Writing Sample Critique Corner

[yeeha]

Hi everyone,

 

I have written the MCAT 3 times and sadly, I have received a M, N and N on the written section. I write next week, so I have been trying to practice, but it's hard to know if I am improving considering my score reputation. I feel like I have improved. It really depends on the topic. If the topic deals with politics or government, I freeze... I have been reading other people's essays but I fear to give any comments because obviously I have problems! I will say that I am absolutely amazed at how well some people accomplish this writing task!

 

A student's academic success depends more on hard work than on intelligence.

Describe a specific situation in which a student's academic success might depend more on intelligence than on hard work. Discuss what you think determines whether a student's academic success depends more on hard work or on intelligence.

 

Intelligence is a measure of an individual's capacity to comprehend and understand principles and concepts. Unlike strict memorization which involves regurgitating information from a text book or set of notes, intelligence requires going beyond memorization of a principle or concept to fully understanding it and its implications.

 

In an academic environment where a students success is measured on a grading system which forces students to compete amongst each other, hard-work, more than anything, is essential - especially for areas that require strict memorization from a textbook. Introductory biochemistry, for example, requires the student to memorize countless structures of compounds and their associated properties. A student who works hard to commit the text book to memory will ultimately do better than a student who has never opened the textbook. As a result, the student's success is an indicator of their hard work and dedication.

 

Although a certain amount of memorization is required for all academic topics -- students must learn the jargon and specific vocabulary for the subject at hand -- a certain level of understanding is essential to succeed in higher level academic courses. Once a student surpasses the introductory level, they are expected to be able to deliver more than just memorization. Students are expected to take different concepts and principles and apply them to different situations. Problem solving courses, such as engineering thermodynamics, requires a student to apply their aquired knowledge to solve problems. In such courses, a students success is proportional to their understanding of the various principles.

 

In the majority of academic institutions, a student's success is indicated by a grade, whether it is percent or letter based. The final grade is often viewed as a measure of a students intelligence; however, we must consider what is required in order to achieve a high grade. Did the student merely memorize the text book after hours and hours of hard work or did the student have to apply different concepts and principles to solve problems? Both scenarios require hard work; however, fully understanding a concept in order to apply it to a problem requires intelligence. And, without the ability to understand or comprehend, there is no amount of time that will improve a student's success in a course that require problem-solving abilities.

[RapedByLifeSci]

Lies are often less harmful than the truth.

Describe a specific situation in which the truth might be less harmful than lies. Discuss what you think determines whether or not lies are less harmful than the truth.

 

 

In contrary to the classic saying, the truth will not always set you free. Lies are essentially a way for a person to adapt to a situation and avoid possible, short-term harm. In the period of World War II, admitting your religious status of Jewish faith in a crowd of Nazis undoubtedly spelt out an eminent death and prosecution. Although their religious fervour would prompt any Jewish person to proudly state their faith when questioned, it was a smarter move to simply lie in the Nazi’s face and move on with their life. If one were to speak the truth absolutely, one may find that the truth does not always solve their problems.

 

 

 

Likewise, if one were to lie indefinitely, one will find themselves in a similar predicament. This type of detrimental effect is portrayed in long-term relationship where a spouse lies to his or her partner, then creates additional lies to cover up that said lie. Lies are often harmful in situations between people who regularly interact with each other as they tend to accumulate over time. When the foundation of the relationship is based on lies, the only way a relationship can grow is, ironically, through more lies. Long-term lies give birth to distrust and suspicions that weaken the bond. For example, Statistics Canada has surveyed that 85% of divorces occur in marriages due to the excessive build-up of lies.

 

 

There is a time to lie and a time to tell the truth. Similar to making an educated hypothesis, one must make a reasonable choice to either lie or speak the truth. This choice depends on the situation and the people whom you will be lying to. It is not abnormal to witness a kid exaggerate and tell lies about themselves at a summer camp. It is, however, abnormal to witness an employee lie about his non-existent MBA at a job interview. There are moral implications tied to each and every lie, and it is up to the individual to assess how each lie will ultimately determine the course of their life.

