sdias

ARGUMENT TASK The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Movies Galore, a chain of movie-rental stores."In order to stop the recent decline in our profits, we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore's ten movie-rental stores. Since we are famous for our special bargains, raising our rental prices is not a viable way to improve profits. Last month our store in downtown Marston significantly decreased its operating expenses by closing at 6:00 P.M. rather than 9:00 P.M. and by reducing its stock by eliminating all movies released more than five years ago. By implementing similar changes in our other stores, Movies Galore can increase profits without jeopardizing our reputation for offering great movies at low prices."Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted. My response The prompt states the financial predicament of Movies Galore, a video rental store that isn't able to catch up it's profits with respect to it's expenses. Several suggestions are made, but each have their distinct flaws which must be assessed in order to make an informed decision. Let's start by looking into the changes being considered with respect to the operational expenses. It has been insufficiently concluded that undoing the special bargains is going to lead to a loss of customers since it is the main marketing point of Movies Galore. It isn't clearly established weather the majority of the loyal customers are there for content or for the offers. A simple survey from the all customers, new to decades old fans could give an insight into what brings customers in and could give an insight into whether a slight change in discounts would negatively impact their business since decreasing discounts is a viable option and the simplest to apply to see a drastic change, but to conclude whether it will be positive, a survey into customer expectations would be enlightening. The decision of the store in downtown being shut early and it having any positive impact has been inconclusive. There is no information on whether this has made any significant changes to the profits and an all round change on other stores without sufficient results would be worrisome. There is a possibility that this would lead to more people coming in early due to the exclusivity factor since now the store is available for fewer hours, but it doesn't guarantee that it'll garner new customers. It could just be that longtime customers might come in earlier and there will be no change or on the other hand it may lead to losing customers for example people coming in late from work may now not be able to come in later like they could before. Keeping track about the customer influx in that particular store would help establish this fact and can help us analyse whether the timings may have a positive, negative or no impact at all. The additional decision of reducing stock by removing copies of movies that are older than five years could be more debilitating than good. This could definitely reduce expenses but it should be established whether customers come in the store due to it's wide variety of movie genres and whether reducing it could reduce the customer base and discourage people who come in for older movies. If older copies are eliminated from the stock, it could lead to a loss of customers instead, thereby reducing profits and having the opposite impact. More data on movies from which period are mostly sold would help give a better view on this and avoid loss of customers. A lot of the suggestions in the prompt are applicable and viable but it lacks sufficient information to make a confident decision. A simple survey into the customers preferences would open up a variety of insights and provide the needed results.

ISSUE TASK Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible. Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented. My response: The prompt brings into focus the role of powerful corporations in people's lives, which is quite subtle and behind the curtains but significant. A grocery store chain, retail stores, restaurants and so on, may seem like a small part of our daily lives, but they involve many business functions that directly or indirectly depend on our other functions of our lives. Hence, I am of the opinion that corporations most definitely have an ethical responsibility towards society because along with money they possess tons of power. It's pretty much an established fact that money isn't the only defining factor for the success of a project or even an individual's accomplishments for that matter. It's essential for keeping it afloat, but only focusing on this one aspect leads to deterioration in other more important supporting factors of a business like employment satisfaction, affecting social changes in the society, business practices that affect the environment, ethical foundations and so forth. Large Corporations that have been in an industry or market beyond a significant period of time, tend to have strong influence which also is an ode to their evolution because of how they have thrived in the domain they work in for so many years. Let's take Amazon as an example. It began as a small book keeping business that now, almost two and a half decades later, has become a powerful and a well known conglomerate and the most well known brand in our time. Maybe 25 years ago, they didn't have much of a responsibility because they were still finding their way through cementing their establishment in the industry. But now, after seeing their company grow and becoming an expert, which eventually led them to succeed, also brings in the responsibility factor towards other industries, consumers, the environment and their own corporation as well. After gaining all possible insights, you can only improve your services which doesn't always mean making more money. Let's look at the ethical repurcussions of corporations. Let's say a hypothetical company would like to expand their offices and buildings to increase productivity and they seem to focus on building projects in rural areas due to access to space and lower costs of building compared to cities. In such situations it is essential that the company seek permission from local communities since there's a possibility people will be displaced and also consider how much the local biodiversity is going to be affected by their project; The local flora and fauna must ideally not be disrupted as this can, in the long run, have dire consequences in the form of negative environment changes. Alternate arrangements must be made in order to protect these communities as well as the biodiversity in the area. If these factors are considered, the people in these areas are going to be relieved, while also creating new opportunities for both the local community as well as the expanding corporation and all in all leading to development with less problematic and more positive consequences. While it is true that in the initial years of starting and handling a business, yes money plays a huge role in determining its success. But in hindsight, this must not be done at the expense of others which includes the society as well as the environment. Hence focus on sustainable business practices is a must, as a solution to balance the money and society factor to lead to a more prosperous, enlightened future. In conclusion, being focused on the company goals while essential shouldn't lead to being inconsiderate as it will most definitely disrupt certain factions of society and the environment. For any large corporation, being mindful of their impact and taking steps to curtail the negative effects is of utmost importance for a more optimistic and brighter future for them as well as everybody else.

