general-edu-and-assignments

Microeconomics

Wed, 01 May 2013 04:32:37 +0100

Business 1050

Wed, 01 May 2013 04:17:04 +0100

Bjorklund, Michael

S00589106

4/30/13

Bus-1050-002

E-portfolio on ASSIGNMENT # 33 “The Greening of Corporate America”

Greening America has been a heavy and important political topic over the past few years. Harvey Meyer, the author of this section is a writer, other than that there is little to be found on who he is. Searching only there are other Harvey Meyer professors, business men, journalists, without his full name it is hard to know which Meyer he is. Leaving his name and reputation aside, the article and facts he addresses have sound evidence allowing any reader to give credence to his writing.

His aim in writing this article is to promote smart “green” goals for companies. The text explains how many companies are starting to focus more on green energy and alternative ways to save energy costs. Examples included are recycling, using different types of light bulbs, refurbishing older products extending their life. The article also explains how the companies that find efficient ways to reduce energy usually save money through reduced power bills, labor costs, more efficient labor, and happier working conditions. There is a warning, however, that companies who create an inefficient “green” plan can end up paralyzing themselves financially.

This article was written in 2000 during a time where companies are facing more public awareness and government influence on them, helping to influence them to go green. This was written in the U.S. and is relevant to business because now days there is a heavy influence and demand to go green. If a company is damaging the environment maliciously they will be branded destroyers and will most likely lose profit and/or will lose public approval. There are also many incentives for companies to go green, both in government grants and marketing campaigns. Personally I didn’t know Xerox went to such lengths to reuse and recycle old printers. It makes me feel more secure and safe with the knowledge that I just bought a Xerox printer. I can see why going green can make a company look responsible and reputable.

The phrase “Greening” means that a company, organization, etc… is looking for ways to reduce waste, conserve energy, and protect the environment. It is an important and positive move. Here are a few companies that have failed to keep up on protecting the environment and society and by so doing have cost the lives of innocent people. Love-Canal, New York is a 36 square blocks of land where Hooker Chemical buried 21000 tons of toxic waste. It was sold to Niagara Falls School Board for $1, expressing all the details about the waste buried there. The city being pushed to provide more places of education built schools and neighborhoods on top of where the waist was buried. During a rain storm the toxic waste eventually became exposed. These toxic chemicals came in contact with many children and homes in the area.

Another example was in Bhopal India Plant owned by Union Carbide. There was a gas leak of methyl isocyanate gas and other chemicals that spread through local towns exposing over 500,000 people to this deadly gas, killing 3,787 people and injuring hundreds of thousands more with injuries ranging from permanent damage to minor injuries. The last example used is Three Mile Island were a partial nuclear meltdown of reactors in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania released small amounts of radioactive gases and radioactive iodine into the environment. This could have been a potentially catastrophic disaster if it had completely melted down. Luckily for the people of Pennsylvania this was contained.

These disasters make people think what is the true cost of business? Is it just profits? There are many costs to doing business: social, financial, ecological, and political. All that added together would be the true cost of business. Trying to calculate the true cost of business including environment, the dependence effect, and human alienation is almost impossible. I don’t believe it is possible to calculate the cost of business mainly because social costs can’t be measured. If the cost are that high than the value of profit would be small if everyone knew the true cost in a company. This is why going green helps to give back to society and protect it.

Not all “green” can be good. Business can still have a green attitude even if they don’t know all the negative effects of their company. Just as a business can have a green attitude even if they don’t understand the positive outcomes of their actions. A green attitude means they are making efforts to become environmentally friendly. This doesn’t guaranty they are perfect in their methods of reaching a green standard. In the end it comes down to corporate decision if they join in or not.

The Corporate environmental consciousness is how the management feels towards its environmental goals. Whether corporate sees them as important and essential providing for growth, or sees going green as a hindrance and a roadblock. Finally, the benefits of corporations going green are that they take responsibility for society; there is more efficient ways to production becoming more efficient with resources. They use less energy, they save money, and create a positive reputation with society.

“TEN NEW VOCABULARY WORDS”

1. Palpable: Able to be touched or felt.

2. Zeal: Great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or an objective.

3. Epiphany: A usually sudden manifestation or perception of the essential nature or meaning of something.

4. Lackluster: Lacking in vitality, force, or conviction; uninspired.

5. Lauded: Praise highly, esp. in a public context.

6. Vociferously: Crying out noisily; clamorous.

7. Recalcitrance: Having an obstinately uncooperative attitude toward authority.

8. Audacious: Showing a willingness to take bold risks.

9. Mediocre: Of only moderate quality; not very good.

10. Proxy: A person authorized to act on behalf of another.

Lifelong Wellness Application Paper

Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:08:36 +0100

Michael Bjorklund

Hlac--1145--007

4/27/2013

Name

Course Prefix –Number--Section

Date

Lifelong Wellness Application Paper

Write a paragraph on each of the following:

1. What did you learn about “lifelong wellness” from taking this General Education class?

By taking this bowling class, I have learned to enjoy a simple sport that I can practice my entire life. Lifelong wellness isn't just lifting weights and going to the gym, but being involved in many social physical activities. This class has been an amazing opportunities to learn the fundamentals of bowling and the possibilities that come with the knowledge of how to play this sport.

