An Analysis of the Different Economic Bodies and Their Impact in Different Countries in the Book, Why Nations Fail, Written By Doran Acemoglu and James Robinson

An Analysis of the Different Economic Bodies and Their Impact in Different Countries in the Book, Why Nations Fail, Written By Doran Acemoglu and James Robinson Why Nations Fail Why some nations fail while others succeed have become a mysterious question to many. However, in their book named Why Nations Fail, authors Acemoglu and Robinson have finally revealed to their readers what truly causes nations to fail, which are extractive economic institutions that certain governments have. This paper will be exploring the current type of economic institutions in three different nations by using knowledge from the book Why Nations Fail, as well as historical facts to support the given statements. The countries’ economic institutions that will be explored are Venezuela, Mexico, and Haiti. These countries will also be put into comparison with the United States, a country that has inclusive economic institutions. Venezuela has been experiencing an economic decline for a long time. According to the article, â€Å"Venezuela is in its third year of recession and according to the International Monetary Fund, its economy is expected to contract 10% this year† (Gillespie, 2016). The main cause of this recession can be tracked down to the leader of the government in Venezuela, Chavez, who focuses government spending excessively on extractive economic institutions. In the book Why Nations Fail by Acemoglu and Robinson, it’s stated that it’s the economic institutions that are the foundation of economic development which is evident through the fact that economic institutions allow people to trade and build their own businesses comfortably. The topic of economic institutions being the heart of economic growth takes us to the topic of trade. Venezuela, as aforementioned, was a thriving country only a decade ago. This was mainly due to Venezuela being an oil-rich country. The point of trade is for the countries to specialize in whatever they’re doing best and export that while importing what they lack in. The problem with Venezuela was although they were successfully specializing in producing oil, they weren’t really producing anything else or importing any goods from other countries. Additionally, Venezuela wasn’t exporting any of the tremendous amount of oil it’s producing. Through the article, one can discover that Venezuela’s main oil company, which is run by the government, is the main reason why any of these exports or imports aren’t taking place. This again is evidence how extractive economic institutions can ruin a nation. Because of the economic recession and the lack of trade in Venezuela, inflation has become a tangible problem. Prices are soaring high, and Venezuela has a staggering increase in inflation in 2016 with a 475% (Gillespie, 2016). Not only are prices high, but producers aren’t able to produce because of the lack of trade. This ultimately results in food shortages and suffering citizens. While the citizens of United States can freely go into any Publix or Winn Dixie and shop at their leisure, the citizens of Venezuela wait in long lines outside of super markets only to find out that the last bottle of milk had already been bought 2 hours ago. The food shortages are causing the mortality rates of Venezuela to go up, with more and more children and elderly being malnourished. Mexico is the second country that is under the exploration of economic institutions. As explained in Why Nations Fail, the reason that Mexico currently has extractive economic institutions is because it’s a country founded up on extractive economic institutions. Historical facts and how a country began its government have a lot to do with its current economic institutions. For example, the reason Mexico is the way it is has to do with how Spanish conquistadors invaded that region and discovered large amounts of gold. Realizing the gold’s worth and seeing how it can be useful to them, they used the region’s natives, forcefully, to mine more gold and silver for them so they can be better off. There an extractive economic institution was created; the Spanish conquistadors were extracting the native’s wealth from them by using the native’ labor to make themselves better off. Even right now Mexico has many extractive institutions. For example, in the 2013 article, Why Nations Fail What Can be Done by David Sasaki, it speaks of how the infamous telecommunications monopolist of Mexico, Carlos Slim, have cost Mexico $129 billion (Sasaki, 2013). Although Mexico has one of the slowest and most costly internet speeds, they â€Å"lose $130 billion and Carlos Slim personally gains $80 billion† (Sasaki, 2013). Carlos Slim’s actions are the epitome of extractive economic institutions, and it because of people like Chavez and Slim and the Spanish conquistadors that are the ones who make sure that extractive economic institutions will continue on. As can be seen, the root of why nations fail lies within their economic institutions. Nations that are successful have mainly inclusive economic institutions. China, a country with extractive economic institutions had a horrible economy only until recently ago. The only reason their economy improved is because they decided to accept technology and trade with foreign countries, instead of pushing them away and secluding themselves. However, China still does have extractive economic institutions, and if other countries don’t wish to trade with them anymore, their economy will return to where it started. As can be seen with Venezuela, Haiti, and Mexico, extractive economic institutions take away from the general public to help the elite. These type of institutions aren’t only bad for the nation, but are immoral and unethical as it leaves people in a chaotic turmoil.