[farh33n]

Hi guys,

I have been brainstorming for this prompt. Can't seem to find any specific examples. Hopefully you guys can help me out.

 

The ideals that soldiers defend often differ from the ideals of those who send them into battle.

Describe a specific situation in which the ideals that soldiers defend might be the same as the ideals of those who send them into battle. Discuss what you think determines when the ideals that soldiers defend differ from the ideals of those who send them into battle and when they are the same.

 

 

For the synthesis I was thinking something like dictatorship vs. democracy?

[MEDLIL]

Hi there,

 

I was wondering if there is any kind soul out there who could take a look at this essay. I wrote it in the 30-minute time framing and this is my first practice. I really appreciate your time and comments. Thank you thank you thank you thank you..

 

A student's academic success depends more on hard work than on intelligence

 

The academic success of the students at schools, universities and colleges are more often than not measured based on their grades and overall grade point average. The whole purpose of examinations and assignments is to provide the instructors and professors with insight into the dedication and hard work the students show towards their education. The number of completed assignments, homework, projects, exercises and overall performance in examinations define this hard work. The more time and effort a student puts into his/her education closely correlates with more outstanding results and academic performance. Completing diplomas, acquiring degrees and reaching high levels of education can not be achieved without investing energy and time. Take an example of two different students in one similar educational setting; they both have enrolled in the same course at the same school; one spends most of his/her time completing projects, and studying course materials, while the other student does not dedicate as much effort and substitutes the coursework and studying time with friends and partying. At the end of the semester, both students stand on one diagram, one in the top minority of the class with great grade achievements and the other in the other part of the diagram with fail or close to fail grades.

 

We should also consider that what helps a student stand out is not only his hard work. Intelligence on the hand plays a major role in helping the students achieve their academic ambitions and endeavors. There is still no exact definition for the word “intelligence”. It is measured by variable Integlient tests, and varies in different subject matters. Some students are very intelligent when it to comes to mathematics or physics; others are much better “intelligently-equipped” in biology, history, and arts majors. When both students study the same topics to complete a major, their academic performance varies based on the subject area they are good at. Given equal amount of hard work and energy has been put into completing a major, a more intelligent student can finish projects and courseworks, using less time and effort.

 

It is correct to say that hard work can help the student with less intelligence achieve equal or more compared to other intelligent peers. But the opposite does not hold true. An intelligent student with all the mental capabilities in the world cannot achieve any high academic standing if he/she does not dedicate any hard work and energy.

[future_doc]

You do not raise the issue of a democratic society being ruled by law, not man, and having an independent judiciary which will protect, enforce and defend individual rights. You give the extreme example of too much freedom. Also, Iran might be a good example, given the recent questionable election result where the individuals have no effective recourse in face of the mass attacks of state sponsored thugs against their own population, with jailings, etc. N.K. is a good example. I find your last paragraph takes the example to the extreme end and you do not consider the realistic middle ground where an independent judiciary combined with rule of law and proper enforcement of society rules take place.

[MEDLIL]

Hi there,

 

I was wondering if there is any kind soul out there who could take a look at this essay. I wrote it in the 30-minute time framing and this is my first practice. I really appreciate your time and comments. Thank you thank you thank you thank you..

 

A student's academic success depends more on hard work than on intelligence

 

The academic success of the students at schools, universities and colleges are more often than not measured based on their grades and overall grade point average. The whole purpose of examinations and assignments is to provide the instructors and professors with insight into the dedication and hard work the students show towards their education. The number of completed assignments, homework, projects, exercises and overall performance in examinations define this hard work. The more time and effort a student puts into his/her education closely correlates with more outstanding results and academic performance. Completing diplomas, acquiring degrees and reaching high levels of education can not be achieved without investing energy and time. Take an example of two different students in one similar educational setting; they both have enrolled in the same course at the same school; one spends most of his/her time completing projects, and studying course materials, while the other student does not dedicate as much effort and substitutes the coursework and studying time with friends and partying. At the end of the semester, both students stand on one diagram, one in the top minority of the class with great grade achievements and the other in the other part of the diagram with fail or close to fail grades.

