answer

watching

views

11 Aug 2019

How would you compare some of the socio economic consequences of opium that led to social and legislative movements in 19th Century England to similar issues in USA up till today that gave rise to the War on Drugs? Do these issues still justify the control of drugs such as opiates in the USA?

answer

watching

views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

You have 0 free answers left.
Get unlimited access to 3.8 million step-by-step answers.

Get unlimited access

Already have an account? Log in

Reid WolffLv2

12 Aug 2019

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.

Already have an account? Log in

Related questions


(Please Summerize the work down below, thank you)

Political	Economic
Growing political influences on healthcare advances	Cost of living increases
Global government influence on healthcare cost	Cost of insurance prices
Government control of Medicaid, Medicare funding	Rise of forecasted interest rates
Social/Cultural	Technical or Technology
Increase average age of population	Demand on new medical treatments
Patient expectations increase	Customize treatments
Demographics are in constant change	More advance service facilities
Environmental	Legal
Growing need for green business	Constant change of government drug Regulations
Environmental agenda and community awareness	Consumer laws
	Health and safety regulations



Porters 5 forces of business model

Competitive Rivalry
Growth opportunity for healthcare companies are expected to growing the next few years
Increase in new revolutionary drugs both in and outside of the US

Threat if New Entrants
Strict government regulations
Difficult to keep up due to constant change
Huge startup cost

Substitute Products
Threat of other substituting product and service at lower cost



Bargaining Power of Customers
Generic drugs offered at large discount to consumer
Larger less customized healthcare facility with lower housing costs
Several facilities offering similar services.

Bargaining power of supplier
Medical suppliers have a large pricing power
Bargaining power of physicians and nurses is huge because of large hospital benefits

Swot Analysis

Strengths

Highly trained and capable employees

Market experience

Strong leadership

High level of organizational efficiency

Excellent facilities

Strong commitment to bettering the community

Weaknesses

Increased cost of healthcare could lower our clientele

Limited staff resources

Limited cash flow to hire and train new employees

Lack of resources

Opportunities

Fast growing technology opens new doors for using state of the art equipment to better serve the patients.

Nursing and residential care is one of the fastest growing industries

Aging population

Threats

Uncertainty in political and economic climate causes hesitation for receiving new patients.

Funding constraints

Highly competitive market

Product or Service Analysis

Our services will be used by patients who cannot afford experimental treatments and patients who have been abandoned by the system because hospitals can no longer provide medical assistance. At our facility, we will be able to work with the families and provide them with different payments options, such as low monthly payment plans. Our main goal is to be able to treat the patient at a very affordable cost; however, if any patient does not possess the means to pay for treatment, he or she would not be turned away; our facility will tap into government and private funding to cover treatment cost.

The beauty of this service is that there isnât a charge of any kind to take part in our program because it is completely funded by government grants. Individuals that would take part would more than likely not have the means to pay a monthly deductible. Due to the nature of the business listed as a non-profit agency, there is no way to make a profit of any kind, as it would jeopardize the business in its entirety.

Some of the market factors that create a demand for our services include the need of medical care after having maximized all resources, the number of low income families, and the number of patients facing health issues needed extended medical care.

Opportunities that may derive from this business is the opportunity to expand and open multiple facilities, while extending a helping hand to many more in need. The risk, however, is the unstable funds deriving from grants. This can pose a huge treat to the business, as grants often times come and go and cannot be counted on as a constant income.

After studying the healthcare system and current policies in place, data shows many individuals facing severe health issues usually go untreated and uncared for due to the outrageous cost of medical care. It is devastating to see how often people, especially the elderly, are sent home and forgotten for the mere reason that hospitals and doctors are not willing to care for patients without financial means. In fact, in 2009 Harvard news reported 45,000 annual deaths due to lack of health coverage in the U.S. alone, which is significantly higher than the 18,000 reported by USA Today in 2002.

Financial Analysis

Clermont will be a nonprofit organization, dedicated to help the most needed. To open the facility fully operational we must take in consideration some fixed expenses like the land acquisition, permits, interest, brokers, administration fees, professionals (facility setup), staff, reports (environmental, occupational, fire, FDA), electricity, water, phone, water & sewer , connections, taxes, insurance, management, security, advertising, accountants, food, lawn mowers, bank fees, etc.

The facility will need have a total value of approximately three million dollars, but if we break the price of the land acquisition in to a thirty (30) year mortgage we can star up the business with an investment of approximately $ 233,944.61 USD to cover the first month of operation including all the startup permits and connections. After the first month the fixed expenses will be $184,444.00 USD with the exception of the months were taxes are due; taxes are around $ 43,000.00 USD paid quarterly will increase the tax month (depending on the facility fiscal year) for $ 10,750.00 USD approximately. We will fund all the costs with private and public funding, fundraiser, events, raffles, and most important with the help of the community.

As we mentioned before, Clermont is a nonprofit organization and we will do everything in our power to give the relief to the families in need. No one will be rejected because they do not have the money or the insurance cannot help. No money will be required from patient and every single dollar received will be spent in the patients, and in improving our facility and our service every day.

