Due to the archaeologists failing to see the real problem with both the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Great Planes Expanse, the US government is already budding heads with the Native Americans, which could lead to future problems with them. The roads that are built to boost the economy not only help today’s society, but they run through Native American land which was promised to them and is not supposed to be touched by the US
However, many contracts between the general contractor and sub contractors include a payment clause that conditions the payment to a subcontractor upon payment to the general contractor by the owner. This trend tends to trickle down from general contractor to subcontractor and from subcontractor to sub-subcontractor (Enforcing Conditional Payment Clauses). Some courts have found that these clauses violate state lien statutes and public policy. In any case, it is important that subcontractors determine before signing a contract whether or not there is a pay-when-paid or a paid-if-paid clause in order to avoid any surprises. Especially since the surprise could come at the end of a job and once work has been completed.
It started off as a way to advance science and help society but the greed of money took over. So because there is no regulations or policies people will do what they must to make a profit. Like in the example above knowing the donor had a disease but selling the tissue anyway. There are now regulations for tissue donations but not for the human remains business as a whole. Once regulations are put in place they need to be enforced and organizations need to be audited to make sure they are within compliance.
Given the two possible ways in which Ventria could stay in California, I believe the company should leave the State. Activists, farmers and millers have a great power in terms of convincing the regulatory agencies and the population’s mind. Farmers and millers do not want competition in a market they already have the control, specially if the new product brings more benefits to the consumers. Activists will bring down Ventria’s reputation to the public and protest for the rejection of the protocol. Fighting against this three groups does not worth the time and money that would be spent.
They also believe that mandatory voting would make people choose random candidate in order to just do their duty and not get fines or other punishments, but that’s not true because people had already gone to choose so they will take their time because they are already there. They also argue that quality rather quantity is prefered to achieve successful election and strong government, however, having large numbers of people will show exactly the amount of support for that candidate and the one that they choose to run their country in the future and lead them to better country. Voting doesn’t need the political knowledge, and everyone can choose the right person without having any idea about politics. When government forces the people to vote that means it’s so important for the country, and they don’t just do it for no reason. Mandatory voting is a huge change maker, it affects the country in many ways; socially,politically and economically.
Statistics are known to be biased, and his statistics are picked to justify and push this theory. Pinker doesn’t consider that his American perspective and our way of life colors his beliefs. He doesn’t mention the possibility of massive destruction of humanity in a way there could never have happened before the invention of nuclear weapons. He feels our sense of responsibility for democratizing and civilizing the world influences our ability to have empathy and compassion, become less selfish and vengeful and therefore violence has declined dramatically. People have experienced a broadening sense of community, global interdependence and our global society.
I do not think that we should increase border patrol because people that need to get out of another country because of say war, or poverty. For them to be safe, they can come to the United States and start a brand new life and not have to worry about their home being destroyed from bombings. I believe that we are too harsh about security in the first place. There is no need to build a wall or a fence because there are less expensive and intrusive ways to restrict access such methods as virtual walls using sophisticated monitoring or employment restrictions. There are many good things that come from not increasing border security.
Rearing Petrochek patent, although Seltek would like to sell it along with the plant as a full offering package, it was not valuable for us at all. Petrochek was just used to solve water pollution problem and was not related to our business. Besides, our top management team also did not want to buy Petrochek patent. Therefore, we did not intend to buy it unless they offered a appealing price, for example, half of market price. Then we might buy it and sell at the market price afterwards to obtain an additional
The primary obstacle in the way of creating a genuine utopia for the inhabitants of that universe is violent conflict (but then there wouldn’t be too many episodes to air). If they manage to achieve peace and harmony, then the Star Trek universe would offer a truly utopic environment for most people. However, if utopia is judged as an ideal society for all its citizens, then Star Trek would still fall short. This is due to individuals like Offenhouse who are not content with having enough or more than enough and aspire for more. This craving is inherent in Offenhouse; his desire for money and power is actually a game for him, not a means to an end but rather the end itself.
Instead of creating a change I also leave point the fault to corporations and I hope for great changes which must be created by organizations or led the responsibility to the government. I considered that we as citizens are not working enough to make our environment better. As how Pollan mentioned, what bother? When miles away from us there is people creating a massive amount of pollution, double that the one that I 'm trying to avoid. But why we should care about them, when if we want to make a huge change we should
This is a huge problem to because it allows the government to determine what is worthy of the news. For instance, let’s say the government made a bad trade deal but did not want the people to hear about it. This could cause the government to leave out facts or alter information causing the people of the country to be misinformed. In America, we are given an immense amount of opportunity to discover and share news-no matter one’s opinion or subject matter, but in several other countries they do not share these ideals of