 

We should also consider that what helps a student stand out is not only his hard work. Intelligence on the hand plays a major role in helping the students achieve their academic ambitions and endeavors. There is still no exact definition for the word “intelligence”. It is measured by variable Integlient tests, and varies in different subject matters. Some students are very intelligent when it to comes to mathematics or physics; others are much better “intelligently-equipped” in biology, history, and arts majors. When both students study the same topics to complete a major, their academic performance varies based on the subject area they are good at. Given equal amount of hard work and energy has been put into completing a major, a more intelligent student can finish projects and courseworks, using less time and effort.

 

It is correct to say that hard work can help the student with less intelligence achieve equal or more compared to other intelligent peers. But the opposite does not hold true. An intelligent student with all the mental capabilities in the world cannot achieve any high academic standing if he/she does not dedicate any hard work and energy.

[future_doc]

Overall, I liked your essay and feel you developed your arguments and theme well. While stating that hard work with less intelligence can help such a student achieve equal or more compared to (more) intelligent peers, you do not bring up the possibility that hard work, without sufficient intelligence, may lead nowhere. This could have been added in paragraph 3.

 

With regard to your first 5 sentences, if you removed the first 3, it would still read well and be complete, or, one of those sentences might be substitued for sentence 4. I liked your example in paragraph one.

 

Paragraph 2 is developed well, and you describe a specific example where the prompt is not true. In paragraph 3, you ave the criterion where the prompt is true and when it is not true. Textbook Kaplan approach, but they would tell you that you need to refer back to your previous examples to increase depth and unity.

 

Dsclaimer: I am not an expert, am taking the Kaplan course which I stopped attending after my 2nd session b/c I found it a waste of my time (at least in my case, it was totally worthless and my money is down the drain) and I write in 2 weeks.

[rmorelan]

Hi there! It is of course pretty hard to make a cohesive argument in 30 minutes (hence the pain of the W.S. section )

 

One suggestion, try on the test to avoid saying something to the effect of "there are many definitions of X". It dilutes your argument and you spend time defining other definitions which do not support your position/point, and there is a risk it appears like you are rambling. As an essay reader I not really all that consider with other peoples definitions and views, just yours

 

You will generally get much better results if you say something like "although X has been defined in a variety of ways, the common characteristic of all definitions is Y". You make your own reasonable definition of the term (indicating your ability to synthesize your own definition - something that displays good essay writing ability) and you will have a better time applying it to the essay question So in your opinion what is the common thread in the definitions? How do you define intelligence?

 

Your first paragraph has an assumption - that hard work is directly the cause of academic success as you define it (GPA). This makes some of your argument somewhat circular as you are assuming your main point to be true from the beginning. You basically state hard work produces the high grades (indicating "dedication and hard work", "overall performance in examinations define this hard work"), but it this actually true (or more correctly from a literary point of view have you supported that position strongly enough)? You start by saying tests measure academic ability and you transition to say it measures hard work. In the following paragraph you move somewhat again to say that test scores also are based on intelligence to a degree as well.

 

Like your overall approach on the essay though - there is a logical structure which is good!

[strawberriHoney]

Can someone please look at this prompt for me? i found it difficult to find any counter examples and feel like mine was very weak, so i feel like i did very bad for the antithesis part.

 

Any suggestions to how i can improve would great!!!

 

 

A truly democratic society cannot maintain any unjust laws.