2. How would you apply this information to your life?

I plan on bowling the rest of my life. Before this class I was happy if i broke 100 points (300 are possible) and now I'm able to get around and over 200, which is hard and rewarding. I know I can bowl when I'm older, with my wife, and hopefully with a group of friends.

3. What is your intention to continue to practice what you have learned in your life and why?

I plan to keep up on my bowling. I hope to get out once a month if not more. I now see bowling in a much different light, I used to think it didn’t take much skill, but now I have learned that there are many techniques used to roll the ball. I plan to keep trying to improve my skills at bowling.

4. General ideas for improving this course?

The only idea I have that would be interesting to me is to learn about how bowling alleys work. Dan has been a great instructor and i have learned about the history and difference of bowling balls, and many other cool fax, along with personal instruction. Also one other part that could be fun is to have team competitions in the class for those who want to.

Math 1050 Review and Paper

Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:02:34 +0100

Michael Bjorklund

Math-1050 Project Review

At the end of this project I have written a review. I just think this was a great way to be able to put math to practice and see how it works with real problems.

Writing 2010

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 01:37:28 +0100

Michael Bjorklund

Writing 2010 Review

The topic of my large essay was how I saw the future. In this paper i was able to explain how man has basic instincts and a natural tendency to be aggressive. That war is an invention of man, and that we are able to change our destiny. Having to pick a topic and then choose your position is great practice for the real world. There will be times when you have to defend your company or defend a position and it helps to be able to learn how to research both positions and state facts to prove your side.

Michael Bjorklund

Large Essay

3^rd portfolio

Page 718, Predictions: what will the future be like?

Question 2

War, it has been present since man itself. Millions of human lives have been eliminated and destroyed from off the face of this planet. Billions more have been affected and influenced by these dramatic events. It is hard to prophecy the events that will take place in the future. I don’t know if wars will continue to pledge and terrorize man. I do feel that in my life I will continue to witness as war ravages this beautiful planet. Many authors have argued that war is biologically part of the human nature such as David Livingstone Smith’s The Most Dangerous Animal or Richard Wrangham and Dale Peterson’s Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence. One of the counter arguments I read was that of Margaret Mead’s Warfare is only an Invention—Not a Biological Necessity, where she stats that warfare is only an invention, it can be replaced by another invention. Yes, Warfare in and of itself is invented by man for purposes unique to each group and can be changed; however, it is human nature to be aggressive and protect ones family group from danger or destruction giving themselves the best chance for survival.

What elements of human nature have united to change our species into one of the only species in the world that purposely kills off mass numbers of our own kind? Also what is Warfare and how has it been invented, built upon, and modified for each period of time? Is it possible to truly change our warlike disposition or are we doomed to repeat ourselves again and again?

There are a few human traits that we all have and help us find happiness and comfort. If combined with a few wrong traits or provoked in certain way, these traits can end up being the cause of much death and suffering. One trait we look for the comfort of those who act look and believe as we do. We want to be surrounded by those who are like us. This however can be a problem if two conflicting groups come together. A few examples are Communism and Democracy, Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. All of which are different groups of people, most of which are peaceful among themselves but next to each other tend to be hostile and aggressive.

“Society has three major biases. First is that we are bias to those who are similar to us, second is that we care less about people we don’t directly come into contact with… Third is our bias towards those we are related to. If you have to choose between rescuing your two children or two strangers from a burning building, you’ll leave the strangers to burn... rescuing the two children.”[1] These biases towards others and for ourselves allow us to be able to lie to ourselves and justify actions against those who are different. If we can succeed in lying to ourselves, we can be capable of creating both psychological and physical distances from those not like us.[2] If as a society we can turn those who are different from us into objects and animals making them not human and/or evil, it makes it much easier to kill them. Examples, you wouldn’t kill one hundred men who all have wives and children at home and are just looking to live another day in peace. You might however kill one hundred men who are Nazis in charge of a holocaust camp or one hundred terrorists that have just attacked a city or village?

Humans have the ability to reason, justify, take revenge, or give mercy. We are thinking, feeling, and pondering creatures. It is not a fact that we will automatically kill someone because they are different. The examples above are just a few of many different factors that have led to the invention of war and its justification. There are those who want power and those who will oppose them, both will be able to justify war, making it almost impossible to uninvent war.

