Only Teen To Skip Walkout Leaves Everyone Speechless With What Was Found At Her Desk
Exactly one month after the horrific tragedy in Parkland, Florida, students at schools
across the nation walked out of their classrooms, thinking that somehow that would change gun
policy and impose more control over people's Second Amendment rights.
At least that was the front for the free day off, as it's suspected that most teens followed
the herd outside without a real opinion or understanding on the matter.
Nonetheless, many students left.
In fact, the mass majority of the student body at schools who promoted this protest
participated in it, for a false sense of empowerment or just to fit in with what everyone else
was doing.
The only thing it accomplished was getting attention for being outside which will make
no difference for their supposed cause.
However, what hasn't gotten the attention that's truly deserved, is the very few students
who stayed in their seats while their entire school walked out and what they endured by
doing so – and specifically, what was found at one girl's desk who didn't protest,
but left everyone speechless.
Elizabeth Busdicker is a 9th-grader at South Davis Jr.
High, who wasn't among the mass majority of the kids at her school who seemed to blindly
follow a few people's leed and walk out of school with the rest of the student body.
Sure it would have been easier to meld into the herd and not be judged and the one who
strayed away from it, but Elizabeth stayed true to herself and made the most important
statement of the day that had nothing to do with relinquishing people's rights.
To stand up amongst your peers in middle school has got to be one of the most courageous acts
a teen can do, knowing that it will inevitably be met with ridicule and make you an outcast,
which can be emotionally difficult to deal with in this day and age.
It was a risk that courageous Elizabeth took on her own, to send a message bigger than
what the kids standing outside were promoting.
She sat alone in a classroom and while she was there, she didn't waste her time like
her classmates outside.
She used it to do something incredible to solve what the protesting students were demanding
others to do, proving they weren't willing to take meaningful action on themselves.
Thankfully, Elizabeth was, and in doing so, made a far bigger difference on her own than
what thousands of kids across the nation were able to accomplish by walking out.
"It wasn't an easy decision as almost all of her classmates stood up and stepped
out, but Elizabeth stayed put," Fox 13 reported of the Bountiful, UT girl who stood her ground
by staying in her seat."Some people walked past our classroom in the halls, kind of gave
me these looks, but I just felt like I was doing the right thing standing up for what
I believe in," Elizabeth said.
She admits that she doesn't agree with what the national school walkout represents, adding
that it's not stricter gun laws that prevent these shootings, it's something else, which
she realized she has the ability to change.
She did that while others protested, with a simple act that if the entire school had
done instead of walking out, could have made a much bigger difference than standing outside
with signs.
While Elizabeth was at her desk for hours, she simply wrote letters.
She made each one personal because they all carried a massive message that the signs outside
didn't.
Instead of walking out with the crowd, she walked up to people individually and handing
them a heartfelt note, with words catered to each individual person that they may need
to hear to feel noticed, important, appreciated, and valuable.
"We wrote 17 thank you notes to 17 different people in our lives to honor the lives,"
Elizabeth explained of her mission to make a real difference of what's the actual root
of the mass shooting issue.
Kids feel worthless, insignificant, bullied, and rejected – these are common emotional
denominators of "outcasts" who become killers.
"It's made me a little scared at school, but I really made a huge effort to help these
kids who look like they need a little extra help or a little more kindness in their day,"
Elizabeth said.
"It's not guns who kill people; it's people who kill people," she added.
Elizabeth and other students across the country who were small in number but big in their
statement are the real heroes.
Many of these well-raised teens who sat in their seats as others walked out around them
were scowled at, ridiculed, and taunted, as people passed by their desks, yet they stayed
anyway.
They are also the ones who have make an effort to talk to the "losers" who need someone
to know they exist.
This alone can prevent that "outcast" from committing a heinous crime…not collectively
getting up and walking out of school.
Let's promote compassion, not control.
For more infomation >> Only Teen To Skip Walkout Leaves Everyone Speechless With What Was Found At Her Desk - Duration: 5:12.-------------------------------------------
Melania Just Made Surprise Visit – Popped In On Someone Who Was Definitely NOT Expecting It - Duration: 4:31.
Even though the mainstream media is dead set on attacking her for President Donald Trump's
alleged affair with the porn star Stormy Daniels over a decade ago, our First Lady Melania
Trump always seems to be able to show up to the party with grace and class.
Yesterday was no exception.
Yesterday the first lady made a surprise visit to the Palm Beach Children's Hospital in
Florida.
She was wearing a very elegant and striped dress for the occasion which screamed springtime
is here while she greeted the patients and their families as she wished them a happy
Easter weekend and handed out gifts to the sick children.
Without of course forgetting to talk to the hospital staff as she worked herself around
the facility.
But perhaps the best part of the event was that no reporters were on hand to ruin the
visit for her or the patients since the visit was kept off the official First Lady schedule.
Which was a welcomed fact since the media on both sides of the political aisle are hell-bent
on gauging her reaction to the alleged affair the president had 12 years ago.
"The first lady's spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham issued a statement on Twitter: "While
I know the media is enjoying speculation & salacious gossip, I'd like to remind people there's
a minor child whose name should be kept out of news stories when at all possible."
Even the former Conservative Libertarian Fox News and The Blaze contributor turned "moderate"
after leaving the Glenn Beck network for a cushy job at CNN had disturbing words for
the first lady.
"Cupp said, "I've heard the stories swirling around, the president described in
a number of ways, scandalous, tabloid trash.
But the word that comes to my mind is humiliating.
The president of the United States is being sued by a porn star over an alleged affair
they had years ago.
It is humiliating for the country certainly that the figurehead of the Republican party—not
too long ago the party of family values—is alleged to have had another affair with a
Playmate just after his son was born is humiliating for the GOP, or it should be anyway.
But worst of all, that Donald Trump has very likely cheated on his wife multiple times.
And that this is all playing out very publicly is particularly humiliating for Melania Trump.
While it's hard to imagine she didn't know who she married, she's also just a
woman, a wife, and a mother, like the rest of us.
There's a real person in there, and she must be reeling."
She continued, "What she does next is no small thing.
It might just be tabloid fodder to gossip rags or political chum for Hill watchers,
but for a generation of young girls, Melania's next move could be formative.
It was to me.
I was just 13 when word of Bill Clinton's affairs hit the campaign trail and imperiled
his 1992 presidential run.
I had just voted for Clinton in my school's mock primary.
I was paying close attention.
Burned in my mind is the image of Hillary sitting next to Bill in a "60 Minutes"
interview trying to put a fresh veneer on her embattled candidate husband."
She added "It was, of course, just the first of many times she would endure the particular
humiliation Bill would inflict, stories of affairs, inappropriate behavior, a graphic
White House tryst with an intern, even a rape allegation, and put on a strong united front.
Over those years, Hillary became for me what she became for many women, the literal definition
of stand by your man."
Cupp concluded, "Now Melania may not have a political career to consider, but as the
First Lady, she is an inherently important figure in American politics, and women are
watching.
Particularly young women.
Melania should do for this generation of girls what Hillary Clinton did not do for mine,
and leave her jerk of a husband."
What S.E.
Cupp and most of her other pundit friends on the left seem to forget is there is a 12-year-old
boy in the mix here.
And Cupp, as a mother and wife should know better than to pose questions of this nature
to people in the limelight.