 

The main criterion needed for democratic society to be in accordance with its ideal is the need to maintain just and fair laws. By preventing the existence of unjust laws, it lays the groundwork to ensure that democracy stays true to its nature which is rule by the people. One area in which the need to eliminate unjust laws is essential to the ideal of democracy is voting. Throughout history, the privilege to vote had been reserved for people who are regarded as more intelligent even in democratic countries such as United States. During that time, the fights for universal suffrage were an ongoing struggle because in democracy, every citizen should have the same right. Ultimately, the people that were neglected won their fights by obtaining the rights to vote. As a result, their battle eliminated the unjust law at the time and pushed the democratic society to stay true to the ideals of democracy.

 

On the other hand, some unjust laws are kept by democratic society in order to protect the citizens. In court, if a jury unanimously decides that the the individual on trial is innocent, he/she is free to go without any punishments. The decision of the jury is always respected even when the person on trial is guilty. In considering the situation where a guilty criminal is set free by the decision of the jury, the law appears to be extremely unjust by setting criminals free. However it is important for a democracy to keep this unjust law in order to solidify the power of the court. If the law changes each time according to the defendant then the court’s power is ultimately questioned and eventually disrespected. From this perspective, sometimes we must keep unjust laws to sustain stability in a democratic country.

 

When, then can a democratic society maintain an unjust law while staying true to its roots? The answer to this question illustrates a great range of grey area where injustice and justice must be balanced delicately. Ultimately, the guide to determine whether an unjust law is appropriate for a democratic society is the impact it has on the overall stability of the society. If the unjust law is necessary to maintain order such as giving a jury the deciding power, then it should not violate the intent of democracy. On the other hand, if the unjust law brings only division among people such as discrimination in the right to vote, the this unjust law must be eliminated for the democratic society to stay truthful to its ideal.

[rmorelan]

Hi there!

 

hmmmm, one thing I noticed is that you don't actually define what an unjust law actually is. I think that might be one reason you are having a bit of trouble coming up with a counter example and I think it weakens your essay. Don't know if it always works, but I think an relatively easy way to get a better score is to always define your terms as clear as you can as good essays are never vague on what they are arguing.

 

For instance maybe (?) you could define an unjust law as one that allows one group of people to legally perform certain actions in a particular situation but disallows another group of people in the same situation from the same actions. So a law that allows on election day one group of adults to vote but disallows another from voting by this definition would be unjust.

 

Now it is easier to perhaps some up with counter examples. Affirmative action by that definition for instance is now unjust. So is drafting people into the armed forces, our unemployment insurance program giving more resources to similarly unemployed people in different parts of the country and so on. On principle at least democratic societies have voted for laws creating these things; the citizens have decided to create an "unjust" law because it serves a greater purpose (leading in the future it is hoped to a more just society, and things you talk about in your last paragraph!).

 

Anyway, my quick 15 sec definition is not the only one of course that fits the bill! But once you state one it channels you to find ways it breaks down I think, and that can really help

 

Can someone please look at this prompt for me? i found it difficult to find any counter examples and feel like mine was very weak, so i feel like i did very bad for the antithesis part.

 

Any suggestions to how i can improve would great!!!

 

 

A truly democratic society cannot maintain any unjust laws.

 

The main criterion needed for democratic society to be in accordance with its ideal is the need to maintain just and fair laws. By preventing the existence of unjust laws, it lays the groundwork to ensure that democracy stays true to its nature which is rule by the people. One area in which the need to eliminate unjust laws is essential to the ideal of democracy is voting. Throughout history, the privilege to vote had been reserved for people who are regarded as more intelligent even in democratic countries such as United States. During that time, the fights for universal suffrage were an ongoing struggle because in democracy, every citizen should have the same right. Ultimately, the people that were neglected won their fights by obtaining the rights to vote. As a result, their battle eliminated the unjust law at the time and pushed the democratic society to stay true to the ideals of democracy.