War is started by so many different factors. That is why there are so many different opinions as to if we are inherently warlike. What might help us to understand why this happens is to focus less on how man is warlike and more on man’s aggressive nature. In Demonic males we can see an idea that “another big gun, firing at distant trenches, booming the message that human violence today is simple fallout from a male temperament shaped by evolution to compete for the domination of females.”[3] Maybe our aggressiveness comes as a result to show how strong and powerful we are to the opposite sex. This is not proof that war is inherent, like lions, tiger, bears, birds, goats and other animals, we as humans still compete aggressively for the opposite sex and don’t wage war over them.

Richard Wrangham states, “Like it or not, war is distinctively human.”^2[4]If war was distinctively human and a natural part of our genetic makeup then the most primitive men should be the most warlike and the more civilized nations should be the least warlike.⁴ This however is the opposite of what we find. Many small primitive tribes can be aggressive, but not warlike, most are peaceful. It’s only the civilized and industrialized nations that truly engage in war and look for ways to maintain their might.

Many humans have a natural aggressive side to them, but not all. War for that matter is the same. Most people would get rid of war and would rather not participate in it. In the beginning there were probably little fights over hunting grounds or plots of land to farm. Over time when populations grew, when greed and lust came into the picture, people wanted other’s land. When the natural resources of the land became more and more crucial for survival of one’s tribe, nation, society, social group, war would have been invented to gain the supplies they needed. The fact that most people would start building defensive structures to protect them, better weapons to kill others quicker, tools to breach towers, and arms to conquer cities only prove that war is an invention. War was made by man, for the gain of one’s self.

As John Paul Scott, professor emeritus at Bowling Green State University, has written: “All of our present data indicate that fighting behavior among higher mammals, including man, originates in external stimulations and that there is no evidence of spontaneous internal stimulation.”[5] This states that there has to be something else that causes war rather than people being born with the desire to kill. An example I remember is waking up on the morning of September 11, 2001. I walked into the kitchen and witnessed my mother with tears streaming down her face. Her focus was riveted on the TV, as I got close I saw a tall building with a plume of smoke billowing from its side. This was my first experience to terrorism. I was just a fifth grader; I had never actual witnessed warlike destruction in my country. For many people in the United States, this hit too close to home and they demanded war for revenge of so many innocent dead. Was this a justified reason for war? Only time will tell. This does show however that an act by one party can cause people that are normally socially polite, behaved, and good neighbors to change into a different kind of animal, wanting justice and revenge to be dealt on those responsible for the attack.

Margaret Mead stated in her essay that war is like marriage. It is an invention and has been turned into a custom accepted by most of the world; only to be changed or replaced if society invents a different custom that can persuade man that war isn’t necessary. She even goes as far as to say “In many parts of the world, war is a game in which the individual can win counters—counters which bring him prestige in the eyes of his own sex or of the opposite sex.”[6]

In the past years our world has become more and more polarized. We see this in politics, we find it between cultures, and we encounter this in the basic beliefs of everyday people. The world is more and more uneasy economically still recovering from a major recession. There is more and more unrest in the Middle East, Israel is threatening to wage war if it continues to be bombed and if Iran doesn’t stop its nuclear race. Everywhere in the globe there are seeds of aggression and war. War is one of man’s most constant inventions that have been with us from the beginning.

Believing that there future will continue to experience war, there is much hope for our time. Never before have we been so in tune with the world. Not once before in the history of man could you hold a conversation with someone on the other side of the world in seconds and see them on a computer or TV screen. We have never had nations that have been so racially culturally and economically mixed. This is a world where more and more nations are democratic and have left behind the bonds of monarchies and dictatorships.

Like Mead I don’t know how or what will replace war. I do think that there is hope that through greater communication will bring a more unified world. This will increase more tolerance throughout more nations and we will see a world that is united in a search for better understanding, focusing less on ancient resentments, forgiving, and moving forward as a united human race.

[1] Smith, David Livingstone. The Most Dangerous Animal. Review by <http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/10/why-war-most-dangerous-animal-by-david.php>

[2] Smith, David Livingstone.

[3] Wrangham, Richard and Peterson, Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence. Houghtom Mifflin 1996, pp 352, evaluation by Philip J. Regal, Professor, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, <http://www.tc.umn.edu/~regal001/demonic.htm>

[4] Wrangham, Richard and Peterson. Pp 350

[5] Kohn, Alfie. “Are Humans Innately Aggressive?”. Psychology Today, June 1988, <http://www.alfiekohn.org/miscellaneous/aggression.htm>

[6] Mead, Margaret. “Warfare Is Only an Invention—Not a Biological Necessity” Inquiry Questioning, Reading, Writing, Second Edition by Bloom, White, Borrowman, Page 654.