How would her child feel if he turned on the TV one day and heard a third-rate pundit who
changes political views depending who's writing the check calling for his mother to
leave his father over an affair which allegedly took place over 12 years ago?
Mrs. Cupp, I used to be a huge fan of yours before you decided to join the "Fake News"
empire of CNN, but isn't it time we all started choosing our words more carefully
and taking into consideration that just like in the 90's, some things are just none of
our damn business?
-------------------------------------------
Only Teen To Skip Walkout Leaves Everyone Speechless With What Was Found At Her Desk - Duration: 4:59.
Only Teen To Skip Walkout Leaves Everyone Speechless With What Was Found At Her Desk
Exactly one month after the horrific tragedy in Parkland, Florida, students at schools
across the nation walked out of their classrooms, thinking that somehow that would change gun
policy and impose more control over people's Second Amendment rights.
At least that was the front for the free day off, as it's suspected that most teens followed
the herd outside without a real opinion or understanding on the matter.
Nonetheless, many students left.
In fact, the mass majority of the student body at schools who promoted this protest
participated in it, for a false sense of empowerment or just to fit in with what everyone else
was doing.
The only thing it accomplished was getting attention for being outside which will make
no difference for their supposed cause.
However, what hasn't gotten the attention that's truly deserved, is the very few students
who stayed in their seats while their entire school walked out and what they endured by
doing so – and specifically, what was found at one girl's desk who didn't protest,
but left everyone speechless.
Elizabeth Busdicker is a 9th-grader at South Davis Jr.
High, who wasn't among the mass majority of the kids at her school who seemed to blindly
follow a few people's leed and walk out of school with the rest of the student body.
Sure it would have been easier to meld into the herd and not be judged and the one who
strayed away from it, but Elizabeth stayed true to herself and made the most important
statement of the day that had nothing to do with relinquishing people's rights.
To stand up amongst your peers in middle school has got to be one of the most courageous acts
a teen can do, knowing that it will inevitably be met with ridicule and make you an outcast,
which can be emotionally difficult to deal with in this day and age.
It was a risk that courageous Elizabeth took on her own, to send a message bigger than
what the kids standing outside were promoting.
She sat alone in a classroom and while she was there, she didn't waste her time like
her classmates outside.
She used it to do something incredible to solve what the protesting students were demanding
others to do, proving they weren't willing to take meaningful action on themselves.
Thankfully, Elizabeth was, and in doing so, made a far bigger difference on her own than
what thousands of kids across the nation were able to accomplish by walking out.
"It wasn't an easy decision as almost all of her classmates stood up and stepped
out, but Elizabeth stayed put," Fox 13 reported of the Bountiful, UT girl who stood her ground
by staying in her seat.
"Some people walked past our classroom in the halls, kind of gave me these looks, but
I just felt like I was doing the right thing standing up for what I believe in," Elizabeth
said.
She admits that she doesn't agree with what the national school walkout represents, adding
that it's not stricter gun laws that prevent these shootings, it's something else, which
she realized she has the ability to change.
She did that while others protested, with a simple act that if the entire school had
done instead of walking out, could have made a much bigger difference than standing outside
with signs.
While Elizabeth was at her desk for hours, she simply wrote letters.
She made each one personal because they all carried a massive message that the signs outside
didn't.
Instead of walking out with the crowd, she walked up to people individually and handing
them a heartfelt note, with words catered to each individual person that they may need
to hear to feel noticed, important, appreciated, and valuable.
"We wrote 17 thank you notes to 17 different people in our lives to honor the lives,"
Elizabeth explained of her mission to make a real difference of what's the actual root
of the mass shooting issue.
Kids feel worthless, insignificant, bullied, and rejected – these are common emotional
denominators of "outcasts" who become killers.
"It's made me a little scared at school, but I really made a huge effort to help these
kids who look like they need a little extra help or a little more kindness in their day,"
Elizabeth said.
"It's not guns who kill people; it's people who kill people," she added.
Elizabeth and other students across the country who were small in number but big in their
statement are the real heroes.
Many of these well-raised teens who sat in their seats as others walked out around them
were scowled at, ridiculed, and taunted, as people passed by their desks, yet they stayed
anyway.
They are also the ones who have make an effort to talk to the "losers" who need someone
to know they exist.
This alone can prevent that "outcast" from committing a heinous crime…not collectively
getting up and walking out of school.
Let's promote compassion, not control.
-------------------------------------------
Hillary HUMILIATED At Who Was Just Given Better Speaking Gig! Couldn't Be Better! - Duration: 5:49.
Hillary HUMILIATED At Who Was Just Given Better Speaking Gig!
Couldn't Be Better!
The former Secretary of State and twice failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
was in New Jersey yesterday for what is being billed as a very rare public appearance since
she had her rear end handed to her by now President Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential
election.
Hillary has been traveling and was recently caught in a viral video falling down steps
in India.
She also had a wrist injury and spent time in a hospital.
After that, she was caught wearing a garb that covered her right arm.
But now she's back in America and up next for the former first lady is a rare speaking
appearance.
She used to do more appearances but has simmered down in her old age.
She also used to earn a lot more money for showing up to blabber, but now she's basically
working for political peanuts.
She's scheduled to talk at Rutgers University.
It's reported that they will pay Hilary Clinton $25k to speak about politics, democracy
and the way she has shaped how women are seen in politics.
The sold-out event is being sponsored by Rutgers Eagleton Institute of Politics which will
be held at Rutgers Athletic Center in Piscataway.
This has been Clinton's third public appearance in the state of New Jersey where she previously
campaigned for then-gubernatorial candidate Phil Murphy.
NJ.com reported more on Hillary Clinton's appearance at Rutgers University: "Former
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is back in New Jersey Thursday for a rare
public appearance since she lost in her bid for the White House against President Donald
Trump.
Clinton is expected to talk politics, American democracy and her role in shaping women's
political history.
Rutgers will pay Clinton $25,000 from an endowment but use no money from tuition or state aid,
according to the university.
A Clinton spokesperson told NBC the former secretary of state plans to donate the honorarium
for the speech to charity.
Rutgers Eagleton Institute of Politics will host the event to be held at Rutgers Athletic
Center in Piscataway.
It's sold out.
Anyone interested in tickets can join the waitlist, or watch it on Rutgers University's
livestream.
Clinton made at least three public appearances in the Garden State since the presidential
election: She campaigned for then-gubernatorial candidate Phil Murphy for governor in October,
and then returned for another pro-Murphy event that same month with her husband, former President
Bill Clinton.
Hillary Clinton was in New Jersey the month before for a book signing in Montclair."
Hillary's previous going rates could grab her an easy $225,000 from speaking at events.
She's been absolutely minimized down to about 10%, which is quite paltry and probably
demeaning.
Her ego must be swimming in tears, but she's still pulling in a lot of money for talking
people to sleep at their college.
Her old rates allegedly soared as high as $325,000, but several sources were in disagreement
on if she was paid around $200,000 or over $300,000.
No one seems to know except for her.
This must really have Hillary's ego in a tailspin.
She reportedly used to get at over $200k per speaking arrangement and now she has sunk
all the way down to $25k.
This means she is now making $7k less per speaking gig than Jersey Shore's star Snooki
makes on average.
Since she has now been reduced to only a "has been" she has to settle for making peanuts,
or what's considered peanuts to her.