 

On the other hand, some unjust laws are kept by democratic society in order to protect the citizens. In court, if a jury unanimously decides that the the individual on trial is innocent, he/she is free to go without any punishments. The decision of the jury is always respected even when the person on trial is guilty. In considering the situation where a guilty criminal is set free by the decision of the jury, the law appears to be extremely unjust by setting criminals free. However it is important for a democracy to keep this unjust law in order to solidify the power of the court. If the law changes each time according to the defendant then the court’s power is ultimately questioned and eventually disrespected. From this perspective, sometimes we must keep unjust laws to sustain stability in a democratic country.

 

When, then can a democratic society maintain an unjust law while staying true to its roots? The answer to this question illustrates a great range of grey area where injustice and justice must be balanced delicately. Ultimately, the guide to determine whether an unjust law is appropriate for a democratic society is the impact it has on the overall stability of the society. If the unjust law is necessary to maintain order such as giving a jury the deciding power, then it should not violate the intent of democracy. On the other hand, if the unjust law brings only division among people such as discrimination in the right to vote, the this unjust law must be eliminated for the democratic society to stay truthful to its ideal.

[future_doc]

Hi, all I am going to do is to cover points that quickly come to mind.

 

1. In the 2nd paragraph, it appears that you come to the table with the view that just b/c 12 jurors find you not guilty, this is unjust. Especially if the person is really 'guilty'. But if we define what 'guilty' is, it is not someone who performs a criminal act, it is someone who is found guilty of having committed a criminal act. Democratic societies have the 'rule of law' and a jury trial is one of our finest examples.

 

2. My example of an unjust law would be 'eminent domain' or confiscation of property by the government according to process of law and if you are unhappy with the amount of payment, there is a process to try to improve on their offer. These laws are unjust b/c you are being deprived of the future use and enjoyment of your property, theoretically, for a great public purpose. But, in fact, the municipality may force you to surender your property b/c they want a mall to be developed there and they have a deal waiting.

 

Sorry for the incomplete critique.

[strawberriHoney]

Thanks! now it makes more sense... =D

[Zipper]

HI med_eng, sorry for usurping your post. I came across that same prompt and came up with the following, maybe it'll help:

 

Arguably the most entertaining and relaxing form of media, television has, in the past few decades, managed to find itself in every household in North America. The average Canadian watches over five hours of television per day. When socially-charged issues, such as the recent Tibetan protests in China, come to light, it is through the screen of a television that we become aware of it. When Tibetans started rioting, North American newscasters showed footage of armed Chinese soldiers aggressively battling weaponless monks. The Chinese government was depicted as brutal, violent and over-controlling. This served to illustrate to North Americans the cruelties and barbarism of a Communist government. Where available, more information from television is sourced than the radio, paper and word of mouth collectively. It is no surprise that when it comes to public opinion, its roots can be found in the programs of television.

 

However, with the advent of the world wide web, the internet has shown an even stronger influence on public opinion. As we become more informed through the internet, we also become more aware of television networks’ biases. Take, for instance, the aforementioned example of the Tibetan protests. Chinese television is controlled by the government, and Tibetans were depicted as veritable terrorists. Chinese newscasters showed footage of armed Tibetans destroying homes and deliberately targeting innocent Chinese tourists. The word “terrorist” was, in fact, used by Chinese newscasters to label Tibetans. However, with the help of the internet, Chinese people were able to access North American footage to see a more complete story of the Tibetan protests. Perhaps both the Chinese and Tibetans were brutal and violent to each other, and neither can be portrayed as victims.

 

Television makes us more aware of issues and events, and they force us to have an opinion. It is the most engaging of forms of media as it allows us to experience events with our eyes and our ears. However, television does not necessarily exert an influence on the opinion itself, especially if the television network is strongly biased or censored. Television exerts the strongest influence on public opinion when it is regarded as truthful and unbiased. When programs allow us to see events from various perspectives, we are inclined to believe what we see and hear. It is when television is controlled by governments or biased parties that we question its validity. This is when other forms of media, such as the internet, usurp television’s position as the greatest influence on public opinion.

 

-------

 

If anyone wants to critique this one as well you are more than welcome to!