We believe our financial even breaking point will be a year after we begin operations, and be profitable soon after. There are many patients in need, and with the government and public grants each person will receive the treatment they need, and we will become the hope of many.

Hello, could you please assist with this discussion question for the Economics course? Thank you.

5) Go to the internet and find an article that discusses the problems of income inequality in the U.S. economy, summarize key points, and post in the Discussions area.

http://neweconomics.org/2014/12/why-inequality-is-an-economic-problem/

Why Inequality Is An Economic Problem

Rising economic inequality was a major driver of the financial crisis. With the OECD recently debunking âtrickle-downâ economics, our new report sets out the links between inequality, the growth in scale and influence of the financial sector, and the dangers for financial stability.

A fragile recovery

A return to growth in economies such as the UK and USA has been welcomed as a sign of recovery from the 2008 financial crisis. But as GDP picks up, so too has the widening gap between rich and poor.

The crisis may be over for the wealthy but the aftermath for ordinary workers depressed wages and growing debt is only getting worse.

Most nations have mustered only negligible growth and this has failed to benefit the vast majority of those nation's populations.

In the seven years following the crash, the UK has suffered the longest sustained decline in real wages since records began.

This decline hasn't has been shared equally across the income spectrum latest annual data up to the end of 2013 shows real earnings for the top 10% increasing by 3.9% and a 2.4% fall for the remaining 90%.

Households are once again piling on risky personal debt at a rate of almost $1billion a year.

Globally, wealth grew by 8.3% last year to $263 trillion, even as living standards stagnate for the majority. Income inequality has seen a sharp return the top 1% of earners have reaped 95% of the USA's economic gains since the crash.

Inequality increases as economies are financialised

Over the past four decades, financial sectors have been extensively deregulated and have expanded enormously as a result, particularly in the UK and USA.

This deregulation produced two systemic outcomes: finance has been freed to become the motor of the economy while the pursuit of greater equality of citizens, as was the focus after the second world war, has been abandoned.

Instead, the notion that unrestrained pursuit of wealth would trickle-down from rich to the poor has been embraced in the mainstream political and economic arenas.

Financial markets, products, and firms now play a much larger role in many areas; from pensions and social insurance to homes and public infrastructure.

Privatization and the doctrine of maximizing value for shareholders have increased the amount of economic activity focused on extracting the largest possible short-term profit. These trends are referred to collectively as âfinancialisationâ.

Until now the connections between this increasing prevalence of financial activities and the steady increase in economic inequality have not been clear. But when these two trends reached a boiling point in the mid-2000s they fuelled a global collapse of financial systems.

The polarization of wealth and incomes fed asset bubbles, risky financial activity,, and necessitated vast levels of household debt â resulting in the 2008 financial crash. With little done since to address these interconnected drivers, the threat of another crisis is very real.

This diagram lays out the seven indicators of economic instability, each fuelled by rising inequality and increasing financial sector activity:

Our report describes how these indicators laid the path for the 2008 crash, and threaten to do the same again:

Increasing inequality depresses demand since consumption levels depend more on the wages of those at the lower end of the income scale than the profits of the wealthy

In the face of stagnating wages, households rely increasingly on debt to maintain their lifestyles with rising asset prices, especially in residential housing, worsening this.

Financial liberalization allows money to flood into countries with trade deficits, such as the USA and the UK, providing the funds for debt-led consumption.

Snowballing wealth at the top increases risky financial speculation.

Inequality doesn't bring growth, it brings economic instability

In recent years there has been a marked slowing of growth across the world's wealthiest economies, with none returning to the growth trends experienced before the crisis. Many have begun to speculate that this stagnation could, in fact, be a permanent development meaning that wealthy economies are fundamentally unable to create enough demand to keep growing.

The mainstream political consensus has for decades now suggested that inequality is a price worth paying for economic growth.

But new research from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows definitively that this inequality/growth trade-off is false adding to a growing body of research showing that inequality actually prevents economies from growing. This points to a fundamental structural flaw in the economy: if the proceeds of growth are not shared, the pie stops growing.

The pursuit of higher returns for the already wealthy within this dwindling pie cannot persist forever. With wealth refusing year on year to trickle down, debt has been used to plug the wage-consumption gap for the rest.

The signals are showing quite plainly that this pursuit of growth, via inequality, is ineffective and unsustainable.

violetbuffalo377

After reading the case that is below, how can a foreign company entering China ensure that it tackles the most important little things that end up being huge barriers to success as we approach the year 2020 when China is expected to have significantly increased purchasing power among its middle class? Write your opinion, as a manager, on how to face cultural issues like those described in the case, when entering foreign markets.

The People's Republic of China opened up to foreign investments in the late 1970s. Since that time, numerous companies have tried to establish operations and sell their products to customers in China. Many more companies will try in the years to come China is expected to have some 190 million people in the middle- and upper-income categories by 2020. This is an increase from only about 17 million people in these income brackets as recently as in 2010. China's purchasing power for virtually all products and services has strong potential, and foreign companies will seek these market opportunities. What have we learned culturally that can help Western-based companies in China's marketplace?