The New Deal for 18-24 year olds (New labour deal) Essay

The New Deal for 18-24 year olds (New labour deal) - Essay Example It offers help for 18-24 year olds who have been unemployed for about six months. Its ultimate aim is to reduce employment by helping young people to get jobs and assist them in many other possible ways. Everyone on New Deal gets a personal adviser who is his or her point of contact throughout the programme. The personal adviser is appointed to understand you, let you share your experiences, interests and goals. The idea is to get you into a suitable job. Its aim is to meet your needs of finding and keeping a job, or becoming self-employed. New Deal for Young People gives you a chance to take the skills and experience you may have already and polish them to create better opportunities for work. New Deal help people with job search, skills acquisition, work experience, and so on. The main aim for the deal was to reduce the unemployment outflow rates, and how far it has succeeded in this aim will remain dependent on the facts and figure to decide. According to the research by (Anderton bob, Riley Rebecca and Young Garry, 1999) 1. While unemployment was lower in the first half of 1998 than it had been in the first half of 1996 for all age and duration categories, it had fallen by more in the pathfinder than the comparison areas. The largest relative decline was for 18-24year olds who had been unemployed for more than 6 months (the target group). ... 2. Outflows from unemployment in the pathfinder areas relative to the comparison areas clearly rose for the target group. There is also evidence of a rise in relative outflows of older long term unemployed. 3. Outflow rates from unemployment were generally higher in the first half of 1998 compared to the first half of 1996. The outflow rates of the target group rose substantially in the pathfinder areas. 4. While outflow rates were generally higher in the first half of 1998 than two years earlier, the increase was more marked in the pathfinder areas for virtually all age and duration categories. 5. Inflows to unemployment were generally lower in the first half of 1998 compared to the first half of 1996. This pattern was common to both the pathfinder and comparison areas. Another briefing (Briefing document, May 2004) argues that the New Deal has, overall, been successful. It discuss that however there have been some successes but that was in some part of the country. It mainly focuses on some major groups, more particularly the black ethnic groups has gain less from the new deal than any one else. It states that Britain has the problem of racial inequality in employment. "Black and minority ethnic people are more than twice as likely to be unemployed as white British people. There is a gap of nearly 17 percentage points in employment rates." Says the report. According to (tutor2u) Data on New Deal, participants published in the autumn of 2000 showed that up to the end of July 2000, over 518,000 people had passed through the New Deal scheme, 402,000 have left leaving 116,000 currently on the programme. 237,040 young people had entered employment. Of which 180,600 were in sustained jobs, and 56,440 in jobs lasting less than 13 weeks. 79,000

Aspects of contracts and negligence Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Aspects of contracts and negligence - Assignment Example The offer must be addressed to a specific person or group of persons hence invitation to treat cannot be considered as an offer. It must then be accepted or rejected by another party. If it is accepted then a contract is made. In Gibson v Manchester City Council - CA [1978] 1 WLR 520, Manchester City council was being managed by Conservative Party which worked with a policy of selling city council’s premises. Gibson made an application for information of his house and terms of mortgage on the council’s form (McKendrick, 2005; p. 47). The council replied by stating that it was prepared to sell the house at a purchase price of  £2,725 less 20% =  £2,180 which was not to be taken as an offer. Gibson filed in the application form with the exception of the purchase price and took it back to the council. The labor party took over and stopped all the sales where Gibson was informed that he could not complete the contract. Gibson sued the council on claims that the contract was already executable. It was ruled by the House of Lords there existed no contract because the parties had not come to a material agreement of the contract. For a valid contract to be executed, the offer must be accepted by the other party. The acceptance must be conveyed to the offeree, the agreement must be assured and the terms of accepting the offer must be precisely the same to the terms contained in the offer. In Entores v Miles Far East [1955] 2 QB 327  the plaintiff delivered a telex message from England promising to buy 100 tons of Cathodes from Miles Far East in Holland. A telex message was sent back to the petitioner from Holland to England accepting the terms of the offer (McKendrick, 2005; p. 51). The issue was for the court to determine the point at which the contract was executable. In case the acceptance was valid from the time the telex message was delivered the contract was created in Holland hence