Via Radar: "Matthew McConaughey was paid $135,000, Katie Couric made $110,000, Nobel
Laureate Toni Morrison received $30,000, Bill Moyers got $35,000 and — worst of all — Nicole
"Snooki" Polizzi was paid $32,000 for her wild speech!
In it, the booze-loving reality star told the graduating university students: "Study
hard, but party harder!"
Sound advice, for sure."
This is Snooki, who just got paid more than Hillary Clinton.
Business Insider reported more on her previous speaking earnings: "Hillary Clinton says
she had a "restful" time following her tenure as Secretary of State, but that doesn't
mean she didn't make a lot of money.
During that time, she made nearly $12 million by charging fees that topped $335,000 for
dozens of speeches.
Clinton's speaking fees shed light on the industries willing to shell out big bucks
for a few minutes with the former Secretary of State.
It's really a sad time for Hillary Clinton if one compares her early career to her end.
One might think that at least someone in her life would care enough to sit her down and
just tell her it's time to call it a day and retire.
As the Washington Post notes, a significant chunk of the money that Clinton made from
speeches came from tech companies.
eBay shelled out $315,000 for a speech that last 20 minutes, while Cisco paid $325,000
for Clinton to sit onstage with the company's CEO.
Salesforce.com brought Clinton back for multiple events.
And for discount spenders, Clinton offered a reduced price for remote addresses via satellite
video.
The former Secretary of State charged some of her lowest speaking fees to the California
Medical Association and Novo Nordisk for video speeches."
what do you think about this?
Please Share this news and Scroll down to comment below and don't forget to subscribe
Top Stories Today.
-------------------------------------------
What is Internalization? | Definition & Explanation of Internalization - Duration: 5:09.
Internalization has different definitions depending on the field that the term is used
in.
Internalization is the opposite of externalization.
Generally, internalization describes the psychological outcome of a conscious mind reasoning about
a specific subject; the subject is internalized, and the consideration of the subject is internal.
Internalization of ideals might take place following religious conversion, or in the
process of, more generally, moral conversion.
Internalization is directly associated with learning within an organism (or business)
and recalling what has been learned.
Psychology and sociology: In sciences such as psychology and sociology,
internalization involves the integration of attitudes, values, standards and the opinions
of others into one's own identity or sense of self.
In psychoanalytic theory, internalization is a process involving the formation of the
super ego.
Internalization is how man is a product of society.
In sociology internalization is the last step.
First comes externalization, then comes objectivation, and finally internalization.
Many theorists believe that the internalized values of behavior implemented during early
socialization are key factors in predicting a child's future moral character.
The self-determination theory proposes a motivational continuum from the extrinsic to intrinsic
motivation and autonomous self-regulation.
Some research suggests a child's moral self starts to develop around age three.
These early years of socialization may be the underpinnings of moral development in
later childhood.
Proponents of this theory suggest that children whose view of self is "good and moral" tend
to have a developmental trajectory toward pro-social behavior and few signs of anti-social
behavior.
In one child developmental study, researchers examined two key dimensions of early conscience
– internalization of rules of conduct and empathic affects to others – as factors
that may predict future social, adaptive and competent behavior.
Data was collected from a longitudinal study of children, from two parent families, at
age 25, 38, 52, 67 and 80 months.
Children's internalization of each parent's rules and empathy toward each parent's simulated
distress were observed at 25, 38 and 52 months.
Parents and teachers rated their adaptive, competent, pro-social behavior and anti-social
behavior at 80 months.
The researchers found that first, both the history of the child's early internalization
of parental rules and the history of his or her empathy predicted the children's competent
and adaptive functioning at 80 months, as rated by parents and teachers.
Second, children with stronger histories of internalization of parental rules from 25
to 52 months perceived themselves as more moral at 67 months.
Third, the children that showed stronger internalization from 25 to 52 months came to see themselves
as more moral and "good".
These self-perceptions, in turn, predicted the way parents and teachers would rate their
competent and adaptive functioning at 80 months.
As a symptom: In behavioral psychology, the concept of internalization
may also refer to disorders and behaviors in which a person deals with stressors in
manners not externally evident.
Such disorders and behaviors include depression, anxiety disorder, bulimia and anorexia.
Biology: In sciences such as biology, internalization
is another term for endocytosis, in which molecules such as proteins are engulfed by
the cell membrane and drawn into the cell.
Economics and management: In economics, internalization theory explains
the practice of multinational enterprises (MNEs) to execute transactions within their
organization rather than relying on an outside market.
It must be cheaper for an MNE to internalize the transfer of its unique ownership advantages
between countries than to do so through markets.
In other words, the alternative to internalization through direct investment is some form of
licensing of the firm's know-how to a firm in the target economy.
Finance: In finance, internalization can refer to several
concepts.
"When you place an order to buy or sell a stock, your broker has choices on where to
execute your order.
Instead of routing your order to a market or market-makers for execution, your broker
may fill the order from the firm's own inventory – this is called 'internalization'.
In this way, your broker's firm may make money on the "spread" – which is the difference
between the purchase price and the sale price."
For a related issue regarding trade execution, see payment for order flow.
Thanks for watching.
Please, subscribe to our channel.
-------------------------------------------
Only Teen To Skip Walkout Leaves Everyone Speechless With What Was Found At Her Desk - Duration: 4:41.
For more infomation >> Only Teen To Skip Walkout Leaves Everyone Speechless With What Was Found At Her Desk - Duration: 4:41. -------------------------------------------
What is Irrational Exuberance? | Definition & Explanation of Irrational Exuberance - Duration: 6:29.
Irrational exuberance is a phrase used by the then-Federal Reserve Board chairman, Alan
Greenspan, in a speech given at the American Enterprise Institute during the dot-com bubble
of the 1990s.
The phrase was interpreted as a warning that the market might be overvalued.
Initial fame: Greenspan's comment was made during a televised
speech on December 5, 1996 (emphasis added in excerpt):
Clearly, sustained low inflation implies less uncertainty about the future, and lower risk
premiums imply higher prices of stocks and other earning assets.
We can see that in the inverse relationship exhibited by price/earnings ratios and the
rate of inflation in the past.
But how do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset values, which then
become subject to unexpected and prolonged contractions as they have in Japan over the
past decade?
— "The Challenge of Central Banking in a Democratic Society", 1996-12-05
The Tokyo market was open during the speech and immediately moved down sharply after this
comment, closing off 3%.
Markets around the world followed.
The prescience of the short comment within a rather dry and complex speech would not
normally have been so memorable; however, it was followed about three years later by
major slumps in stock markets worldwide, particularly the Nasdaq Composite, provoking a strong reaction
in financial circles and making its way into colloquial speech.
Greenspan's comment was well remembered, although few heeded the warning.
Origin of the phrase: The phrase was also used by Yale professor
Robert Shiller, who was reportedly Greenspan's source for the phrase.
Shiller used it as the title of his book, Irrational Exuberance, in 2000.
Shiller is associated with the CAPE ratio and the Case-Shiller Home Price Index popularized
during the housing bubble of 2004–2007.
He is frequently asked during interviews whether markets are irrationally exuberant as asset
prices rise.