The following is a memorandum from the office of Mayor Harrison Smith Jones. "In order to relieve Briggsville’s notorious traffic congestion, Mayor Harrison Smith Jones plans to build a multi-million dollar subway system. The subway will run through the major downtown areas, a part of the town where buses serve as the only form of public transportation. For years, residents have been complaining both about inconsistent buses, and the general lack of safety while riding the buses. Additionally, the subway will be running twenty-four hours a day. Since motorists will spend less time in traffic, Mayor Harrison Smith Jones expects to see an immediate increase in worker productivity, which will improve the economy of Briggsville." Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted. My response: The prompt states that the proposed subway should most definitely resolve certain long-pressing issues for the citizens of Briggsville with the introduction of a new subway system. On analyzing the current described situation, certain ambiguities must be analyzed. Firstly, let's get to the safety factor mentioned in the prompt. It is being assumed that the subways will be safer than buses, which are currently seen as unsafe. It should be seen as to what safety issues are the people facing - whether it is in terms of physical safety, or if there have been constant reports of thefts or safety in terms of getting on and off the bus or frequent bus accidents, etc. Will the subway reduce instances of thefts or accidents? It is possible that bus-related accidents might reduce, but it can't be assured the subway will not introduce new kinds of accidents related to metros in the terminal. Regarding thefts, if security is bumped up, for example with cameras being added, it may reduce incidents of theft but since it isn't mentioned it can't be guaranteed that using a different mode of transport is going to reduce petty crimes and similar cases. More data regarding such incidents in subways in nearby cities may help get a clearer picture of whether safety will be improved and if adding such facilities may help. Next, coming to the location of the subway hubs, indeed, the downtown areas sound like commuting in well-traveled areas will be easier, but there isn't sufficient information on whether the impact on traffic reduction will be significant or negligible. It hasn't been established whether the downtown area is commercial or residential and whether the subway stops will make it easier for people living on the outskirts of the area to reach their work locations. Another thing to look at with respect to the location of the subway is if it will actually improve the commute for workers and in turn, help improve the economy. A lot of people may stay far away from the downtown area and may still have to use buses instead. More information regarding the locations of the stops would help get a decent idea about how many people would benefit and whether changing the stop locations would help improve the commute situation for the people. Although the proposed project may resolve certain issues related to traffic and other bus incidents, getting more data with respect to subway stops and records of nearby subway projects in similar areas may help make sure the project is as effective as intended.

Undergraduate students majoring in Business or in the Sciences should not be required to take any courses in the Humanities since those courses won’t benefit their future careers. Write a response to the prompt in which you discuss whether or not you agree or disagree. Be certain to fully develop your position and carefully consider ways in which your position could be challenged. Experts have gone through various teaching systems that could be efficient as well as save time for students. Every country has a varying process of evaluation for a child's "intelligence". In my opinion, the main features that are relevant to a system that could be called efficient would ultimately be how useful it would be to the students in their daily lives. In an undergraduate course, a student spends considerable amount of money, time and effort to gather credits and build their portfolio to make them appealing for future job prospects which would eventually improve their lives. But are these job related courses sufficient to lead a wholesome life? Aren't other characteristics involved while undergoing these tasks? We shall discuss this below. Now, with regards to a Business or Science degree or any course related to these fields, I would completely agree with students having to take certain humanities subjects along with their majors. Now, it may seem irrelevant, but subjects like languages, which would involve writing and grammar courses, is very useful for students trying to write their job applications, their SOPs or other important documents related to work or further studies. Having a strong hold of a singular language can make a student stand out and pass on their ideas in a clear and succinct manner in a collaborative environment. A course on basic finances, especially for a science student would also be very helpful for their out of work lives too as these things are very hard to grasp for someone not of the same background. These tasks are essential for their everyday lives as well. A crash course on psychology would greatly impact a student's ability to thrive in a work environment with many other people as they would get a better understanding of how to deal with difficult situations and how to manage things like stress and anxiety, which are very common in any adult's life. Now, one may argue that this would take up alot of useful time off a student's time in their undergraduate course, to which a possible solution would be to probably involve more interactive sessions and less theoretical concepts with regards to these classes and avoid going too in-depth for these courses unless students are willing to make up more time for it, in which case there could be an advanced version of these classes. Another arguement could be that students may rather skip these things which can be learnt on their own, which may be true, but not everybody can deal with these efficiently. Alot of times, in training phases while joining a company, students undergo people training too to help them with seemingly simple things like team building, communication, dispute resolutions etc. It would greatly help students get industry ready by undergoing such basic trainings with their course which they would inevitably need in their daily lives as well.