Biology Review and Paper

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 01:37:37 +0100

Michael Bjorklund,

Biology review

Human Biology, BIOL-1090

This paper on systems of the body gave me a chance to explore in more depth an illness I had. Before this I had an idea of how the appendix worked and different procedures used in surgery, but now I have been able to understand much more. The body is such a fascinating object, it is so complex and works so well. what a great opportunity this class has been to learn about this wonderful gift we all have.

Michael Bjorklund

System of the body, Digestive system, Appendix

Many people have heard of the appendix actually never know what it is, what it’s used for, and how we need to be aware if it ever becomes infected. I had probably heard of it once before I was diagnosed with appendicitis. This little organ in the digestive system of the human body can be the source of great pain and even death.¹ There are many parts to the appendix; the focus of the essay will be to give a basic overview of the appendix, my experience with appendicitis and appendicitis its causes and appendectomy, or how the appendix is removed.

The human appendix is located where the small intestine meets the large intestine. During this stage of the digestive process food enters the large intestine and moves up it, the extra water is extracted and feces are formed. The problem here is the appendix is located at the bottom of the entrance into the large intestine. Here it is prone to particles of food, bacteria, feces, and other irritants to fall into it leading to infection.² Animals however, use the appendix as another source to introduce vial into the intestines allowing for further digestions to take place and for the animal to extract more nutrients from its meal.

Scientist still don’t know what use it has for the human body, we do know however, that these little finger like pouch can lead to the death of someone very quickly. I remember six years ago on father’s day night. I had just been eating a wonderful Sunday meal and I started to fill nauseous, thinking I had the flu or food poisoning I went and laid down, it wasn’t long till I felt extremely sharp pain in my abdomen. I couldn’t find a position to be comforted. My dad took me to the Emergency Room and I was operated on a few hours later. The doctor explained to me that if I had not had my appendix removed within an hour or two more, it would have burst and infected my entire digestive system, plus neighboring organs.

When the Appendix becomes infected there is nothing you can do but operate on it. If you do not operate quickly enough it will enflame enough till it literally erupts. This eruption makes the infection spread to other organs and infect them causing your lower abdominal organs to fail. If this isn’t treated within a few days it will be fatal. The operation with today’s technology is much more efficient and quick. There are two ways to remove the appendix. One is the Open Method. In this method, a two to three inch incision is mad in the lower right hand side of the abdomen. The surgeon locates the appendix and removes it through the incision. The second is Laparoscopic Method. This procedure uses several small incisions and three or more laparoscopes- small thin tubes with video cameras attached- to visualize the inside of the abdomen during the operation. The surgeon performs the surgery while looking at a TV Monitor. The appendix is removed through one of the inscisions.³

The human appendix has become an organ that our bodies don’t really need to survive. If we fail to protect this organ and it becomes infected we will die. All people should be taught the basics about the appendix so that if they end up as I did they will know to get to the hospital and not try to tough it at home, hoping that it will get better. The body is a complex instrument and should be cared for and studied so that we can prevent future problems or catch them as before they get out of hand.

Sources

1. MedlinePlus, A service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine NIH National Institutes of Health, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/appendicitis.html

2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Digestive Diseases Information Clearinghouse (NDDIC), Appendicitis, http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/appendicitis/

3. John Hopkins Medicine, Health Library, Appendectomy, http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/healthlibrary/test_procedures/gastroenterology/appendectomy_92,P07686/

Public Speaking review and paper

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 01:37:45 +0100

Michael Bjorklund

COMM-1020 Review

This was such a fun project. writing and giving speeches is entertaining and thought provoking. Having the chance to research topics give you new insights to how much work goes behind any type of speech. Also it is a challenge to write a speech that covers Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. This project here I was able to Roast the teacher and tease him. I thoroughly enjoyed it and would take this class again.

Michael Bjorklund

Special occasion speech

My fellow classmate, my brothers and sister, the hour of your redemption has arrived. Do I hear a halleluiah? Now what would this class be like without our Reverent Professor Roger C. Johnson? Could you ever imagine any other professor teaching our class with such supreme eloquence as our dear Professor Roger? I ask you now to ~~show~~ express your support in honoring this man.

This is to that man whose keen ability to pronounce Anglican and European names leads to his inability to pronounce the names of these our wonderful Chinese friends, YOU CHOW and… ~~you~~ well we can’t pronounce your name.

This is to that man who, like Moses of old, ~~directs~~ instills in us, his chosen people, ~~by inscribing on Microsoft word, with his saintly hand~~, the Ten Commandments of speech outlines. By his finger he wrote them, and with his understanding and ~~recollection~~ divine insight of “A Pocket Guide to Public Speaking” has unlocked the knowledge of good and evil discourse delivery.

This is to that man who presents us with the temptation to leave his class with a “B” and never need to return. We, as a class, have endured and will resisted this enticement knowing that if we stay strong with indestructible conviction to see this course ~~out to the end~~ through, the blessing will come.

