Appeasement. Appeasement Is A Conciliatory Action Taken Towards The Ag

Appeasement. Appeasement is a conciliatory action taken towards the aggressor by giving what was asked. Many examples of this often cowardly action can seen through the course of history, such as the case of Alexander II when he passed the Emancipation Act in order to prevent peasant rebellion. Such was also the case in the gathering storm of World War II. The earliest sign of appeasement was seen in 1935, when Great Britain signed the Anglo-German Naval agreement. Great Britain simply allowed Germany to rebuild its navy in order to prevent any conflicts. This led to the breaking up of Stresa Front, a coalition made by the Allies against Germanys rearmament. As some others see it, the reoccupation of the Rhineland was the first appeasement made by Great Britain. At first the alarmed French proposed sanction but Great Britain declined, feeling that any minor conflict with the Germans could lead in another World War. Great Britains attitude led to a further breakdown of Stresa Front, and Hitler started to take a low view of the Allied solidarity. During the Spanish Civil War, Britain and France were again seen to have appeased the Axis Power. As democratic nations, the two allies had a duty to support the republican government by providing arms, but they felt that any action against the will of Italy would further separate them from Italy. The Allies proposed non-intervention, which annoyed the two Axis nations anyway. Through this the Allies had lost their greatest security to a Fascist nation. The Anschluss of 1936 was also accepted by Great Britain and France, and Hitler had become more confident. The final appeasement made by the Allies was in 1938-39, during the Czechoslovakian crisis. Hitler had demanded that the Sudetenland be given self- determination as part of Germany. Immediately Great Britain and France searched for a way to make a peaceful agreement, even at the expense of another democratic nation. Without even discussing with Czechoslovakians, Britains Prime Minister Chamberlain flew to Berchtesgarten with an agreement that would give Germany the right to only occupy parts of the Sudetenland. Berchtesgarten was a place where Hitler stayed during vacation time, and this made Hitler feel that he could ask for more, because Chamberlain must have been desperate for peace to fly all the way out to Germany for a discussion. Hitler declined and they met again at Bad Godesberg. Again Hitler declined and the Munich Conference was held. In this conference, Germany was given all the land she wanted. Great Britain and France had given up the Sudetenland without even discussing the issue with the Czechoslovakians. One positive result came out of this agreement. It was that by this time, it was difficult to pretend any longer that Hitler was interested in only reasonable demands. But this realization by the British was too late, as France and she had lost an ally who could have created a second front in a war against Germany. Russia became skeptical of the Allies trustworthiness and signed with Nazi-Soviet Pact in 1939 to divide Poland between them. Seeing the Germans accomplish their fight for self-determination, Polish, Hungarians and other nations split up the remaining part of Czechoslovakia and by doing so, made it easier for Hitler to conquer them. Without doubt, appeasement has played a major role in encouraging Hitler to pursue his ultimate goals. If Great Britain and France had taken more aggressive actions towards Hitlers demands, perhaps Germany would have been stopped before becoming such an imperial nation. Also, during the first few aggressions, Germanys army was not even close to being as powerful as Hitler always presented it to be so he would have been fairly easily defeated. However, from another perspective, if the Allies had taken more aggressive actions towards Germany, more blood might have been shed through a myriad of wars.