There was some speculation for many years whether Greenspan borrowed the phrase from
Shiller without attribution, although Shiller later wrote that he contributed "irrational"
at a lunch with Greenspan before the speech but "exuberant" was a previous Greenspan term
and it was Greenspan who coined the phrase and not a speech writer.
Greenspan wrote in his 2008 book that the phrase occurred to him in the bathtub while
he was writing a speech.
The irony of the phrase and its aftermath lies in Greenspan's widely held reputation
as the most artful practitioner of Fedspeak, often known as Greenspeak, in the modern televised
era.
The speech coincided with the rise of dedicated financial TV channels around the world that
would broadcast his comments live, such as CNBC. Greenspan's idea was to obfuscate the
Fed Chairman's true opinion in long complex sentences with obscure words so as to intentionally
mute any strong market response.
Precisely because he was considered to be so good at this, an uncharacteristically clear
statement such as "irrational exuberance" was viewed as a strong signal to the markets
and its meaning was widely discussed by financial journalists at the time of the speech.
The further irony was that if it was indeed his intended purpose to "talk markets down"
he was later ignored as stock valuations three years later dwarfed the levels at the time
of the speech.
This phrase is arguably the most famous example of Greenspeak, albeit perhaps an atypical
one.
Continued popularization: It had become a catchphrase of the boom to
such an extent that, during the economic recession that followed the stock market collapse of
2000, bumper stickers reading "I want to be irrationally exuberant again" were sighted
in Silicon Valley and elsewhere.
By the mid-to-late 2000s the dot-com losses were recouped and eclipsed by a combination
of events, including the 2000s commodities boom and the United States housing bubble.
However, the recession of 2007 onward wiped out these gains.
The second market slump brought the phrase back into the public eye, where it was much
used in hindsight, to characterize the excesses of the bygone era.
In 2006, upon Greenspan's retirement from the Federal Reserve Board, The Daily Show
with Jon Stewart held a full-length farewell show in his honor, named An Irrationally Exuberant
Tribute to Alan Greenspan.
The term gained new currency after the collapse of the US housing market in 2008 that led
to a worldwide financial panic.
Shiller was the co-creator of the Case-Shiller index that tracks US residential housing prices.
He is frequently interviewed as an expert on home prices and shared the Nobel prize
in economics in 2013 for his work on asset prices.
Greenspan's 1996 speech and Shiller's 2000 book are often viewed as harbingers of future
frenzy whether or not they specifically predicted the bubbles and subsequent crashes that followed.
This combination of events caused the phrase at present to be most often associated with
the 1990s dot-com bubble and the 2000s US housing bubble although it can be linked to
any financial asset bubble or social frenzy phenomena, such as the tulip mania of 17th
century Holland.
The phrase is often cited in conjunction with criticism of Greenspan's policies and debate
whether he did enough to contain the two major bubbles of those two decades.
It is also used in arguments about whether capitalist free markets are rational.
Nobel Prize Laureate and author of seminal Irrational Exuberance (book), Robert J. Shiller,
called Bitcoin the best current example of a speculative bubble.
Author Dan Pink also used the phrase in 2009 in his book "Drive: The Surprising Truth About
What Motivates Us" in the chapter discussing how extrinsic motivation can encourage short-term
thinking at the cost of long-term health: "This is the nature of economic bubbles: What
seems to be irrational exuberance is ultimately a bad case of extrinsically motivated myopia"
Thanks for watching.
Please, subscribe to our channel.
-------------------------------------------
Lena Dunham's mother thinks she bit Beyonce - What Is The Reason?!!! [SEE DETAILS] - Duration: 3:33.
Lena Dunhams mother is weirdly doubtful of her after she was accused of biting Beyoncé.
The Girls creator was had the finger pointed at her by many fans on social media after actress Tiffany Haddish caused a stir earlier this week when she claimed an unidentified guest had bitten the Formation singer on the cheek at a party they attended together last year.
The search to discover who the culprit was has been widespread since the news broke, and although Lena has already denied being involved, she has now revealed that even her own mother thinks she might have something to do with the alleged altercation.
Taking to Twitter on Friday (3003.18) night, she wrote: To the paps who chased me through the airport yelling we need to know- did you bite Beyonce!? A- I basically only leave home for work and ginger ale.
B- No, you dont need to know. C- What the f**k do you think?. But can someone explain to my mom why anyone THINKS I bit Beyonce? She seems mad and also weirdly doubtful of me.
And the 31-year-old actress is still perplexed by the whole situation.
On Saturday (3103. 18) morning, she added: Woke up with this thought: having to deny biting anyone as an adult is its own special hell/not the reality I was hoping to inhabit (sic).
Meanwhile, 38-year-old Tiffany recently revealed she would never expose the identity of the biter, as she has allegedly signed a non-disclosure agreement preventing her from saying anything.
Speaking in her Instagram Story while getting her hair done, she said: NDAs are real, so Im not saying s**t about nothing.
Previously, Chrissy Teigen admitted she thought she knew who the mystery person was because they were the worst.
She Tweeted: I cannot leave this planet without knowing who bit Beyonce in the face. I can only think of one person who would do this. but I cannot say. but she.is the worst. .
But the Lip Sync Battle star - who is married to musician John Legend - subsequently revealed that her original guess about the culprit was proven to be wrong.
She confessed: My initial guess was wrong. The real person? I *never* would have guessed. IVE SAID TOO MUCH .
-------------------------------------------
What is Intangible Asset? | Definition & Explanation of Intangible Asset - Duration: 8:28.
An intangible asset is an asset that lacks physical substance (unlike physical assets
such as machinery and buildings) and usually is very hard to evaluate.
It includes patents, copyrights, franchises, goodwill, trademarks, trade names, the general
interpretation also includes software and other intangible computer based assets.
Contrary to other assets, they generally—though not necessarily—suffer from typical market
failures of non-rivalry and non-excludability.
Definition: Intangible assets have been argued to be one
possible contributor to the disparity between company value as per their accounting records,
and company value as per their market capitalization.Considering this argument, it is important to understand
what an intangible asset truly is in the eyes of an accountant.
A number of attempts have been made to define intangible assets:
Prior to 2005 the Australian Accounting Standards Board issued the Statement of Accounting
Concepts number 4 (SAC 4).
This statement did not provide a formal definition of an intangible asset but did provide that
tangibility was not an essential characteristic of asset.
International Accounting Standards Board standard 38 (IAS 38) defines an intangible
asset as: "an identifiable non-monetary asset without physical substance."
This definition is in addition to the standard definition of an asset which requires a past
event that has given rise to a resource that the entity controls and from which future
economic benefits are expected to flow.
Thus, the extra requirement for an intangible asset under IAS 38 is identifiability.
This criterion requires that an intangible asset is separable from the entity or that
it arises from a contractual or legal right.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standard Codification 350 (ASC
350) defines an intangible asset as an asset, other than a financial asset, that lacks physical
substance.
The lack of physical substance would therefore seem to be a defining characteristic of an
intangible asset.
Both the IASB and FASB definitions specifically preclude monetary assets in their definition
of an intangible asset.
This is necessary in order to avoid the classification of items such as accounts receivable, derivatives
and cash in the bank as an intangible asset.
IAS 38 contains examples of intangible assets, including: computer software, copyright and
patents.
Research and development: R&D is considered as one among several other
intangible assets (e.g., about 16 percent of all intangible assets in the US ), even
if most countries treat R&D as current expenses for both legal and tax purposes.