This is to that man who ~~claimed~~ claims his words ~~had~~ have no bite, knowing that most of us ~~hadn’t~~ haven’t read the assigned reading.

This is to that man who emails you the night before reminding you what is due, acting as a guide through the jungles of scholarly life.

This is to that man who holds the fate of our grades in the palm his hand, knowing that with such great power, comes great responsibility.

~~This is to that man who through his outline, enlightened my mind with the dews of salvation by presenting me with the vision of how to turn a good speech into a great speech.~~

This is to that man who warns us with the plainest language of the human tongue that we shouldn’t expect him to have mercy on us. When our paper is due, it’s due and one must accept the consequence.

This is to that man who is fair as fair can be and not only in looks, but as fair in grading our projects as lady justice is blind.

This is to that man who looks after us, nurtures us with sweet advice, and allows us to speak ~~with power~~ the thoughts of our heart… as long as we are not found on “the loser side of the room”. He truly worries about the intelligence of some of us.

Tell me and tell me true, does he not deserve our admiration? ~~Should~~ Shall we not sing him praises?

This is to you, Professor Roger. This is for your capacity to help us grasp the a superior intellect of public discourse.

Do I hear an Amen?

Histroy 1510, review and paper

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 01:37:55 +0100

Michael Bjorklund

HIST-1510

This paper was a good experience to learn how to do research on history and to try and think critical about different views on the Maginot line and how it affected the relations in Europe. I feel that I was able to get a much greater understanding of how research papers work and the importance of studying in depth certain subjects.

Michael Bjorklund

Dr. Beurtheret

History 1510

TR 11:30 am

History Essay

Topic: The Maginot Line in the international relation context of the interwar period (1919-1939)

Thesis: During the interwar period, how did France’s creation of the Maginot line influence the nations of Europe while trying to contain Germany physically and politically?

Introduction

The Maginot Line shaped the international affairs and relations between the European nations during the Interwar period of 1919-1939. At the end of WWI the nations of Europe were in a frenzy of affairs, treaties, and packs to protect their own states. This Line was a fortified line of defenses built between France and Germany. It was meant to act as a deterrent against the Germanic offensive strategies. During the interwar period, how did France’s creation of the Maginot line influence the nations of Europe while trying to contain Germany physically and politically? This essay will focus first on defining the Maginot line, searching for security behind a political “Maginot Line”, and the Germanic policies that undermine France’s political and physical defenses.

Part One: What is the Maginot line?

World War I ended with the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. The war had devastated Europe. It lasted 1,565 days, one-fifth of the 65,000,000 soldiers died, and had a financial cost totaling $186 billion.¹ The world had never seen a war at this magnitude before. This treaty was dominated by several points of negotiations: the wording and creation of a League of Nation’s Covenant; the question of French Security and the fate of the left bank of the Rhine; the Italian and Polish claims; the disposition of the former German colonies and the former possessions of the Turkish Empire; the reparation for damages that was to be demanded from Germany. Around fifty to sixty countries attended the treaty.¹ The major flaw was that no Central Power was represented. Even Russia didn’t attend due to civil war. Right from the beginning of the interwar period, the national relations of Europe were in a fragile state.

In the middle of the raging international relations, the United States failed to ratify the 1919 Treaty of Versailles with France and other nations.⁴ This made the nations of Europe feel like the United State had turned its back on them. France, who had taken the brunt of the casualties and whose land had suffered the most from the war, looked toward its own self and smaller nations for providing security and peace to Europe mainland.

Germany insisted it could not possibly pay any more reparations, the sum of which was practically impossible to pay, France, Belgium, and Italy launched a strike against Germany. They seized much of the Rhineland which acted as a buffer state between France and Germany being a demilitarized zone. In January 1923, French, Belgian, and Italian troops occupied the Ruhr district as far East as Dortmund. The British called the occupation illegal. Acting as they did, France, Italy, and Belgium justified this seizure with claims that Germany had broken the Treaty of Versailles. If they weren’t going to pay the fine, then they would pay with land. By doing this Germany would be burdened even more. Much of the territory taken by France was land they had claim to before WWI and had lost, also the other nations involved had economic interests and wanted expansion. When France withdrew from the Rhineland they knew they needed enhanced protection.

The Maginot Line was a great set of complex fortifications constructed by France. By the end of WWI, France had fought an offensive war against fortified German positions. With little offensive technology, they suffered millions of casualties. After such a loss in man power they didn’t want to accept Charles de Gaulle’s modern military plan of a more mobile army and air force that came with an offensive strategy.⁷ Many of the French leaders wished to be defensive like the Germans had been. By building great defensive fortifications, anyone who would attack them, would be forced to charge the fortifications, just like the valiant French soldiers did in WWI. This would preserve more man power. The defense would allow much faster mobilization of troops behind the line, and they didn’t have the political stability to be able to sustain any offensive campaigns. France didn’t want another war and didn’t want to press war with such little recourses. They were in a tight spot. Their defensive policy was a realistic goal.