Prompt: Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs. Write a response to the prompt in which you discuss whether or not you agree or disagree. Be certain to fully develop your position and carefully consider ways in which your position could be challenged. My response: Controversies are inevitably a part of our lives. So more often than not, people tend to have atleast some sort of a basic opinion on things; from politics, to economic policies, to the invitees of a limited guest list of a private party- we always lean towards a side more than the other. Depending on the subject in question, people can have very strong opinions or be neutral to the point that they may seem uninterested. When it comes to sensitive subjects like in politics, people may swing to either side based on their current and past knowledge, family ideas, cultural environment, etc. To say that controversial topics being discussed between parties of opposing opinions is useless is probably a very sensible statement, but could be a little far-fetched, let's analyse why. Now, it may be true, that people rarely change their minds about their core beliefs. But not exposing such minds to an opposing idea may turn out to be more problematic. Being a part of such an amalgamation of communities, people have to learn to adjust and accept new and seemingly frightening ideas at the beginning to maintain harmony. Let's say a person from a remote location, who grew up in a certain culture/religion, followed it to the point where she is deeply revered in her community. This person one day, decides to go to a city, and finds people of different beliefs alot of it very different from her community's and may feel odd. There is a possibility that this person may be amazed by the variety and expansive ideas out there and may be welcoming in which case she is open to a whole new world of ideas. There is also the possibility that this person may be frightened and may refuse to indulge in anything unfamiliar and may limit her understanding of the universe. In the second situation, the person is inhibiting her own growth by not being open to new ideas. Discussing difficult topics can produce huge results, if not always favourable. Discussions act as a catalyst to move certain issues forward. For example, women's rights. Something so controversial since the beginning of time, but so necessary to be talked about. Women didn't have access to a lot of rights that men did but having these conversations even with people who didn't believe that women should have such rights led to the revolution that allows our women right now to have a voice. In the context of trying to have discussions with people with differing beliefs, it is actually very necessary to have difficult conversations, since we tend to inhibit our understanding by only engaging with like minded people. We may be unable to change their mind but we may have started an important conversation that may have pushed them to think or instilled a new idea in them. This process of conversation leads to a chain reaction of spreading ideas or starting new necessary conversations relevant to our daily lives.

Prompt: Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses. Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted. My response: Diets are an essential part of our daily lives. So what we put in our bodies matters to a great extent. Everybody has different preferences and different body types and issues they try to address with varying diets. Although for most people a diet is about being palatable, having a healthy, physically benefitting diet has become increasingly popular nowadays as people realise the importance of eating healthy instead of only following your taste bud's preferences. Although throughout history, diets played a major role, in recent decades, humans have been obsessed with diets for maintaining their physical appearances, as well as for improving their quality of life and health. Many "diet fads" have come and gone in the last few years one of which is the Paleo Diet. Paleo diets are considered to be healthy due to its raw nutrients and simplistic ingredients but let's dig a little deeper into why it may not be as accurate. The fact that having animal bone dishes is the main source of nutrition, it is stated that due to the consumption of cartilages, bones in our bodies tend to get stronger. But it is also established that our bones cannot absorb the nutrients from these digested cartilage. In fact there isn't enough proof that our bodies benefit from the cartilage in these soups. They may have a hand in helping with metabolic and inflammatory diseases as people have reported. But this benefit could arise due to many other factors or other nutrients and there isn't sufficient data to establish that bone broth may have contributed to the fall in such diseases. If this was conducted as a survey, their family health history as well as other existing diseases must be taken into consideration. Again, promotion of nerve regeneration and it's impact on our brains would need extensive studies which could increase or decrease the chances of possessing these diseases based on common pre-existing conditions. Also, stating that ancient humans understood human physiology would be a bold statement to make. Ancient humans just started discovering the wonders of everything around them so they definitely didn't have enough information to establish something is useful for curing diseases. The most probable cause for them adopting this diet would be the increased variety of flavours they got exposed to and it's also possible they noticed a boost in energy due to the increased intake of proteins in their diets. Everything else was probably based on assumptions or temporary changes which could be due to a variety of factors and we can't certainly say for sure since there is no recorded evidence of this. Therefore, from the above arguments, I believe it's possible this diet could benefit us, but the data provided is insufficient to make concrete, confidable conclusions in favour of Paleo diets being beneficial for chronic illnesses.