involved in the feedback form (Chivers and Darling 1999). The selected committee should involve an approximate of five stakeholders from the different departments within the McDonald’s Cooperation which can be the HRM Manager, Cashier and the other heads of various departments of the Restaurant. Hence, the collection of the feedback will be based on the behaviors such time management, the employees relationships, and how they serve the customers. The collected feedback will be given to HR department where the confidentiality of the collected information is guaranteed.

2.3Choosing the instrument and methods for collecting data

 Once the selection of the constructive approach has been done, it is time to choose the methods for data collection. Now that only one option needs to appllied in collecting data, the Questionnaire technique will be applied in the 360-degree feedback process within and outside the McDonald’s Cooperation (Fleenor et al. 2020). The HR department has to make sure that information captured within the Questionnaire are not bias. The Questionnaire can consist of both the closed questions and open-ended questions where the respondents which include employees, peers, suppliers and other stakeholders can provide their responses. The closed question consists a number of multiple number where the employees or customers can provide their responses by making selection on the available choices.

 2.4  Decide on behaviours/items to be included in the rating instrument.

The Questionnaire sheet can include a variety of behaviours or items that need to explore as have some impact on the operation of the McDonald’s Cooperation. One of the items or behaviours that can be investigated is the perception of the customers on the quality of their meals. This perception can be categorized into a rating of one to ten which values close to 1 show that the customer extremely dissatisfied while the values close to 10 shows that the customers are so much satisfied with the quality of food. Another behaviour that can be investigated concerning the performance of the McDonald’s Cooperation is the one to do with the perception of the employees concerning their view on the ethical leadership within the organization (Bracken et al. 2016). The perception of the employees on ethical leadership can be categorized into Excellent, Very good, good, fair, and poor. Apart from the two forms of behaviours mentioned, other related items within the organization can be included too.

2.5  Decide who the feedback recipients are.

 The subsequent step on the 360-degree feedback is concerning making decision on who will be the targeted group and who will receive the collected feedback. Therefore, the decision will be the adoption of all the employees from different departments where ranking could be done (Bracken et al. 2016). Therefore, the McDonald’s Cooperation can decide the recipients of the feedback collected to be the heads of the various departments within the organization, the HR manager or the general manager of the organization.

2.6  Decide on who will give the feedback.

 All the necessary elements need to be captured to reach a more convenient decision in the interest of every stakeholder. Hence, the feedback concerning the general performance and the operation of the McDonald’s Company will be given by the various heads of departments within the organization. The HODs are the one to give the feedback to the Human Resource management.

2.7  Decide how feedback will be given.

 Having made decision of using the Questionnaire technique a way of collecting information, the submission of the feedback will be done using hard copies. Now that the distribution of the Questionnaire is provided mainly to the employees, customers and the other stakeholders, hard copy submission can be the best (Bracken et al. 2016). Therefore, the feedback will be manually collected from the respondents and given to the HRM department of the McDonald’s Cooperation where the confidentiality of the feedback is guaranteed.

2.8  Analysis of feedback data

When the data has been collected using the questionnaire, the analysis of the collected feedback can be analyzed using the statistical packages or software. Some of the tools that can be used to analyze the information of the data collected on the computer include IBM SPSS, Microsoft Excel and many others. The analysis of the data can be done using techniques such as descriptive statistics, frequency tables, Charts and many others.

2.9  Deciding how the data will be used.

 The next step of the 360-feedback is to make decision on how the data will be used. The collected data or information can be used by the Chief executive officer or the Mangers of the McDonald’s Corporation to carry out analysis of the general status and performance of the Organization (Grenier and Rienks 2020). Therefore, the data can be used by the CEO to analyze the perception of the customers on the quality of meals prepared, to analyze the degree of ethical leadership within the organization, the relationship between the employees, the efficiency of its services, the degree of honesty and integrity within the organization and the rate of profitability on the organizational performance.

2.10          Initial Implementation of the project

 Once all the earlier steps have been successfully put in place, the next stage is to plan the initial implementation of the system. Before implementation of the process is done on the entire organization, It is advisable for the piloting technique to be applied where a given section of the company is used to carry out the implementation (Zatsarinnaya et al. 2020). Once the feedback provided has been analyzed, it can be implemented to facilitate the improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of the McDonald’s Corporation performance.