The French built a fortified defensive position on the border of Germany, ranging from the south near the Rhine River up to the north to Luxembourg. This plan was thought up by Marshall Patain and was favored by Andre Maginot who was the Minister of War. However the Maginot Line wouldn’t be finished till the end of the 1920’s and beginning of 30’s when Maginot returned to government office.² This was built at the end of the Great War (WWI) with the intention to prevent or slow any German attack on French people. There by allowing the mobilization of troops and an effective defense to be put in place. It consisted of thousands of miles of trenches, tunnels, forts, machinegun bunkers, concrete, steal, wires and mines. It also was used as a symbol of power to deter any future aggressive Germanic plans against France.

Part Two: The Search for Peace through a Political Maginot Line

This mentality led to a political “Maginot Line” of alliances, treaties, and packs to box Germany in and bring peace to an economically and politically troubled Europe. France was in a state of Maginot mentality, they were static, defensive, and wanted to cage the German nation. Knowing fully well that they didn’t have the manpower or resources to challenge Germany, they looked for allied help.¹¹ This masked Europe with a facade of alliances that had very little veracity and few were binding.

On December 1, 1925 Germany, France, and Belgian signed the Locarno Pacts, which included the guarantees of the national borders with Italy and Britain being the guarantors by providing military assistance to the party wronged if pack was broken.⁹ Other treaties that were signed were: The Four-Power Pact, The Four-Power Treaty, Franco-British boundary agreement, Franco-Italian Agreement, Franco-Polish alliance, Franco-Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance, Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence, and many others. All of which were a type of Political Maginot Line.⁶ Many of these agreements were to define and defend boundaries, essentially picking teams. This set Europe up for a “domino effect”. Example if nation “X” is attacked by nation “b” than nations “Y” and “Z” will come to the aid of nation “X”. This provided a great deterrent of war at first. No nation wanted to start a war due to the amount of treaties.

The nations surrounding Germany who were allied or friendly to France knew that France was not in a great position politically to be able to wage another war. They had a fairly good size army, navy, and air force. The main problem was they were not modernized and most were old or young men due to the casualties of The Great War. For France, an important treaty that was signed was that of the Franco-Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance. Pushed by Louis Barthou, was meant to encircling Nazi Germany, and create a balance of power. This defensive treaty was that either nation would come to the aid of the other, if they were attacked and hadn’t provoked a nation with aggressive behavior. The problem was that Russia never fully trusted France would come to their aid, and France didn’t trust them.

The biggest internal problem facing that French was their government and coalitions. The Maginot line was a symbol that France couldn’t lead other nations at this time, and wanted to separate itself physically from them. France was made up of a multi-party parliamentary system. The cabinets and local governments rose and fell with alarming frequency. First the Bloc Nation was in charge. They were conservative and moderate. When this party fell apart, the Cartel des Gauches party took over, but still stuck with the failing economy lost power quickly. Within three years six more governments rose and fell trying to help France. One leader that had hope for change was, Leon Blum. HE was part of the Popular Front, a socialist party that took over during part of the depression, who helped stabilized and regulated prices of products, restructured the national bank, introduced the forty hour work week. When trying to deal with rising strikes and social problems, he was denied by the upper house, he then resigned.³ Their politics were divided and there was a lack of leadership of leaders wanting to tackle hard tough issues. The failure to unite the nation under a working government forced France to stay defensive, and hindered their production

One nation that was put on edge by the construction of the Maginot Line was Belgium. Being located in-between France and Germany, they were on alert to resist foreign rule and maintain their autonomy. Being north of the Maginot Line also meant that if war broke out again between Germany and France the battling would most likely stretch up through their land and country. Belgium refused to allow French or English soldiers to be stationed in their land. They also knew that they had to keep in friendly terms with them incase Germany decides to push an assault; they would have friends come to their rescue. This put them in daunting position. They tried to decide what would be the best form of action in protecting their land without foreign influence. They were however declared neutrality, not wanting any part of the European wars and desiring to keep its independence. France honored their desires and failed to construct fortifications along the Belgium boarder, as to not show that they were going to abandon them or just hide behind their wall. In effect Britain and France still honored the Treaty of London signed almost one hundred years ago and as part of their plan would both help to defend Belgium.¹³ Belgium wasn’t the only nation that felt that they needed more protection.

Russia had just concluded a terrible civil war in which the Czars had been overthrown and the Communist party had taken over. Knowing that France was weak and in no position to stand up to Germany alone, they were the only other nation that could maintain the balance of power if Germany launched another offensive in mainland Europe. Also the fact that the Maginot Line had been constructed Russia knew that there was a chance if Germany returned to power they would focus on the East rather than try to fight through the fortified West. Another role of Russia was that they were a protectorate of the other smaller Slavic countries which were under threat of invasion from the Germanic or Austrian nations. The lack of a strong balance of powers through Europe put the Russian nation on edge, especially because Stalin was in the middle of purging his army.⁴ He had little trust in anyone but himself. He killed many of his Generals and high ranked officers and reorganized his military.