While most countries report some intangibles in their National Income and Product Accounts
(NIPA), no country has included a comprehensive measure of intangible assets.
Yet, economists recognize the growing contribution of intangible assets in long-term GDP growth.
IAS 38 requires any project that results in the generation of a resource to the entity
be classified into two phases: a research phase, and a development phase.
Research is defined as "the original and planned investigation undertaken with the prospect
of gaining new scientific or technical knowledge and understanding.
For example, a company can carry a research on one of its products which it will use in
the entity of which results in future economic income.
Development is defined as "the application of research findings to a plan or design for
the production of new or substantially improved materials, devices, products, processes, systems,
or services, before the start of commercial production or use."
The accounting treatment of such expenses depends on whether it is classified as research
or development.
Where the distinction cannot be made, IAS 38 requires that the entire project be treated
as research and expensed through the Statement of Comprehensive Income.
As research expenditure is highly speculative, there is no certainty that future economic
benefits will flow to the entity.
As such, prudence dictates that research expenditure be expensed through the Statement of Comprehensive
Income.
Development expenditure, however, is less speculative and it becomes possible to predict
the future economic benefits that will flow to the entity.
The matching concept dictates that development expenditure be capitalised as the expenditure
will generate future economic benefit to the entity.
The classification of research and development expenditure can be highly subjective, and
it is important to note that organisations may have an ulterior motive in its classification
of research and development expenditure.
Less scrupulous directors may manipulate financial statements through their classification of
research and development expenditure.
Financial accounting: General standards:
The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) offers some guidance (IAS 38) as to
how intangible assets should be accounted for in financial statements.
In general, legal intangibles that are developed internally are not recognized and legal intangibles
that are purchased from third parties are recognized.
Wordings are similar to IAS 9.
Under US GAAP, intangible assets are classified into: Purchased vs. internally created intangibles,
and Limited-life vs. indefinite-life intangibles.
Expense allocation: Intangible assets are typically expensed according
to their respective life expectancy.
Intangible assets have either an identifiable or indefinite useful life.
Intangible assets with identifiable useful lives are amortized on a straight-line basis
over their economic or legal life, whichever is shorter.
Examples of intangible assets with identifiable useful lives include copyrights and patents.
Intangible assets with indefinite useful lives are reassessed each year for impairment.
If an impairment has occurred, then a loss must be recognized.
An impairment loss is determined by subtracting the asset's fair value from the asset's book/carrying
value.
Trademarks and goodwill are examples of intangible assets with indefinite useful lives.
Goodwill has to be tested for impairment rather than amortized.
If impaired, goodwill is reduced and loss is recognized in the Income statement.
Taxation: For personal income tax purposes, some costs
with respect to intangible assets must be capitalized rather than treated as deductible
expenses.
Treasury regulations generally require capitalization of costs associated with acquiring, creating,
or enhancing intangible assets.
For example, an amount paid to obtain a trademark must be capitalized.
Certain amounts paid to facilitate these transactions are also capitalized.
Some types of intangible assets are categorized based on whether the asset is acquired from
another party or created by the taxpayer.
The regulations contain many provisions intended to make it easier to determine when capitalization
is required.
Given the growing importance of intangible assets as a source of economic growth and
tax revenue, as well as the fact that their non-physical nature makes it easier for taxpayers
to engage in tax strategies such as income-shifting or transfer pricing, tax authorities and international
organizations have been designing ways to link intangible assets to the place where
they were created, hence defining nexus.
Intangibles for corporations are amortized over a 15-year period, equivalent to 180 months.
Definition of "intangibles" differs from standard accounting, in some US state governments.
These governments may refer to stocks and bonds as "intangibles."
Thanks for watching.
Please, subscribe to our channel.
-------------------------------------------
What is Gaifong? | Rent everything you need | Gaifong - Duration: 0:58.
For more infomation >> What is Gaifong? | Rent everything you need | Gaifong - Duration: 0:58. -------------------------------------------
What is Gross Domestic Product? | Definition & Explanation of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - Duration: 34:40.
Gross domestic product (GDP) is a monetary measure of the market value of all final goods
and services produced in a period (quarterly or yearly) of time.
Nominal GDP estimates are commonly used to determine the economic performance of a whole
country or region, and to make international comparisons.
Nominal GDP per capita does not, however, reflect differences in the cost of living
and the inflation rates of the countries; therefore using a basis of GDP per capita
at purchasing power parity (PPP) is arguably more useful when comparing differences in
living standards between different nations.
Definition: The OECD defines GDP as "an aggregate measure
of production equal to the sum of the gross values added of all resident and institutional
units engaged in production (plus any taxes, and minus any subsidies, on products not included
in the value of their outputs)."
An IMF publication states that "GDP measures the monetary value of final goods and services
- that are bought by the final user - produced in a country in a given period of time (say
a quarter or a year)."
Total GDP can also be broken down into the contribution of each industry or sector of
the economy.
The ratio of GDP to the total population of the region is the per capita GDP and the same
is called Mean Standard of Living.
GDP is considered the "world's most powerful statistical indicator of national development
and progress".
History: William Petty came up with a basic concept
of GDP to defend landlords against unfair taxation during warfare between the Dutch
and the English between 1652 and 1674.
Charles Davenantdeveloped the method further in 1695.
The modern concept of GDP was first developed by Simon Kuznets for a US Congress report
in 1934.
In this report, Kuznets warned against its use as a measure of welfare (see below under
limitations and criticisms).
After the Bretton Woods conference in 1944, GDP became the main tool for measuring a country's
economy.
At that time gross national product (GNP) was the preferred estimate, which differed
from GDP in that it measured production by a country's citizens at home and abroad rather
than its 'resident institutional units' (see OECD definition above).
The switch from "GNP" to "GDP" in the US was in 1991, trailing behind most other nations.
Crucial to the development of GDP was its role in the wartime effort.A crucial role
was played here by the US Department of Commerce under Milton Gilbert where ideas from Kuznets
were embedded into governmental institutions.
The history of the concept of GDP should be distinguished from the history of changes
in ways of estimating it.
The value added by firms is relatively easy to calculate from their accounts, but the
value added by the public sector, by financial industries, and by intangible asset creation
is more complex.
These activities are increasingly important in developed economies, and the international
conventions governing their estimation and their inclusion or exclusion in GDP regularly
change in an attempt to keep up with industrial advances.
In the words of one academic economist "The actual number for GDP is therefore the product
of a vast patchwork of statistics and a complicated set of processes carried out on the raw data
to fit them to the conceptual framework."
Determining gross domestic product (GDP): GDP can be determined in three ways, all of
which should, in principle, give the same result.
They are the production (or output or value added) approach, the income approach, or the
speculated expenditure approach.
The most direct of the three is the production approach, which sums the outputs of every
class of enterprise to arrive at the total.
The expenditure approach works on the principle that all of the product must be bought by
somebody, therefore the value of the total product must be equal to people's total expenditures
in buying things.
The income approach works on the principle that the incomes of the productive factors
("producers," colloquially) must be equal to the value of their product, and determines
GDP by finding the sum of all producers' incomes.
Production approach: This approach mirrors the OECD definition
given above.
1.
Estimate the gross value of domestic output out of the many various economic activities;
2.