Some background on China can serve as a starting point for a better understanding of the culture in China and what some well-known companies such as Best Buy and eBay have done to target the Chinese marketplace. The motivation for many foreign companies to enter China beyond those that have been there for a few decades for reasons of low-cost production was the triple growth of the Chinese economy that was seen from 2000 to 2010. China overtook Japan to become the second-largest economy in the world behind only the United States, and its large population makes for an enormous target market. Investment from foreign companies was the largest driver of China's growth in the decade from 2000 to 2010. However, many companies also increased their exports to China. The United States, for example, saw its companies increase exports to China by 542 percent from 2000 to 2011 (from about $16.2 billion to $103.9 billion), while total exports to the rest of the world increased by only 80 percent in the same time period.

Interestingly, while foreign investments grew, domestic consumption as a share of the Chinese economy declined from 46 percent in 2000 to 33 percent in 2010. This consumption declineâcoupled with slower growth globally and, ultimately, the worldwide economic downturn that started in 2008âraised questions about China's momentum. Right now, around 85 percent of mainstream Chinese consumers are living in the top 100 wealthiest cities. By the year 2020, these advanced and developing cities will have relatively few customers who are lower than the middle- and upper-income brackets by Chinese standards. The expectation is that these consumers will be able to afford a range of products and services, such as flat-screen televisions and overseas travel, making the Chinese customer much more of a target for a wide variety of consumption. This begs the question, can the unprecedented Chinese growth really continue, and would it come from increased consumption?

The resounding answer is yes according to research conducted by McKinsey & Company. McKinsey found that barring another major economic shock similar to what we saw in 2008, China's gross domestic product (GDP) will continue to grow, albeit not at the historic levels seen between 2000 and 2010 when it grew about 10.4 percent annually. The growth from 2010 to 2020 is expected to be about 7.9 percent per year, which is still far above the expected growth for the United States (2.8 percent annually), Japan (1.2 percent annually), and Germany (1.7 percent annually) the three countries among the top four worldwide economies along with China. And, the key is that consumption will now be the driving force behind the growth instead of foreign investment. The consumption forecast opens up opportunities for foreign companies to engage with Chinese consumers who are expected to have more purchasing power and discretionary spending. But culturally translating market success from one country or even a large number of countries to the Chinese marketplace is not necessarily as straightforward as it may seem. Often, a combination of naivety, arrogance, and cultural misunderstanding has led many well-known companies to fail in China. Lack of an understanding of issues such as local demands, buying habits, consumption values, and Chinese customers' personal beliefs led to struggles for companies that had been very successful elsewhere in the world. Let's take a brief look at Best Buy and eBay as two examples.

Best Buy, the mega-store mainly focused on consumer electronics, was founded in 1966 as an audio specialty store. Best Buy entered China in 2006 by acquiring a majority interest in China's fourth-largest appliance retailer, Jiangsu Five Star Appliance, for $180 million. But culture shock hit Best Buy, best described by Shaun Rein, the founder of China Market Research Group. He pointed to a few reasons for this culture shock and lack of success. First, the Chinese will not pay for Best Buy's overly expensive products unless they are a brand like Apple. Second, there is too much piracy in the Chinese market, and this reduces the demand for electronics products at competitive market prices. Third, like many Europeans, the Chinese do not want to shop at huge mega-stores. So, these three seemingly easy-to-understand cultural issues created difficulties for Best Buy. Solving these issues, Best Buy believed that it would have to develop and implement a different business model for the Chinese market than it has used, for example, in the United States. Now, how far should a company go outside its normal business model to adhere to the cultural values and beliefs of a new market? Strategically moving forward, Best Buy opted to close all of its Best Buy branded stores in China and focus on its wholly-owned local Jiangsu Five Star chain of stores. But will this new strategic business model be successful with the new makeup of customers in China expected by 2020?

eBay, the popular e-business site focused on consumer-to-consumer purchases, was founded in 1995. The company was one of the true success stories that lived through the dot-com bubble in the 1990s. It is now a multi-billion-dollar business with operations in more than 30 countries. But China's unique culture created problems for eBay in that market. Contrary to the widespread cultural issues that faced Best Buy, one company in particular (TaoBao) and one feature more specifically (built-in instant messaging) shaped a lot of the problems that eBay ran into in China. Some 200 million shoppers are using TaoBao to buy products, and the company accounts for almost 80 percent of online transaction value in China. Uniquely, TaoBao's built-in instant messaging system has been cited as the main reason for its edge over eBay in China. Basically, customers wanted to be able to identify a seller's online status and communicate with them directly and easily function not seamlessly incorporated into eBay's China system. Clearly, built-in instant text messaging is a solvable obstacle in doing business in China. It sounds easy now when we know about it, but may not always be the case when we take into account all the little things that are important in a market.