Part Three: Germanic Policies Used to Undermine the Maginot Line.

Germany was forced into a terrible position; they had lost the war and because they started it they must pay for it. They had no representation on their behalf to defend them or argue in their behalf. The stiff penalties put on them by the Treaty of Versailles were devastating to their Economy. Germany’s infrastructure was destroyed and many of them felt betrayed by their government. The German industry was gone, there was nothing left, and not even a wheel barrel of money had enough value to buy bread. Then nation was in ruin, looking for something to change, someone to help.

When Hitler came to power he started he set about to complete his agenda of restoring Germany to its old power. To the Germans especially a rising Nazi Germany could see that France didn’t want an offensive war and that they were on the defensive. Hiding behind The Maginot Line was a sign of hate, fear, and anger by the French. Hitler was able to us this time to play right into his plan. Knowing that France was on the defensive and wasn’t in the position to launch a major military campaign and Russia was distracted with the purging of its army. Only Britain would be in the way.

By undermining the political and defensive alliances and treaties that surrounded his nation, Hitler was able to slowly tear apart this political Maginot Line. First he withdrew Germany from the League of Nations in 1933.¹ Second he signed a ten-year none-aggression pact with Poland. This treaty signed in 1934, pledged to resolve their problems through bilateral negotiations and to forgo armed conflicts. This was a huge blow to France. Before this Poland, France, and England had all agreed to come to the aid of the other if one nation was attacked. Now Poland was at peace with Germany. Not too long after Hitler made the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of June 1935, which was a bilateral concord between Britain and Germany countenancing a German navy but limiting it to 35 percent of the size of the British Navy.¹⁰ This not only allowed Germany to violate the Treaty of Versailles, it also aided them in the growth of their navy. The last blow to France was the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union.⁸ This agreement gave Hitler the go ahead to invade Poland and a week later allowing Russia to invade the east while guaranteeing that the nations won’t fight in the USSR.

These significant treaties and pacts gave the French reason that they were alone. And if that wasn’t enough to undermine the Maginot Line of alliance that France had made against Germany, Hitler also took apart the treaty of Versailles, built up his army, and in 1936 he remilitarization the Rhineland.⁴ All of these Germany policies and movements were declared as a need to defend themselves from the great nations around them, Hitler emphasized how all he wanted was peace and to restore Germany. While France saw that these actions were leading up to war. Other great nations like Britain, the U.S., Russia and smaller nations like Poland, Italy, and the Baltic States hid behind their own personal Maginot Lines, hoping that the German power would stop its thirst for power if they could just appease them.

Conclusion

The Nations of Europe were clouded by a Maginot Mentality. They wanted peace; they searched for peace, and tried to talk about peace. In the end they only received war. There are times when a nation physically doesn’t have the power by itself to eliminate a threat before it starts. This is what happened to France. They knew Germany still had power, they could see that there was much more that still needed to be done to keep Germany under control. The failure of the Maginot Line and Mentality was that of the combined powers of Europe to act and hold Germany to the Treaty of Versailles and force them to stop their military plans. Because they didn’t want another war, they ended up having to fight a war much greater than if they would have if only they all acted together. A more offensive plan and confident leadership would have aided Europe more than hiding behind a wall of fear, hate, and anger.

BIBLIOAGRAPH

1. Political and Intellectual Trends of the Interwar Years (1919-1938) (Walter Langham, Otis Mitchell, The World Since 1919) http://hst86.hubpages.com/hub/Political-and-Intellectual-Trends-of-the-Interwar-Years-1919-193

2. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/maginot_line.htm

3. History 369: The world since 1914, Lecture notes on England and France in the Interwar Period, http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/BrFr.html

4. World War II: a Military and Social History, by Professor Thomas Childers, Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania, http://www.scribd.com/doc/38410884/WWII-A-Military-and-Social-History

5. Spark Notes, History Study Guides, The Interwar Years (1919-1938), http://www.sparknotes.com/history/european/interwaryears/section5.rhtml

6. Wikipedia, Category: Interwar Treaties, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Interwar_treaties

7. Wikipedia, Maginot Line, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line

8. Wikipedia, Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Non-Aggression_between_Germany_and_the_Soviet_Union

9. Britannica Academic Edition, Pact of Locarno, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/345660/Pact-of-Locarno

10. Britannica Academic Edition, Anglo-German Naval Agreement, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/25048/Anglo-German-Naval-Agreement

11. France’s Strategy, May 15, 2012, by George Friedman, http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/frances-strategy