 

Strong words on a touchy subject! just hope your marker isn't Chinese. They are everywhere these days

[strawberriHoney]

Hi guys, just wondering if anyone has any ideas for this prompt:

 

It is in the nature of democracy to reward mediocrity.

[future_doc]

Hi guys, just wondering if anyone has any ideas for this prompt:

 

It is in the nature of democracy to reward mediocrity.

 

Democracy stands for treating its citizens equally. Accordingly, society needs to provide services at the level of the lowest common denominator. Accordingly, mediocity is rewarded, with some examples

 

On the other hand, in democratic socieities, there is no ceiling for what can be accomplished by citizens with their own ideas, efforts and initiviative. Accordingly, democracy creates an environment in which ther entrepeneur and free spirit in whatever field may thrive thru his own inovation and entrepeneurial spirt...Bill gates of Microsoft started in his home garage as example

 

Look at non democratic countries like Russia where they can arrest a billionaire and put him in jail throwing away the keys just b/c they don't like him.

 

There you go strawberriHoney

[chrail]

Hi guys,

 

I'm really struggling with this one:

 

Too many politicians turn public matters into private gains

 

T - ???

A - Public matter turned into public gain. Eg. Ruby Dhalla and bringing the live-in caregiver program to the spotlight

S - socioeconomical/political, public/private

 

Any ideas for examples that fit with the promt? Thanks!

[future_doc]

Hi guys,

 

Any ideas for examples that fit with the promt? Thanks!

 

corruption ex Governor of Illinois Blagojevisch wanted to 'sell' Obama's vacant Senate seat b/c he appoints the new Senator

 

third world African nations take aid money thatdisappears w/o accountability while their citizens live in starving misery

[nino]

i dun know if anyone's still helping editing, but my test is very near and i really need help in writing ><

 

here's my first practice essay..

----------------------------------------------------------

 

The object of education should be to teach skills, not values.

 

Describe a specific situation in which the object of education might be teaching values rather than skills. Discuss what you think determines when the object of education is to teach skills and when it is to teach values.

 

Education, in its common definition, usually means the teaching of the skills essential for living. Ever since kindergarten, where basic literacy and arithmetics are taught, all the way to post-secondary school, where job-related trainings are gained, a person spends more than a quarter of his or her life indulging in such learning. Much like an investment, education aims to offer a positive return by improving the learners' lives. Hence, it is not surprising that strong emphasis is placed on real-life skills, such as dissection for doctors. On the other hand, values, being perceived as sets of rules governing one's action, vary greatly from person to person. Views on controversial issues, such as abortion or stem cell research, cannot be "passed on" to children in school, as they are entitled to their own opinions on such matters. Thus, it is understandable for values to play a less important role in education.

 

However, that is not to say the teaching of values should be completely omitted from education. There are values shared by people, which are regarded as societal morales. The respect for others, for example, is taught to toddlers even before pre-school. So are freedom of speech and religion, the fundamentals outlined by the Bill of Rights that laid out the foundation of the democratic society. Such societal values play important roles in one's life. It is obvious that no matter how well prepared a person is for a job, a lack of basic respect for co-workers would not benefit that person in his or her journey in life. Since education ultimately offers opportunities and satisfaction in life, common societal values are incorporated into one's education, whether it is taught by family or schools.

 

The object of education is for one to self-improve, to gain from what is learned and use it to better his or her life. Whether the emphasis should be on skills or values depend on the nature of the said values. In a society that encourages individual opinions, values that differ among people should not be advocated in schools, such is the case with common controversial topics. On the other hand, values that have been approved by the society as a whole, such as respect or freedom, are more important than skills in one's education, since those are the solid foundation of our society.

[pebz]

What do you guys think of this essay?

 

Praise teaches better than criticism.

Describe a specific situation in which praise might not teach better than criticism. Discuss what you think determines whether praise or criticism teaches better.

