In The United States Economy Most Markets Can Be Classified Essays

In the United States economy most markets can be classified into four different markets structures. But, each and every market in the United States is completely unique from the others. Generally the best type of market structure for the general public is per-fect competition because it creates the lowest possible price for the public. There are some exceptions were perfect competition isnt the best choice for the public on account of various reasons. The United States Postal Service is one of them and since the Postal Service is a monopoly, it is its own market. This paper will discuss the budget dilemmas that the postal service has faced for the past twenty years and if it is in the best interest of the economy for the United States Postal Service to continue as a monopoly. The first time there was talk of privatizing the Postal Service was in 1979 when the Postal Service was losing vast amounts of money in the long run. But since the Postal Service is a necessity for America, the government had to subsidize the service in order for it to continue in operation. In 1979 the United States Postal Service had a cash flow of $22.5 Billion and was additionally receiving $176 million from investing(#1, Intro). Even with this added revenue the Postal Service was still greatly under funded on its own (#1, Intro). During this time it was discussed to privatize the postal service and introduce competition because of the extreme losses that the service was experiencing. A positive argument for privatizing the Postal Service was with numerous competitors in the market there would be more efficiency and the public would receive lower prices. But this would also increase the usage of resources, for example airplanes and cars. One of the problems the Post Office had was its receipts from consumer purchases that were submitted the next day after the transaction (#1, i). If the receipts were submitted earlier the postal service would receive more money because they could invest that money sooner (#1, i). Another way the Postal Service could increased profits was by competitively selecting banks that would give them higher interest rates and such (#1, ii). Probably the most relevant and final way to improve the budget of the Postal Service is to improve the bookkeeping poli-cies and banking techniques (#1, ii). Not only did the Post Service propose to increase profits but they also proposed to cut costs in a number of ways. There were three methods that were proposed in 1946 for the protection of salaries that no longer exists (#2, Intro). These have to do with the rural mail carriers. Under this antiquated method of delivering mail the Postal Service was los-ing money to any mail that went to "rural" areas (#2, i) There are 48,000 mail carriers that deliver mail to millions of families that are considered to be living in rural settings; this costs the postal Service 858 million dollars a year (#2, i). This is a fairly easy problem to fix considering how much money is being lost. It was proposed that money loss could be significantly cut down if the Postal Service corrected the following problems. The rural mail carriers were assigned a certain amount of time to deliver to a specific rural area, this method was out of date and because of this the carriers have free time for which they got paid for (#2, ii). The next problem was that other mail routes based pay on how many miles the route covered, so the carriers were getting paid by the mile (#2, iii). With this problem fixed the Postal Service could saved 26.8 million a year (#2, iii). There was also an hourly rate that was in effect which indirectly promoted inefficient service (#2, iii). A stop to this could have saved the Postal Service $255,000 a year (#2, iii). From the num-bers mentioned above, it can be seen why the United States Postal Service was losing so much money. These problems did indeed eventually did get solved over the past fifteen years and now the Postal Service is making record breaking profits. Now in the first quarter of the fiscal year 1996 the Postal Service already has a net income of $1.2 billion (#3, 1). Now not only is the Postal Service just breaking even, but they are also making a profit. On top of that, the 1.2 billion dollar figure is 115 billion dollars better then the quarterly forecast predicted (#3,1). It is incredible that they are not only making a reasonable profit but it is increasing