2.11          Analyzing the outcome of the pilot scheme

 In this stage, the firm can experiment the effectiveness of the process to some workers who have past experiences on the 360-degree feedback system. The training can be conducted as the employees fill in the questionnaire (Grenier and Rienks 2020). As per the discussion of this study, the results from the pilot study need to be analyzed and adjustments can be done to enhance the improvement of the McDonald’s Corporation performance.

2.12          Plan and Implement the program

 The core objective pilot study is to carry out the analysis of the changes which have been made within the organization, the project can be implemented using the appropriate plan. The implementation of the project can be done by the Manager of the Human resource department or any employee who is well-familiarized and experienced with the 360-degree system.

 2.13          Monitoring and evaluation of the program

 The final stage is about the monitoring and evaluation of the program. Monitoring should be continuous and based on the evaluation of the process, improvement can be made in the future (Ali 2015). The evaluation process can be conducted through a interviewing the employees and gauge their perception concerning the implementation of the system and how it benefits their organization in relation to their needs (Fleenor et al. 2020). Therefore, regular monitoring and evaluation of the program will influence the general performance of the McDonald’s Corporation organization.

3.0 Conclusion

In conclusion, the 360-degree feedback system seem to very reliable when it comes to assessment and the general factors which influences the general operation of an organization. The opinions of employees can be categorized using ratings which is very useful in coming up with appropriate conclusion concerning the general status of the organization. The feedback obtained from this system can be used by the management to reward the best performed employees within the organization. Hence, in reality, this approach of 360-degree feedback is so realistic as it enhances the collection of first-hand information from all the stakeholders within the surrounding of the given organization that can facilitate necessary improvements on the general performance of the firm.

     References

 Baron, J.N. and Dreps, D.M., 1999. Strategic Human Resources: Frameworks for General Managers. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Bracken, D.W., Rose, D.S. and Church, A.H., 2016. The evolution and devolution of 360 feedback. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(4), pp.761-794.

Bragg, M.A., Pageot, Y.K., Amico, A., Miller, A.N., Gasbarre, A., Rummo, P.E. and Elbel, B., 2020. Fast food, beverage, and snack brands on social media in the United States: An examination of marketing techniques utilized in 2000 brand posts. Pediatric obesity, 15(5), p.e12606.

Silverman, M., Kerrin, M. and Carter, A., 2005. 360 Degree Feedback: beyond the spin. Sussex: Institute for Employment Studies.

Chivers, W. and Darling, P., 1999. 360-Degree feedback and organisational culture. London: Institute of Personnel and Development.

Corbi, A., Errasti, I.L. and Burgos, D., 2018. A scalable approach for 360 feedback in cooperative learning. IEEE Access, 7, pp.9105-9115.

Fleenor, J.W., Taylor, S. and Chappelow, C., 2020. Leveraging the impact of 360-degree feedback. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Incorporated.

Grenier, A. and Rienks, S., 2020. The views of many: 360 feedback for child welfare leadership development. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 14(1), pp.101-121.

Cid de León Carlos, V., González Salvador, M., Abraham, E.M., Evelio Erick, C.M. and Rigoberto Corby, M.M., 2020. 360-degree evaluation review applied in top-level education.

dos Santos, J.R., Pedro, L. and Nunes, S., 2020. Emotional Intelligence and Leadership: A 360-Degree View in the Electronics Industry in Portugal. In Research methodology in management and industrial engineering (pp. 111-127). Springer, Cham.

Zatsarinnaya, Y., Logacheva, A., Suslov, K. and Stepanova, E., 2020, November. 360-Degree Assessment of Training Efficiency in Power Engineering Sector. In 2020 Ural Smart Energy Conference (USEC) (pp. 172-175). IEEE.

Ali, A., 2015. Leadership Assessment through 360 Degree Feedback System–An Insight of Prevailing Concepts. Global Management Journal for Academic & Corporate Studies, 5(1), pp.22-30.

Mayes, P.J., 2019. Study of the Impact of 360-Degree Feedback on Principal Reflection and Action Planning (Doctoral dissertation, East Stroudsburg University).