buy custom The Healthcare in America essay

buy custom The Healthcare in America essay The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) which was signed by President Obama on March 23, 2010 is an effort to solve Americas biggest domestic issue. The issues of cost, the large number of uninsured, and quality of care are the catalysts leading America towards the universal healthcare. First, while insurance companies are recording the superfluous profits, the insurance premiums are averaging 10% to 20% of families budgets (Abelson 3). In addition to the obligation to pay large premiums, high deductibles have risen sharply. In 2010, 10% of people covered by their employers had a deductible of at least $2000.00 (Abelson 1). These high deductibles discourage people from receiving the routine medical care because they are paying out of pocket until their deductible is reached. This practice has a reverse effect on people putting off care until they absolutely need to, which results in higher costs. An estimated 18,000 people in the U.S die each year prematurely because of not having the affordable healthcare (Toner 5). A byproduct of this age of large premiums and deductibles is deceptive marketing practices by the insurance companies leading people to believe they are covered while the small print excludes them from coverage, selling people essentially fake insurance . The small print jargon can be so confusing even that hospital representatives can be fooled. In one case, Lawrence Yardin had a policy, which seemed to indicate $150,000 a year in the hospital care. After looking at his policy, St. Davids, where he went for two separate heart procedures, estimated his portion of his bill to be a few thousand dollars. He and the hospital were surprised to learn his coverage was mostly for room and board. The policy coverage for other hospital services was capped at $10,000, which excluded him from nearly all-routine care including medicine (Abelson 1). Mr. Yardin ended up with a hospital bill of over $200,000, forcing him into bankruptcy. This is one example of how people are being pushed into personal bankruptcy by medical problems and actually had insurance when they got sick, which is now estimated be 75% of people filing for bankruptcy. The excessive cost of healthcare in America has also created a new industry called medical tourism. This is the practice of going to such countries as Thailand, India, Singapore, and Costa Rica to receive the elective medical treatments. With a heart valve replacement costing as much as $160,000 in Boston, the same procedure can be as little as $8,000 in India. A hip replacement costing $43,000 in New York can be done for $12,000 in Thailand (Shilan 1). In 2008, Hannaford supermarkets added an international option for the hip replacement surgery where the cost is $10,000 to $15,000, compared to more than $40,000 in the U.S. An employee would pay $2,000 to $3,000 out of pocket for the procedure stateside. If the employee goes to Singapore, he or she has no out of pocket expenses and the company pays up to $10,000 for the airfare and ldging for the patient and a companion (Shilan 2). Healthcare costs forcing Americans to go to foreign countries for procedures, going into bankruptcy, and foregoing preventive care have put America on the course for the universal care. Second, although the perception in America is that our healthcare is the best in the world, the U.S. ranks only 37th in healthcare performance among 191 members of the World Health Organization (Davidson, p. 3). A dismal statistic considering America spends more on healthcare per capita than any other country in the world. Quality healthcare is in doing everything right in the rigt time and way and have the best possible results. (Docteur 1). A recent study finds that 81% of Americans have concerns that the quality of care will diminish if the U.S. adopts the universal healthcare. Americans have come to assume they have the best healthcare in the world, maybe out of ignorance. The United States is not among the top performers in terms of life expectancy, and rank among the lower third of developed countries in the life expectancy at birth (Docteur 3). In addition, in a recent study among 19 countries, the United States had the highest rate of death from conditions that could have bee n prevented or treated successfully. The Canadians, who have had a universal health care system for years also seem to be receiving better quality of care. From 10 studies that included the statistical adjustment and enrolled broad populations, five favored Canada, two favored the United States, and three showed mixed results (Docteur 7). When looking at these studies, it is clear that the United States is not the best provider of the health care in the world, offering another reason for the push towards universal care. Moreover, according to (Patel Rushefsky182) and the findings of a research carried out by Rand Health on the quality of heath care in America, it was established that on overall, adults receive nearly half of the recommended health care. In addition, the findings further postulates that the quality of care across the metropolis was similar. It also points out that the quality of care varied across conditions, as well as across communities in respect for the same condition, for instance, cares for diabetes varied from 39% in Little Rock to 59% in Miami. However, the care for cardiac problems was also inconsistent with 52% in Orange County and Indiana to 70% in Syracuse. The findings further revealed that no single community had the worst or the best health care in relation to chronic conditions, and that all socio-demographic groups were at risk for poor health care since race, financial status, as well as gender makes a negligible difference as far as the receiving recommended healt h care is concerned. This measures the extent in which the quality of health care in America vary, and as such, the need for a universal care will help improve the situation. Finally, the other factor pushing Americca towards the universal care is number of uninsured in America. The Census Bureau reports the number of Americans now at an all-time high of 49.9 million, an increase of 900,000 from 2009 (Pecquet 1). Since 2001, the number of Americans with employer-provided insurance has declined from 179.9 million to 169.2 million, partly from employers no longer offering coverage, but also from employees who could no longer afford the premiums (Kunerth 1). In 2010, in regard to the adult population 16.4% are un-insured, 11.2 % are get insurance from means such as buying their own insurance coverage, 25.3% get health coverage through the government plan, and 45.8% getting the employer-based coverage. However, this percentage has been on a decline, hence increasing the number of uninsured. With the economy not doing well, many families have had to make the decision between the health insurance and food on the table. Those without insurance have been classif ied as either involuntary uninsured or voluntary uninsured. The involuntary uninsured comprises of school dropouts, young, low-income, immigrants, unemployed, as well as those who are single and have no children. These demographics indicate the variation in the health coverage. The number of uninsured in America has been tolling, and research indicates that 1 in 5 adults below the age of 65 and approximately 1 in 10 children are without insurance. As such, individuals without insurance are exposed to more health risks compared to those insured. The gap that exist between those insured and those without insurance in terms of the effective health care access and health care needs have resulted in the needless suffering, illness and even death. In addition, the levels of uninsured in America in 2010 still remains high with 38.9% of Hispanic Americans continuing to be uninsured, whereas 3 out of 10 low-income Americans staying without insurance. On the other hand, 28% of youths below the age of 26 are still without insurance. The high number of u ninsured means that uninsured will be potentially vulnerable and it will add to the collective cost of healthcare that Americans pay. A Center for Disease Control (CDC) report points out the falling economy as one of the contributors to the soaring number of the uninsured. Many people during the economic downturn loss their job, this implies that they also loss the accompanying insurance coverage. The report findings indicates that out of the 68,000 Americans surveyed, more than two-thirds are considered to be in good health, but the number is far much below what it was a decade ago. As such, the need for a healthcare reform is indispensable. Based on the documented studies, the healthcare system of America is on a crisis. Therefore, the necessary action must be taken, and as such, the appropriate action should be through a healthcare reform where all the American citizens will be eligible to health insurance coverage. This will help in reducing the variations that are prevalent in health care needs and access. Buy custom The Healthcare in America essay