 

The quote “Practice makes perfect” comes to mind when dealing with academics, playing an instrument, or practicing a particular skill. To be flawless at a particular skill set, such as performing a mid air 720 back-flip or training to perform at a major piano concert takes great discipline. Countless hours are spent on performing the same skills over and over again, even though their performances are already flawless to the general public. However, judges or experts in the field may be able to detect minor flaws, and hence these performers train daily to accomplish perfection. In these situations, where the mind takes a psychological beating from performing the same tasks repeatedly, the trainer may actually achieve better results from praising rather than strict criticism. Although both combinations may be needed, more focus should be put on praising especially after a successful trial run. Harsh criticism puts too much stress on the performer and lowers self esteem.

 

However, when dealing with students at a lower caliber a different approach is warranted. Consider a ten year old gymnist who first signs up for gymnastic lessons. Praises in this case will not guarantee success. In fact, it’ll be counter-productive. Praising when the student does not deserve complements will further encourage false techniques to become habit. For example, if a student does a summersault incorrectly, but the instructor insists on complementing the individual out of sympathy, then this will only facilitate further technical flaws. If this is perpetuated, then as the student grows older, these flawed techniques will be much harder to correct. Therefore at an early stage of developing a particular skill-set, the instructor should focus on criticism rather than praising.

 

It has been shown that praises sometimes work better than criticism at achieving desired results. Yet at times, it seems that criticism is the best route to go. This apparent contradiction can be resolved by examining the stage of development the student is in. At an early stage, where the fundamentals have not been acquired, the instructor must focus more on criticism so that the student does not acquire bad habits. Criticism in this case will mold the student into one with the basic fundamentals, however, in order to reach the next caliber, the professional level, psychological effects must be considered. When the performer is in the professional caliber, complementation may work better than criticism. This is often because the performer may be able to spot his or her own mistakes, and praising will allow the performer to get through tough experiences.

[future_doc]

I like it.

[queensgrad1]

Hey everyone,

 

Alastriss suggested I post my essay for feedback, apparently it helped him a lot when he went through this process. Thanks for your time and help!

 

Any business must be concerned with the long-term consequences of its actions.

 

Describe a specific situation in which a business might justifiably not be concerned with the long-term consequences of its actions. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a business must be concerned about the long-term consequences of its actions.

 

 

Businesses are based on models that allow for the greatest amount of profit, by minimizing their own expenditures. However, in the process of lowering costs of production, some corporations unfortunately are misguided into believing that this is their only responsibility. The methods that they use minimize costs, can lead to problems in the future. These long term consequences, which may not come into realization for years or even decades, can hold the company accountable for it's actions. Perhaps one of the more recent developments is the protection of the environment against polluting companies. The environment has become one of the most important issues of current times as it is now socially favourable to be environmently friendly. Businesses in the past disposed of harmful pollutants through enormous release of chemical gases into the atmosphere, as well dumping of wastes into bodies of water. This lead to deteriation of the ozone layer, and decreased quality of living for the rest of society. Governments now hold the companies accoutable for the amount of pollution that is created, and penalize companies who abuse the environment with hefty fines. This recent development forces companies to be more aware of how their business models and modes of thinking, affect everyone else, not just in the current times but also in the future.

 

 

 

Although businesses must be held accountable for their actions, one must also realize a business is only successful if it continues to grown and produce a surplus. One of the more successful companies under this guideline is Wal-Mart. This once small and local business, has grown to be a staple and ubiquitous force in nearly all communties in North America. Their model of underpricing, over stocking, and ultra friendly greeters has lead to enormous profits and franchising. By all accounts, Wal-Mart has achieved and sustained their business goals. However, by doing so, they have often been criticized for driving out local businesses, and raising the unemployment numbers in communities. Moreover, these communuties, and their local economy become solely responsible on this single corporation. Although, these criticisms may seem justifiable, one cannot assume that Wal-Mart must choose to abondon their own goals, as they have stayed true to local and national business laws. They are, in the eyes of the law, not guilty of any wrong doings, and may be seen by other leaders in business as corporation that has been successful despite the tightening of regulations and rules.