Athens Put Socrates and Philosophy on Trial

Athens Put Socrates and Philosophy on Trial Introduction Philosophy is an ancient field of study that entails systematic study of knowledge, nature, existence, reality, mind, and reason through logical and rational arguments. Philosophers use logical and rational arguments when explaining their perception of life and their existence. For centuries, humans have been accumulating knowledge about their existence in a bid to understand the nature of life.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Athens Put Socrates and Philosophy on Trial specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In Athens, Socrates was the most prominent philosopher who examined the lives of Athenians and found that they were groping in the darkness of ignorance since they did not understand their existence. Thus, Socrates argued that ‘unexamined life is not worth living’ after observing the how the Athenians lived. As he tried to enlighten the people, Athenians leaders observed that Socrates was spoi ling the minds of the youths, and thus guilty of using his philosophies inappropriately. Hence, this essay argues that Athenian leaders put Socrates and his philosophy on trial, for they did not like to examine and assess their lives using philosophy. Unexamined Life Socrates was an Athenian philosopher who made a significant contribution to the development of the Western philosophy. Although Socrates was one of the wisest men in Athens, he considered himself as ignorant. He argued that gaining wisdom only begins when one understands own ignorance as it forms the basis of knowledge. During his life, Socrates observed that Athenians lived miserable lives since they could not understand the essence of life. Thus, Socrates decided to examine the lives of the Athenians and teach the youths on how to attain better lives as he envisioned. According to Socrates, ‘unexamined life is not worth living’ because people are groping in the dark, and thus unable to attain real meaning of life or live worthy lives. Therefore, Socrates talked to Athenians while examining their lives and teaching youths on how to gain wisdom and live worthy lives. Socrates used the Allegory of the Cave to describe how Athenians are groping in the darkness without hope of attaining real meaning of life. In the allegory, Socrates argues that Athenians are seeing illusions in life and taking them as reality, just as prisoners in the cave assumed that shadows are real people walking across the wall.Advertising Looking for essay on philosophy? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The prisoners in the cave have accustomed to the shadows until they could not differentiate reality and illusions. In this view, Socrates asserts that philosophers like him are among people who have come out of the cave and are able to differentiate reality and illusions. Hence, the work of Socrates was to enlighten the Athenians so that they can tra nsform their understanding of life from cave illusions to the reality in the world. Although Socrates tried to enlighten the youths, Athenian leaders had a different perception. The Athenian leaders perceived that Socrates was spoiling the minds of the youths with philosophical doctrines that are against laws and regulations of the Athenian empire. In essence, what Socrates did was to examine the lives of the Athenians in a bid to enhance their understanding of life and resolution of issues affecting their lives. Despite Socrates’ important role in enlightening the youth, the Athenian leaders charged Socrates and dismissed his philosophy as destructive. In response, Socrates protested that the jury did set the penalty very high that he could not afford to pay, and thus putting him and his philosophy on trial. Despite his plea and protest, the jury still sentenced Socrates to death. In the course of examining the lives of the Athenians, Socrates also questioned the existence o f the piety. Socrates analyzed Euthyphro concept and asserted that the gods love pious things and hate impious things. In his argument about piety, Socrates came up with the Euthyphro dilemma since he wondered whether the gods loves pious things or the gods make things pious by loving them. Socrates believed that things are pious on their own and independent of the gods. Hence, piety is an inherent attribute of things and not gods. The Euthyphro dilemma attracted massive criticisms from Athenians because it touched on a sensitive matter about the Athenian gods and their deity roles. If god cannot make anything pious, it means they have no ability to transform the lives of people from impiety to piety. Such dilemma made the Athenians charge Socrates for introducing new doctrines that are against their gods. Hence, Athenians accused Socrates of introducing foreign gods while relegating Athenian gods. Conclusion Socrates was a noble philosopher who examined the lives of the Athenians a nd realized that they were ignorant about life. According his assessment, Socrates argued that ‘unexamined life is not worth living’ because people grope while searching for the real meaning of life.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Athens Put Socrates and Philosophy on Trial specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Despite the fact that Socrates examined the lives of youths and taught them, Athenian leaders accused him of corrupting their minds while introducing foreign gods. Eventually, the jury sentenced Socrates to death for alleged destructive teachings and impious philosophy. Thus, the Athenians put Socrates and his philosophy on trial when they sentenced him to death and rejected his philosophy as destructive.