Determine the [intermediate consumption], i.e., the cost of material, supplies and services
used to produce final goods or services.
3.
Deduct intermediate consumption from gross value to obtain the gross value added.
Gross value added = gross value of output – value of intermediate consumption.
Value of output = value of the total sales of goods and services plus value of changes
in the inventory.
The sum of the gross value added in the various economic activities is known as "GDP at factor
cost".
GDP at factor cost plus indirect taxes less subsidies on products = "GDP at producer price".
For measuring output of domestic product, economic activities (i.e. industries) are
classified into various sectors.
After classifying economic activities, the output of each sector is calculated by any
of the following two methods: 1.
By multiplying the output of each sector by their respective market price and adding them
together 2.
By collecting data on gross sales and inventories from the records of companies and adding them
together The gross value of all sectors is then added
to get the gross value added (GVA) at factor cost.
Subtracting each sector's intermediate consumption from gross output gives the GVA at factor
cost.
Adding indirect tax minus subsidies in GVA at factor cost gives the "GVA at producer
prices".
Income approach: The second way of estimating GDP is to use
"the sum of primary incomes distributed by resident producer units".
If GDP is calculated this way it is sometimes called gross domestic income (GDI), or GDP
(I).
GDI should provide the same amount as the expenditure method described later.
(By definition, GDI = GDP.
In practice, however, measurement errors will make the two figures slightly off when reported
by national statistical agencies.)
This method measures GDP by adding incomes that firms pay households for factors of production
they hire - wages for labour, interest for capital, rent for land and profits for entrepreneurship.
The US "National Income and Expenditure Accounts" divide incomes into five categories:
1.
Wages, salaries, and supplementary labour income
2.
Corporate profits 3.
Interest and miscellaneous investment income 4.
Farmers' incomes 5.
Income from non-farm unincorporated businesses These five income components sum to net domestic
income at factor cost.
Two adjustments must be made to get GDP: 1.
Indirect taxes minus subsidies are added to get from factor cost to market prices.
2.
Depreciation (or capital consumption allowance) is added to get from net domestic product
to gross domestic product.
Total income can be subdivided according to various schemes, leading to various formulae
for GDP measured by the income approach.
A common one is: GDP = compensation of employees + gross operating
surplus + gross mixed income + taxes less subsidies on production and imports
GDP = COE + GOS + GMI + TP & M – SP & M Compensation of employees (COE) measures
the total remuneration to employees for work done.
It includes wages and salaries, as well as employer contributions to social security
and other such programs.
Gross operating surplus (GOS) is the surplus due to owners of incorporated businesses.
Often called profits, although only a subset of total costs are subtracted from gross output
to calculate GOS.
Gross mixed income (GMI) is the same measure as GOS, but for unincorporated businesses.
This often includes most small businesses.
The sum of COE, GOS and GMI is called total factor income; it is the income of all of
the factors of production in society.
It measures the value of GDP at factor (basic) prices.
The difference between basic prices and final prices (those used in the expenditure calculation)
is the total taxes and subsidies that the government has levied or paid on that production.
So adding taxes less subsidies on production and imports converts GDP at factor cost to
GDP(I).
Total factor income is also sometimes expressed as:
Total factor income = employee compensation + corporate profits + proprietor's income
+ rental income + net interest Expenditure approach:
The third way to estimate GDP is to calculate the sum of the final uses of goods and services
(all uses except intermediate consumption) measured in purchasers' prices.
Market goods which are produced are purchased by someone.
In the case where a good is produced and unsold, the standard accounting convention is that
the producer has bought the good from themselves.
Therefore, measuring the total expenditure used to buy things is a way of measuring production.
This is known as the expenditure method of calculating GDP.
Components of GDP by expenditure: Here is a description of each GDP component:
C (consumption) is normally the largest GDP component in the economy, consisting of
private expenditures in the economy (household final consumption expenditure).
These personal expenditures fall under one of the following categories: durable goods,
nondurable goods, and services.
Examples include food, rent, jewelry, gasoline, and medical expenses, but not the purchase
of new housing.
I (investment) includes, for instance, business investment in equipment, but does
not include exchanges of existing assets.
Examples include construction of a new mine, purchase of software, or purchase of machinery
and equipment for a factory.
Spending by households (not government) on new houses is also included in investment.
In contrast to its colloquial meaning, "investment" in GDP does not mean purchases of financial
products.
Buying financial products is classed as 'saving', as opposed to investment.
This avoids double-counting: if one buys shares in a company, and the company uses the money
received to buy plant, equipment, etc., the amount will be counted toward GDP when the
company spends the money on those things; to also count it when one gives it to the
company would be to count two times an amount that only corresponds to one group of products.
Buying bonds or stocks is a swapping of deeds, a transfer of claims on future production,
not directly an expenditure on products.
G (government spending) is the sum of government expenditures on final goods and
services.
It includes salaries of public servants, purchases of weapons for the military and any investment
expenditure by a government.
It does not include any transfer payments, such as social security or unemployment benefits.
X (exports) represents gross exports.
GDP captures the amount a country produces, including goods and services produced for
other nations' consumption, therefore exports are added.
M (imports) represents gross imports.
Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C,
and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic.
Note that C, G, and I are expenditures on final goods and services; expenditures on
intermediate goods and services do not count.
(Intermediate goods and services are those used by businesses to produce other goods
and services within the accounting year.)
According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, which is responsible for calculating the national
accounts in the United States, "In general, the source data for the expenditures components
are considered more reliable than those for the income components [see income method,
below]."
GDP vs GNI: GDP can be contrasted with gross national
product (GNP) or, as it is now known, gross national income (GNI).
The difference is that GDP defines its scope according to location, while GNI defines its
scope according to ownership.
In a global context, world GDP and world GNI are, therefore, equivalent terms.
GDP is product produced within a country's borders; GNI is product produced by enterprises
owned by a country's citizens.
The two would be the same if all of the productive enterprises in a country were owned by its
own citizens, and those citizens did not own productive enterprises in any other countries.
In practice, however, foreign ownership makes GDP and GNI non-identical.
Production within a country's borders, but by an enterprise owned by somebody outside
the country, counts as part of its GDP but not its GNI; on the other hand, production
by an enterprise located outside the country, but owned by one of its citizens, counts as
part of its GNI but not its GDP.
For example, the GNI of the USA is the value of output produced by American-owned firms,
regardless of where the firms are located.
Similarly, if a country becomes increasingly in debt, and spends large amounts of income
servicing this debt this will be reflected in a decreased GNI but not a decreased GDP.
Similarly, if a country sells off its resources to entities outside their country this will
also be reflected over time in decreased GNI, but not decreased GDP.
This would make the use of GDP more attractive for politicians in countries with increasing
national debt and decreasing assets.
Gross national income (GNI) equals GDP plus income receipts from the rest of the world
minus income payments to the rest of the world.
In 1991, the United States switched from using GNP to using GDP as its primary measure of
production.
The relationship between United States GDP and GNP is shown in table 1.7.5 of the National
Income and Product Accounts.
International standards: The international standard for measuring GDP
is contained in the book System of National Accounts (1993), which was prepared by representatives
of the International Monetary Fund, European Union, Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development, United Nations and World Bank.
The publication is normally referred to as SNA93 to distinguish it from the previous
edition published in 1968 (called SNA68) SNA93 provides a set of rules and procedures
for the measurement of national accounts.