What is Pirandello implying in this allegory by having characters in Essay

What is Pirandello implying in this allegory by having characters in search of an author. What does the theater of theater implies - Essay Example It also played on Broadway in New York City in 1922. Six Characters has been classified a satirical tragicomedy, meaning that its purpose was satire, but with elements of both comedy and tragedy. This play, as well as many of Pirandello’s other plays and novels, is also considered a forerunner of Theatre of the Absurd, an important artistic movement of the mid-twentieth century and developed by authors like Samuel Beckett and Edward Albee. There is much Theatre of the Absurd in Six Characters. Pirandello, like many later absurdists, rejected realism in drama and art and substituted it with symbolic representations on stage. According to Pirandello, the characters in Six Characters represented the creative process he went through when creating characters. It is fitting that this play’s setting is the rehearsal of another play, one that just happened to also be written by Pirandello, The Rules of the Game. Setting the setting of a play within another play is a common practice today, but not during Pirandello’s day, when it was unheard of and truly absurd. In an essay Pirandello wrote in 1925, about the process of creating Six Characters in Search of an Author, he said, â€Å"The mystery of artistic creation is the mystery of birth itself† (n.p.). He likened the creation of characters to the experience of giving birth. He rejected realism in theatre and drama, so he imagined that his characters, as a result of his creation of them, were actual living entities. The six characters in this play are physical representations of that concept. Even the Director, who goes about helping the characters find the plot of their play, is confused about the reality of the plot and by the end of the play, is unsure about if what he has experienced really happened. The first audience’s experience seems to have imitated this character’s experience. Of course, for Pirandello,