12. Inter-War Diplomacy, http://rpfuller.freeservers.com/gcse/history/4.html

13. History Learning Site, The Maginot Line, http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/maginot_line.htm

14. History Channel, World War I ends, http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/world-war-i-ends

15. Primary Documents, Treaty of London, 1839, http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/london1839.htm

Modeling Real Data - Math 1010 Project

Sun, 29 Apr 2012 15:44:13 +0100

Modeling Real Data

A Math 1010 project

Data from the United States Census Bureau about children living with both parents has been decreasing steadily in the United States. The following table shows the percent of children (under 18) living with both parents since 1980. In this project, you will have the opportunity to use the data in the table to find a linear function that represents the data, reflecting the change in living arrangements of children.

PERCENT OF U.S. CHILDREN LIVING WITH BOTH PARENTS

Year

1980

1983

1988

1992

1997

2000

2005

2008

Percent Y

1. Plot the data given in the table as ordered pairs.

2. Use a straight-edge to draw on your graph what appears to be the line that “best fits” the data you plotted. Hint: Use two points that are already on the graph.

3. Estimate the coordinates of two points that fall on your “best fits” line. Use these points to find the slope of the linear function .

(0,77) (20,69)

The slope of the function is . M= -2/5

4. Interpret the meaning of the slope. Be specific. Does it make sense in the context of this situation?

-The slope is negative meaning that every two years there are about five percent more children living without both parents.

5. What is the y-intercept of your line of “best fit”? What does it mean?

Write the function of the “best fit” line.

-The Y intercept = 77 This means we started the graph and data at 77% of kids living with both parents. The meaning of “Best Fit” is an educated guess that helps plot a line of what will most likely happen if the same trend of data keeps up.

6. Compare your graph with another person or group. Are the linear functions the same? Are they different? If so, explain why.

-No, their line of best fit was steeper than mine. This would change the slope and changes all other data.

7. Find the value of ? Is this what you expected by looking at the data from the table above?

f(x) = -2/5 x + 77

f(10) = -2/5 (10) + 77

f(10)= 73 – Yes, it falls on the line of best fit, and is decreasing since 1980

8. In what year would you expect to have 61 percent of children in the United States living with both parents?

61 = -2/5 x +77

-16 = -2/5 x

-16/(-2/5) = x

X = 40 … The year 40 = 61%

9. Use your function to predict the percent of children living with both parents in 2030, 2080 and 2230. Do these predictions make sense? Why or why not?

f(50) = -2/5 (50) +77 = 57% - this makes sense it could happen.

f(100) = -2/5 (100) +77 = 37% - this could be possible if the rate stays the same.

f(250) = -2/5 (250) +77 = -23% - this is not possible. It isn’t realistic. You can’t have negative kids living with both parents.

10. Reflection: Write a paragraph or two discussing what you have learned by doing this project. Include something about “real world data” and the accuracy of long- range predictions?

I noticed how this graph only works for the short time. Especially because there will come a point where people will still stay together and kids will still have both parents. If you try guessing far into the future using the “line of best fit” it might give you an idea of what will happen, but it will not be accurate. Also if you chose a “line of best fit” that is too steep or to shallow of a slope, then your statistics and data could be very far off real data.

Golf Review

Sat, 28 Apr 2012 06:05:31 +0100

Michael Bjorklund

HLAC-1130-005

Lifelong wellness is greatly influenced by physical activity. Recreational activities help people by increasing physical health. This allows people to usually live healthier stronger and more comfortable lives. Also physical activity is a way to release stress and to increase happiness in most people.

Cardio fitness is very important in keeping a healthy heart and body. This allows blood to flow through the body easier decreasing the risk of a heart attack; also it allows people to be more alert. As well as physical exercise there is a need to keep a track on your sleep patterns. It is extremely important to allow people to receive more energy, be happier and feel better. If you want to have a better day, you need to get the right amount of sleep.

It is extremely important for people to have balance in their life and in the way they work out. If all you do is lift weights, you might have big muscles but then you will have limited flexibility and will lack endurance to run. If you wish to have lifelong wellness, you need to balance all things. This balance includes self-discipline, mental outlook, stress management, nutrition, muscle strength and endurance, etc…

Before I took this class I felt that there was more I needed to do to increase my personal fitness. I feel like I know have an activity that I can enjoy for my entire life. I have always wanted to be able to play golf well. I feel like I know have an activity I can play my whole life. The practice of golf will let me walk, play, and release stress for the rest of my life. Also from the practicing I have felt much more confidence in how my game has improved and a greater desire to try new sports.

I intended to try and play golf as much as chance allows. I have a goal to at least play once every two weeks. Hopefully I am able to keep up the new skills I have learned through this class. I have greatly improved my swing and my game. I am much more excited to play and practice golf on a regular basis.