The standards are designed to be flexible, to allow for differences in local statistical
needs and conditions.
National measurement: Within each country GDP is normally measured
by a national government statistical agency, as private sector organizations normally do
not have access to the information required (especially information on expenditure and
production by governments).
Nominal GDP and adjustments to GDP: The raw GDP figure as given by the equations
above is called the nominal, historical, or current, GDP.
When one compares GDP figures from one year to another, it is desirable to compensate
for changes in the value of money – i.e., for the effects of inflation or deflation.
To make it more meaningful for year-to-year comparisons, it may be multiplied by the ratio
between the value of money in the year the GDP was measured and the value of money in
a base year.
For example, suppose a country's GDP in 1990 was $100 million and its GDP in 2000 was $300
million.
Suppose also that inflation had halved the value of its currency over that period.
To meaningfully compare its GDP in 2000 to its GDP in 1990, we could multiply the GDP
in 2000 by one-half, to make it relative to 1990 as a base year.
The result would be that the GDP in 2000 equals $300 million × one-half = $150 million, in
1990 monetary terms.
We would see that the country's GDP had realistically increased 50 percent over that period, not
200 percent, as it might appear from the raw GDP data.
The GDP adjusted for changes in money value in this way is called the real, or constant,
GDP.
The factor used to convert GDP from current to constant values in this way is called the
GDP deflator.
Unlike consumer price index, which measures inflation or deflation in the price of household
consumer goods, the GDP deflator measures changes in the prices of all domestically
produced goods and services in an economy including investment goods and government
services, as well as household consumption goods.
Constant-GDP figures allow us to calculate a GDP growth rate, which indicates how much
a country's production has increased (or decreased, if the growth rate is negative) compared to
the previous year.
Real GDP growth rate for year n = [(Real GDP in year n) − (Real GDP in year n − 1)]
/ (Real GDP in year n − 1) Another thing that it may be desirable to
account for is population growth.
If a country's GDP doubled over a certain period, but its population tripled, the increase
in GDP may not mean that the standard of living increased for the country's residents; the
average person in the country is producing less than they were before.
Per-capita GDP is a measure to account for population growth.
Cross-border comparison and purchasing power parity:
The level of GDP in different countries may be compared by converting their value in national
currency according to either the current currency exchange rate, or the purchasing power parity
exchange rate.
Current currency exchange rate is the exchange rate in the international foreign
exchange market.
Purchasing power parity exchange rate is the exchange rate based on the purchasing
power parity (PPP) of a currency relative to a selected standard (usually the United
States dollar).
This is a comparative (and theoretical) exchange rate, the only way to directly realize this
rate is to sell an entire CPI basket in one country, convert the cash at the currency
market rate & then rebuy that same basket of goods in the other country (with the converted
cash).
Going from country to country, the distribution of prices within the basket will vary; typically,
non-tradable purchases will consume a greater proportion of the basket's total cost in the
higher GDP country, per the Balassa-Samuelson effect.
The ranking of countries may differ significantly based on which method is used.
The current exchange rate method converts the value of goods and services using global
currency exchange rates.
The method can offer better indications of a country's international purchasing power.
For instance, if 10% of GDP is being spent on buying hi-tech foreign arms, the number
of weapons purchased is entirely governed by current exchange rates, since arms are
a traded product bought on the international market.
There is no meaningful 'local' price distinct from the international price for high technology
goods.
The PPP method of GDP conversion is more relevant to non-traded goods and services.
In the above example if hi-tech weapons are to be produced internally their amount will
be governed by GDP(PPP) rather than nominal GDP.
There is a clear pattern of the purchasing power parity method decreasing the disparity
in GDP between high and low income (GDP) countries, as compared to the current exchange rate method.
This finding is called the Penn effect.
For more information, see Measures of national income and output.
Standard of living and GDP: Wealth distribution and externalities:
GDP per capita is often used as an indicator of living standards.
The major advantage of GDP per capita as an indicator of standard of living is that it
is measured frequently, widely, and consistently.
It is measured frequently in that most countries provide information on GDP on a quarterly
basis, allowing trends to be seen quickly.
It is measured widely in that some measure of GDP is available for almost every country
in the world, allowing inter-country comparisons.
It is measured consistently in that the technical definition of GDP is relatively consistent
among countries.
GDP does not include several factors that influence the standard of living.
In particular, it fails to account for: Externalities – Economic growth may
entail an increase in negative externalities that are not directly measured in GDP.
Increased industrial output might grow GDP, but any pollution is not counted.
Non-market transactions– GDP excludes activities that are not provided through the
market, such as household production, bartering of goods and services, and volunteer or unpaid
services.
Non-monetary economy– GDP omits economies where no money comes into play at all, resulting
in inaccurate or abnormally low GDP figures.
For example, in countries with major business transactions occurring informally, portions
of local economy are not easily registered.
Bartering may be more prominent than the use of money, even extending to services.
Quality improvements and inclusion of new products– by not fully adjusting for
quality improvements and new products, GDP understates true economic growth.
For instance, although computers today are less expensive and more powerful than computers
from the past, GDP treats them as the same products by only accounting for the monetary
value.
The introduction of new products is also difficult to measure accurately and is not reflected
in GDP despite the fact that it may increase the standard of living.
For example, even the richest person in 1900 could not purchase standard products, such
as antibiotics and cell phones, that an average consumer can buy today, since such modern
conveniences did not exist then.
Sustainability of growth– GDP is a measurement of economic historic activity and is not necessarily
a projection.
Wealth distribution – GDP does not account for variances in incomes of various demographic
groups.
See income inequality metrics for discussion of a variety of inequality-based economic
measures.
It can be argued that GDP per capita as an indicator standard of living is correlated
with these factors, capturing them indirectly.
As a result, GDP per capita as a standard of living is a continued usage because most
people have a fairly accurate idea of what it is and know it is tough to come up with
quantitative measures for such constructs as happiness, quality of life, and well-being.
Limitations and criticisms: Limitations at introduction:
Simon Kuznets, the economist who developed the first comprehensive set of measures of
national income, stated in his first report to the US Congress in 1934, in a section titled
"Uses and Abuses of National Income Measurements": The valuable capacity of the human mind to
simplify a complex situation in a compact characterization becomes dangerous when not
controlled in terms of definitely stated criteria.
With quantitative measurements especially, the definiteness of the result suggests, often
misleadingly, a precision and simplicity in the outlines of the object measured.
Measurements of national income are subject to this type of illusion and resulting abuse,
especially since they deal with matters that are the center of conflict of opposing social
groups where the effectiveness of an argument is often contingent upon oversimplification.
All these qualifications upon estimates of national income as an index of productivity
are just as important when income measurements are interpreted from the point of view of
economic welfare.
But in the latter case additional difficulties will be suggested to anyone who wants to penetrate
below the surface of total figures and market values.
Economic welfare cannot be adequately measured unless the personal distribution of income
is known.
And no income measurement undertakes to estimate the reverse side of income, that is, the intensity
and unpleasantness of effort going into the earning of income.
The welfare of a nation can, therefore, scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national
income as defined above.
In 1962, Kuznets stated: Distinctions must be kept in mind between
quantity and quality of growth, between costs and returns, and between the short and long
run.
Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what.