 

 

 

Corporations are often in a stand still between two sides; the competitive and lucrative side of business, and the other end of moral and social responsibility. It seems that there are times that businesses must be aware of thier actions, and the accountability that comes along with those actions, and at other times, must be able to turn proftis without any concern to moral values. At this juncture, the business consciousness must turn to an external and superior force, that has outlined to what corporations must avoid. This ofcourse, are the laws and regulations set forth by the local and federal goverments. A company must abide to these regulations at all times, or face the consequences that come along with disobeying. Moreover, lawmakers must realize the difficulties that corporations face in turning a profit, and contuning a mode of growth in current times. This cooperation may lead to further understanding on both sides, and an improved balance between the social responsibility and the need for economic success that a company faces.

[future_doc]

You were asked to describe a specific situation in which a business might not be concerned with the long term consequences of its actions. I assume this is the case of Wal-Mart although nowhere do you say this is an example of where a business might not be concerned ....... Don't make me assume and fill in the blanks, tell me if this is the case of your example.

 

With respect to examples of consequences coming to haunt the company, think of asbestosis and tobacco industries, the oil industry carry oil (Exxon Valdez comes to mind), the clothing manufacturers who hire little children in India etc under slave like conditions, pharmaceuticals that come to market qui8ckly b/c of a cushy relatoinship with the regulators (who came from the industry) and problems arise with the drugs causing deaths and costing billions...and to a lesser extent think of the fast food industry helping to create a population that becomes obese, plastic bottles for babies discovered to carry enormous health risks.

 

In terms of considerations of companies, they need to look at moral or social considerations (strikes and boycots are not good for the bottom line) but also legal considerations and future regulatory hurdles. Toys from China soaked in lead, etc.

 

Generally, I like your essay.

[anthony]

What do you think of this essay?

Please give me some ideas how to make this essay better.

 

In a democracy, the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen.

Explain the above statement. Describe a specific situation in which the successful politician in a democracy does not resemble the ordinary citizen. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen.

 

In a free country, the citizens may choose their politician from a middle class but a trusted candidates. The people need to trust their candidates by knowing that he had a crime-free life. For example Bush was an ordinary citizen, intelligence man from a middle class and a trusted family. He was a successfull politician by leading the people to the right way while he was from a middle class family and sometimes with his own economic problem.

 

However, sometimes the citizens prefer their politician be someone from a upper class since they may believe that a politician from an upper class could make a better decision while living in peace and not having economic issues. Even people could trust a candidate with non crime-free life who was convicted of crime only once in their life. For example, Mashio, Japan's president, convicted of crime when he was a little kid but after that there was no sign of other crimes in his document. He was from a rich and intelligence family. He ended up as a successfull politician in his country.

 

Finally, sometimes a successful politician could be from a middle class with no crime history or someone who is from an upper class with crime history life. It all depends on how people think of their candidates. if they evaluate the candidate's crime history more than the his rank in the society.

[future_doc]

I don't know if this is true as a generalization but often the higher the office, the less like an ordinary citizen these people would be. For example the assasinated Pres Kennedy came from a wealthy family background as did Pierre Elliot Trudeau our PM. I do not know that living a crime free life is even worth mentioning as it is a given in virtually any society, just as with med students, if there is the hint of criminal background the person will not get far in politics. So, I think this idea is not the best for as essay of this type.

 

Successful politians do often have strong family roots and some degree of poverty in their background, like ex Pres Clinton. To the extent that the ordinary citizen is able to connect with them on some significant level, this proves of benefit to the politician. Obama, a family man, who worked in doing community work for years, slowly built up connections and a base from which to stray into politics.

 

Sorry if I am not too helpful but I believe your essay needs further thought. I hope another poster shows up with better assistance that is more helpful.

[Hatchepsout]

I would also mention that Bush is not from a middle-class family.