[speedyparadisewhispers]

Biological Weapons

Biological Weapons

In the 1960’s, most states with significant Biometric programs decided to outlaw Biological Weapons and terminate their own offensive BW program while still allowing small- scale defensive research. The Soviet Union was the exception to this trend, continuing its offensive research program into the 1980’s, when other countries such as South Africa and Iraq started manufacturing Biometric Weapons. The Soviet’s BW program existed as it was presumed that the use of biological weapons was advantageous to its operations. It anticipated that there would be beneficial nuclear exchanges between the United States and the Soviet Union (Hart, 132). The Soviet Union did not entirely interdict the inclusive research, but rather necessitated that those accused face the United Nations Security Council. In 1980, there were allegations against the Soviet Union for contravening this agreement. The result from the Soviets Union adamant actions was the ineffectiveness of the Soviet as it was unable to develop a fully workable BW, making the entire structure dangerous to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (Evangelista, 2019). It used many resources, added little benefit to the military forces and caused more risks than benefits to the civilians around the world and generated very few products that served the Soviets Unions interests and its economic development (Wheelis& Martin, 252). Ultimately, the Soviet Offensive BW program maximised the ability of the of the military to rage war instead of yielding benefit. The program rather prevented the successful development of the Union by increasing the rate of diseases, reducing the general nutrition, and impairing the environment rather than improving civilian, community and industry development.  

With the exception of Unit 731 in the WW1, none of these countries ever ended up deliberately using BW. Most States, including the UK and the US, have chosen not to use or even attempt to use BW, this is because in the UK and US for example, the value that BW offered seemed to have a small impact on military efficiency The Turning Against BW 35. The ICBM Revolution- The use of nuclear biological and chemical attacks for mass destruction was regarded as unessential by the Intelligence Community Assessment of CBW, 1960. 35, and the major goal became to prevent themselves and other states from acquiring or using these weapons.  By this example, they purposed to achieve peace and good correlations between different people and nations. Different treaties and international collaborations came together and influenced the end of the use of BW programs.

 Challenges of Using Biological Weapons

The first challenge associated with the use of BW is the inefficiency in the ability to implement strict ways of investigating and correcting breaches in the BW concordances. The BW did not exactly improve on the protocols in any efficient way. The US came discover that there were numerous threats that resulted from BW and exclusively relinquished aggressive BW programs. The were earlier attempts in 1899 by the Hague Convention to outlaw the use of BW even before it had been employed. BW led to disruption in the industrial areas, and was also used in the destruction of valuable food plants, animals and industrial crops. Another issue is the presence of the technical and scientific problem associated with the application of these weapons in military forces. Since most of the research associated with BW is secret, the lack of transparency involved could result to misinterpretation of its intended purpose.

 Disease and its complexities

In 2002, the Bioterrorism act of 2002 was created, to reduce the permission granted to risky BW operations by the development of more accurate authorization guidelines. The act cleared the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to advance itself to be able to deal with the aspect of BW (Wheelis& Martin, 252). The emergence of the Bioshiled Project, in 2004 sequenced in huge amounts of money being invested in the acquirement of vaccine to deal with a possible Biological Weapon attack. Other countries such as Japan, adopted to the use of BW with the hopes that they would emerge victors in the war in pursuing military power. Even though the different tests that have been carried out on BW have been effective, the decision of countries like the US to give up their offensive BW programs, while retaining CW and nuclear weapon programs remains. In 1925, various countries came to an agreement opposing the use of BW. This law acclimatized and most states complied with it. The US and UK decided not to implement and use BW even though they had made significant progress in its development, with the history of the atomic bomb developed during the World War II that killed aver 100,000 people. In the 1960’s, obviation from the propagation of nuclear weapons became a key objective, as the test explosions were causing major pollution in the air, water and atmosphere.

Public sentiment in regard to BW and the Importance of Secrecy in using BW

BW tends to be regarded as a taboo since the 1920’s, which is why secrecy has been important in the study of the history of Biological weapons. When the Second World War ended, the United Nations adapted the phrase ‘weapons of mass destruction’ and constituted the destruction of other weapons or future weapons that would have corresponding effects such as atomic explosive weapons, lethal, chemical and biological weapons and radioactive material weapons. These weapons led to a high number of mass destruction and their use was ruled out as unethical, even though their use did not end until after 25 years after the war. In 1968, the UK came up with regulations that; disregarded the use of BW as a contrast to international regulations and an offense to humanity, prohibited invasive research, banned the development of accessory research equipment, made it mandatory to eliminate all existing weapons and permitted the authorities to be able to access and investigate any kind of remonstration. A convention was drafted the following year restricting the use of Biological Weapons and the production and advancement of BW. It initiated structures in place to inquire and investigate on presumed enhancement and progression of these weapons. Employees that worked in Biological Weapons were also exposed to conditions such as q- fever which was easily transmittable, concluding that risks would continue being involved as long as research went on (Sugishima& Wheelis, 284). There has also been a lot of secrecy in keeping the efficiency of the use of BW. The knowledge required in the development of effective BW should be protected such that it does not end up with dangerous individuals or even terrorist organisations.

The Living Weapon

Fearing that the Germans would create and use their biological weapons in the World War II, the Great Britain and United States created their own BW. In 1942, the United States, and the United Kingdom used a test of anthrax spores on the Gruinland Island, an island in Scotland, contaminating it and leaving it unable for anybody to settle there for decades. The Japan Unit 731 provided human experimentation research materials to the US government and was guaranteed immunity from war crimes by the US. The US army developed a unit to support a number of biomedical experiments one of them referred to as Project Whitecoat. This project was disguised as an opportunity given to the youth to offer services which would benefit both the military and medical units. From watching the film, one can clearly learn on the risks associated with Biological Weapons. For instance, one is able to learn about how the outlook by the US and UK, and other countries on BW has changed over the years, the results of Unit 731 BW’S use and the challenges that different nations have had in the development and implementation of their Biological Weapons programs.

[speedyparadisewhispers]

When it comes to social policy, the US is very different from Europe. Do you agree or disagree?

When it comes to social policy, the US is very different from Europe. Do you agree or disagree?

The communal strategy concentrates on societies worldwide to meet the human needs for education, security, healthy, work, and well-being.  Social policies address how countries and communities respond to global issues facing humanity's social, economic, demography, poverty, and migration. It analyses several responsibilities that government, family, market, civil societies, and international organizations provide services across life from a young age to old age. And I agree that US social policy is different from Europe.

 Over the last century, we see that Europe has invested in large social welfare states, while the US has maintained its social welfares. People welfare is comprehensive, and if we look into things like unemployment, Europe spends five times what Americans Spend on unemployment and other labor market-related programs. Europe also puts many resources into ensuring that workers are protected against interests associated with the business. Labor market rules prohibit high-cost firing, long paid vacations, good produced and sick leaves, short work hours, and Europe makes this happen since the national government gives more than 25 vacations annually. In contrast, the US government does not officially mandate a free day from work. Vacations are primarily private agreements between employers and employees.

In Europe, taxes are higher and progressive, which is different in the US, where another redistributive mechanism on revenue on government balance, an addition to the spending side. Pension laws regulate retirement, and in Europe, pensions allow early retirement, with women and government employees having special privileges (Gallagher, 2011). People retire at their early fifties with full pensions, which is not the case in America.

When we look into how people spend their lives in the two countries, Americans spend most of their time working long hours, which is higher than an average European worker. Labor participation in the US is higher than in Europe. Employment is higher in the US, as almost 90% of Americans drive to work using public transport, while in Europe, there is more home production, making buying of products at the market less (Taylor, 2014). Life in the US is more of buying food in a restaurant, while in Europe, it is like meal cooking at home.

US welfare style is different from Europe; the US has a cluster of institutions, like a divided government. Apart from this, they have laws that defend property rights. However, in Europe, constitutions were rewritten to new ones who favor social democrats, labor movements, hence welfare states.  US has ethnic heterogeneity, with government redistributing less, creating higher social mobility while remaining ethnically diverse, thus the US remaining diverse than any European nation. The US and Europe have similar institutional redistributive and residual welfare states. Finally, Europe is not more generous than America since private charity is more prominent in the US, almost six times higher than donations in America. Americans are individualist, while Europe believes more in social activities (Alber*, 2010).

 In conclusion, the US social welfare differs from Europe regarding social protection, labor markets, ways of living, employment, pensions. We see that Europe is well off compared to the US since people don't spend their lives working longer hours and buying meals in meal stores.