Further criticisms: Ever since the development of GDP, multiple
observers have pointed out limitations of using GDP as the overarching measure of economic
and social progress.
Many environmentalists argue that GDP is a poor measure of social progress because it
does not take into account harm to the environment.
Although a high or rising level of GDP is often associated with increased economic and
social progress within a country, a number of scholars have pointed out that this does
not necessarily play out in many instances.
For example, Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen have pointed out that an increase in GDP or in
GDP growth does not necessarily lead to a higher standard of living, particularly in
areas such as healthcare and education.
Another important area that does not necessarily improve along with GDP is political liberty,
which is most notable in China, where GDP growth is strong yet political liberties are
heavily restricted.
GDP does not account for the distribution of income among the residents of a country,
because GDP is merely an aggregate measure.
An economy may be highly developed or growing rapidly, but also contain a wide gap between
the rich and the poor in a society.
These inequalities often occur on the lines of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or other
minority status within countries.
This can lead to misleading characterizations of economic well-being if the income distribution
is heavily skewed toward the high end, as the poorer residents will not directly benefit
from the overall level of wealth and income generated in their country.
Even GDP per capita measures may have the same downside if inequality is high.
For example, South Africa during apartheid ranked high in terms of GDP per capita, but
the benefits of this immense wealth and income were not shared equally among the country.
GDP does not take into account the value of household and other unpaid work.
Some, including Martha Nussbaum, argue that this value should be included in measuring
GDP, as household labor is largely a substitute for goods and services that would otherwise
be purchased for value.
Even under conservative estimates, the value of unpaid labor in Australia has been calculated
to be over 50% of the country's GDP.
A later study analyzed this value in other countries, with results ranging from a low
of about 15% in Canada (using conservative estimates) to high of nearly 70% in the United
Kingdom (using more liberal estimates).
For the United States, the value was estimated to be between about 20% on the low end to
nearly 50% on the high end, depending on the methodology being used.
Because many public policies are shaped by GDP calculations and by the related field
of national accounts, the non-inclusion of unpaid work in calculating GDP can create
distortions in public policy, and some economists have advocated for changes in the way public
policies are formed and implemented.
The UK's Natural Capital Committee highlighted the shortcomings of GDP in its advice to the
UK Government in 2013, pointing out that GDP "focuses on flows, not stocks.
As a result, an economy can run down its assets yet, at the same time, record high levels
of GDP growth, until a point is reached where the depleted assets act as a check on future
growth".
They then went on to say that "it is apparent that the recorded GDP growth rate overstates
the sustainable growth rate.
Broader measures of wellbeing and wealth are needed for this and there is a danger that
short-term decisions based solely on what is currently measured by national accounts
may prove to be costly in the long-term".
Proposals to overcome GDP limitations: In response to these and other limitations
of using GDP, alternative approaches have emerged.
In the 1980s, Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum developed the capability approach, which focuses
on the functional capabilities enjoyed by people within a country, rather than the aggregate
wealth held within a country.
These capabilities consist of the functions that a person is able to achieve.
In 1990 Mahbub ul Haq, a Pakistani Economist at the United Nations, introduced the Human
Development Index (HDI).
The HDI is a composite index of life expectancy at birth, adult literacy rate and standard
of living measured as a logarithmic function of GDP, adjusted to purchasing power parity.
In 1989, John B. Cobb and Herman Daly introduced Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare
(ISEW) by taking into account various other factors such as consumption of nonrenewable
resources and degradation of the environment.
The new formula deducted from GDP (personal consumption + public non-defensive expenditures
- private defensive expenditures + capital formation + services from domestic labour
- costs of environmental degradation - depreciation of natural capital)
In 2005, Med Jones, an American Economist, at the International Institute of Management,
introduced the first secular Gross National Happiness Index a.k.a Gross National Well-beingframework
and Index to complement GDP economics with additional seven dimensions, including environment,
education, and government, work, social and health (mental and physical) indicators.
The proposal was inspired by the King of Bhutan's GNH philosophy.
In 2009 the European Union released a communication titled GDP and beyond: Measuring
progress in a changing world that identified five actions to improve the indicators of
progress in ways that make it more responsive to the concerns of its citizens: Introduced
a proposal to complementing GDP with environmental and social indicators
In 2009 Professors Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen, and Jean-Paul Fitoussi at the Commission
on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress (CMEPSP), formed by French
President, Nicolas Sarkozy published a proposal to overcome the limitation of GDP economics
to expand the focus to well-being economics with wellbeing framework consisting of health,
environment, work, physical safety, economic safety, political freedom.
In 2012, the Karma Ura of the Center for Bhutan Studies published Bhutan Local GNH
Index contributors to happiness—physical, mental and spiritual health; time-balance;
social and community vitality; cultural vitality; education; living standards; good governance;
and ecological vitality.
The Bhutan GNH Index.
In 2013 OECD Better Life Index was published by the OECD.
The dimensions of the index included health, economic, workplace, income, jobs, housing,
civic engagement, life satisfaction In 2013 professors John Helliwell, Richard
Layard and Jeffrey Sachs published World Happiness Report and proposed to measure other wellbeing
indicators in addition to GDP.
The evaluation framework included GDP per capita, Gini (income inequality), life satisfaction,
health, freedom of life choices, trust and absence of corruption.
Thanks for watching.
Please, subscribe to our channel.
-------------------------------------------
Arnold Schwarzenegger Open heart surgery - What Is The Reason?!!! [SEE DETAILS] - Duration: 3:31.
Sylvester Stallone has confirmed Arnold Schwarzenegger is better than ever following his open heart surgery.
The former Governor of California was admitted to hospital this week to have a catheter valve replaced, and after complications with the procedure, a team of doctors were forced to perform emergency surgery.
Now, Arnold is said to be awake and recovering from his ordeal, and his close pal Sylvester has wished him nothing but the best.
When asked about the Terminator stars condition, Sly said: Arnold is a strong man. Hell be bigger and better than ever..
The 71-year-old Hollywood legend also insisted that he would love to visit Arnold in the hospital if [he] gets a chance.
Following Arnolds health scare, some fans have suggested that he gives up his long-term habit of smoking cigars, and Sylvester - who shares the habit - has said it isnt something he thinks either of them will do.
He said: Some things you just cant give up, stogies and breathing. And when asked by TMZ if he thinks Arnold will put down the cigars, the Rocky star simply said: Doubt it.
Previously, Arnolds representative Daniel Ketchell shared a statement on Twitter in which he detailed the procedure which the Predator star underwent.
He wrote: Yesterday, Governor Schwarzenegger underwent a planned procedure at Cedars-Sinai to replace a pulmonic valve that was originally replaced due to a congenital heart defect in 1997.
That 1997 replacement valve was never meant to be permanent, and has outlived its life expectancy, so he chose to replace it yesterday through a less-invasive catheter valve replacement.
During that procedure, an open-heart surgery team was prepared, as they frequently are in these circumstances, in case the catheter procedure was unable to be performed.
Governor Schwarzeneggers pulmonic valve was successfully replaced and he is currently recovering from the surgery and in a stable condition.
We want to thank the entire medical team for their tireless efforts.. Daniel later revealed Arnold was awake and well following his surgery.
He tweeted: Update: @Schwarzenegger is awake and his first words were actually Im back, so he is in good spirits.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét