Thursday, March 19, 2020
Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 The Indian Reorganization Act, or the Wheeler-Howard Act, was legislation enacted by the U.S. Congress on June 18, 1934, intended to loosen federal government control over American Indians. The act sought to reverse the governmentÃ¢â¬â¢s long-standing policy of forcing Indians to abandon their culture and assimilate into American society by allowing the tribes a greater degree of self-government and encouraging the retention of historic Indian culture and traditions. Key Takeaways: Indian Reorganization Act The Indian Reorganization Act, signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt on June 18, 1934, loosened U.S. government control of American Indians.The act sought to help Indians retain their historic culture and traditions rather than being forced to abandon them and assimilating into American society.The act also allowed and encouraged the Indian tribes to govern themselves while increasing the federal governmentÃ¢â¬â¢s efforts to improve living conditions on Indian reservations.While many tribal leaders praised the act as the Ã¢â¬Å"Indian New Deal,Ã¢â¬ others criticized it for its shortcomings and failure to realize its potential. The act returned control of the land and mineral rights to former Indian lands back to the tribes and sought to improve the economic condition of the Indian reservations. The law did not apply to Hawaii, and a similar law passed in 1936 applied to Indians in Alaska and Oklahoma, where no reservations remained. In 1930, the U.S. census counted 332,000 American Indians in the 48 states, including those living on and off reservations. Due largely to the Indian Reorganization Act, government spending on Indian affairs increased from $23 million in 1933 to over $38 million in 1940. In 2019, the U.S. federal budget included $2.4 billion for programs serving the American Indian and Alaska Native population. While many tribal leaders hail the Indian Reorganization Act as the Ã¢â¬Å"Indian New Deal,Ã¢â¬ others, saying that it actually had a negative effect on Indians, called it the Ã¢â¬Å"Indian Raw Deal.Ã¢â¬ Historical Background In 1887, Congress had enacted the Dawes Act, intended to force Native American Indians to assimilate into U.S. society by abandoning their cultural and social traditions. Under the Dawes Act, some ninety million acres of tribal land was taken from Native Americans by the U.S. government and sold to the public. The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 had granted full U.S. citizenship only to American-born Indians living on reservations.Ã In 1924, Congress recognized Native AmericanÃ¢â¬â¢s service in World War I by authorizing the Meriam Survey assessing the quality of life on the reservations. For example, the report found that while the average national per capita income in 1920 was $1,350, the average Native American made only $100 a year. The report blamed U.S. Indian policy under the Dawes Act for contributing to such poverty. The abysmal conditions on Indian reservations detailed in the Meriam Report of 1928 drew sharp criticism of the Dawes Act and drove demands for reform. Passage and Implementation The Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) was championed in Congress by John Collier, President Franklin D. RooseveltÃ¢â¬â¢s Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Long a critic of forced assimilation, Collier hoped the act would help American Indians govern themselves, retain their tribal reservation lands, and become economically self-sufficient. As proposed by Collier, the IRA met stiff opposition in Congress, as many influential private-sector interests had profited greatly from the sale and management of Native American lands under the Dawes Act. In order to gain passage, supporters of the IRA agreed to allow the BIA, within the Department of Interior (DOI), to retain oversight of the tribes and reservations. While the act did not terminate existing private-sector ownership of any Indian reservation lands, it did allow the U.S. government to buy back some of the privately owned lands and restore it to Indian tribal trusts. In the first 20 years after its passage, the IRA resulted in the return of more than two million acres of land to the tribes. However, by not disturbing existing private ownership of reservation lands, the reservations emerged as patchwork quilts of privately- and tribally-controlled land, a situation which persists today. Constitutional Challenges Since the enactment of the Indian Reorganization Act, the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to address its constitutionality on several occasions. The court challenges have typically arisen from a provision of the IRA under which the U.S. government is allowed to acquire non-Indian land by voluntary transfer and convert it into Indian land held in federal trusts. These lands may then be used for certain activities intended to benefit the tribes, such as Las Vegas-style casinos in states that do not otherwise allow gambling. Such Indian tribal lands also become exempt from most state taxes. As a result, state and local governments, as well as individuals and businesses objecting to the impacts of large Indian casinos, often sue to block the action. Legacy: New Deal or Raw Deal? In many ways, the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) succeeded in delivering its promise of being the Ã¢â¬Å"Indian New Deal.Ã¢â¬ It directed funds from President RooseveltÃ¢â¬â¢s actual Great Depression-era New Deal programs toward improving conditions on the Indian reservations that had suffered under the Dawes Act and encouraged renewed public appreciation and respect for Native American culture and traditions. The IRA made funds available to help Native American groups buy tribal lands lost to the Dawes ActÃ¢â¬â¢s allotment program. It also required that Indians be given first consideration for filling Bureau of Indian Affairs jobs on the reservations. However, many historians and tribal leaders argue that the IRA failed American Indians in many aspects. First, the act assumed that most Indians would want to remain on their tribal reservations if the living conditions on them were improved. As a result, Indians who wanted to fully assimilate into white society resented the degree of Ã¢â¬Å"paternalismÃ¢â¬ the IRA would allow the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to hold over them. Today, many Indians say the IRA created a Ã¢â¬Å"back-to-the-blanketÃ¢â¬ policy intended to keep them on the reservations as little more than Ã¢â¬Å"living museum exhibits.Ã¢â¬ While the act allowed Indians a degree of self-government, it pushed the tribes to adopt U.S.Ã¢â¬âstyle governments. Tribes that adopted written constitutions similar to the U.S. Constitution and replaced their governments with U.S. city council-like governments were given generous federal subsidies. In most cases, however, the new tribal constitutions lacked provisions for separation of powers, often resulting in friction with Indian elders. While funding for the needs of Indians increased due to the IRA, the annual budget for the Bureau of Indian Affairs remained inadequate to deal with the growing demands of economic development for the reservations or to provide adequate health and educational facilities. Few individual Indians or reservations were able to become financially self-sustaining. According to Native American historian Vine Deloria Jr., while the IRA provided opportunities for Indian revitalization, its promises were never fully realized. In his 1983 book Ã¢â¬Å"American Indians, American Justice,Ã¢â¬ Deloria noted, Ã¢â¬Å"Many of the old customs and traditions that could have been restored under the IRA climate of cultural concern had vanished during the interim period since the tribes had gone to the reservations.Ã¢â¬ In addition, he noted that the IRA eroded reservation IndiansÃ¢â¬â¢ experience of self-government based on Indian traditions. Ã¢â¬Å"Familiar cultural groupings and methods of choosing leadership gave way to the more abstract principles of American democracy, which viewed people as interchangeable and communities as geographical marks on a map.Ã¢â¬ Sources and Further Reference Wilma, David. Ã¢â¬Å"Wheeler-Howard Act (Indian Reorganization Act) shifts U.S. policy toward Native American right to self-determination on June 18, 1934.Ã¢â¬ HistoryLink.org.Ã¢â¬Å"Indian New Deal.Ã¢â¬ US National Archives: Pieces of History.Ã¢â¬Å"Indian Affairs: Indian Affairs Funding.Ã¢â¬ US Department of the Interior (2019).Ã¢â¬Å"Meriam Report: The Problem of Indian Administration (1928).Ã¢â¬ National Indian Law LibraryDeloria Jr, Vine, and Lyttle, Clifford. Ã¢â¬Å"American Indians, American Justice.Ã¢â¬ 1983. ISBN-13: 978-0292738348Giago, Tim. Ã¢â¬Å"Good or Bad? Indian Reorganization Act Turns 75.Ã¢â¬ Huffington PostKelly, Lawrence C. Ã¢â¬Å"The Indian Reorganization Act: The Dream and the Reality.Ã¢â¬ Pacific Historical Review (1975). DOI: 10.2307/3638029.
Monday, March 2, 2020
Criminal Profile of Serial Killer Joel Rifkin For five years, Joel Rifkin avoided capture as he used the city streets across Long Island, New Jersey, and New York City as his hunting ground, but once he was caught, it took little time for police to get him to confess to the murders of 17 women. Joel Rifkins Early Years Joel Rifkin was born on January 20, 1959, and adopted three weeks later by Ben and Jeanne Rifkin. Ben worked as a structural engineer and Jeanne was a homemaker who enjoyed gardening. The family lived in New City, a hamlet of Clarkstown, New York. When Joel was three, the Rifkins adopted their second child, a baby girl who they named Jan. After a few more moves the family settled intoÃ in East Meadow, Long Island, New York. East Meadow was then much like it is today: a community of mostly middle to upper-income families who take pride in their homes andÃ community. The Rifkins blended quickly into the area and became involved in the local school boards and in 1974, Ben earned a seat for life on theÃ Board of Trustees at one of the towns main landmarks, The East Meadow Public Library. The Adolescent Years As a child, there was nothing particularly remarkable about Joel Rifkin. He was aÃ nice child but terribly shy and had a difficult time making friends. Academically he struggled and from the start, Joel felt that he was a disappointment to his father who was very intelligent and actively involved on the school board. Despite his IQ of 128, he received low grades as a result of undiagnosed dyslexia. Also, unlike his father who excelled in sports, Joel proved to be uncoordinated and accident-prone. As Joel entered middle school, making friends did not come easy. He had grown into a clumsy adolescent that appeared uncomfortable in his own skin. He naturally stood hunched over, which, along with his unusually long face and prescription glasses, led to constant teasing and bullying from his schoolmates. He became the kid that even the nerdy kids teased. High School In high school, things got worse for Joel. He was nicknamed Turtle due to his appearance and his slow, unsteady gait. This lead to more bullying, but Rifkin was never confrontational and seemed to take it all in stride, or so it appeared. But as each school year passed, he distanced himself further from his peers and chose instead to spend much of his time alone in his bedroom.Ã Considered to be an annoying introvert, there were no attempts made from any friends to coax him out of theÃ house unless it was to pull a mean prank, including hitting him with eggs, pulling down his pants with girls around to see, or submerging his head into a school toilet.Ã The abuse took its toll and Joel began avoiding other students by showing up late to classes and being the last to leave school. He spent much of his time isolated and alone in his bedroom. There, he began to entertain himself with violent sexual fantasies that had been brewing inside of him for years. Rejection Rifkin enjoyed photography and with the new camera given to him by his parents, he decided to join the yearbook committee. One of his jobs was to submit pictures of the graduating students and activities going on at school. However, like so many of Rifkins attempts to find acceptance among his peers, this idea also failed after his camera was stolen immediately after joining the group. Joel decided to stay on anyway and spent a lot of his spare time working on meeting the yearbook deadlines. When the yearbook was completed, the group held a wrap-up party, but Joel was not invited. He was devastated. Angered and embarrassed, Joel once again retreated to his bedroom andÃ submerged himself into true crime books about serial killers. He became fixated on the Alfred Hitchcock movie, Frenzy, which he found sexually stimulating, especially the scenes that showed women being strangled. By now his fantasies were always made with a repetitive theme of rape, sadism, and murder, as he incorporated the murders he saw on screen or read in booksÃ into his own fantasy world. College Rifkin was looking forward to college. It meant a new start and new friends, but typically, his expectations turned out to be far greater than reality. He enrolled at Nassau Community College on Long Island and commuted to his classes with a car that was a gift from his parents. But not living in student housing or off-campus with other students had its drawbacks in that it made him even more of an outsider than he already felt. Again, he was facing aÃ friendless environment and he became miserable and lonely. Trolling for Prostitutes Rifkin began cruising the city streets around areas where prostitutes were known to hang out. Then the shy, slouched-over introvert who found it difficult to make eye contact with girls at school, somehow found the courage to pick up a prostitute and pay her for sex. From that point on, Rifkin lived in two worlds - the one that his parents knew about and the one filled with sex and prostitutes andÃ consumed his every thought. The prostitutes became a live extension of Rifkins fantasies that had been festering in his mind for years. They also became an inexhaustible addiction that resulted in missed classes, missed work, and cost him whatever money he had in his pocket. For the first time in his life, he had women around who seemed to like him which boosted his self-esteem. Rifkin ended up dropping out of college, then enrolling again at another college only to then drop out again. He was constantly moving out, then back again with his parents each time he flunked out of school. This frustrated his father and he and Joel would often get into big shouting matches about his lack of commitment towards getting a college education. The Death of Ben Rifkin In 1986, Ben Rifkin was diagnosed with cancer and he committed suicide the following year. Joel gave a touchingÃ eulogy, describing the love that his father had given to him throughout his life. In truth, Joel Rifkin felt like a miserable failure who was a major disappointment and embarrassment to his father. But now with his father was gone, he was able to do what he wanted without the constant worry that his dark seedy lifestyle would be discovered. The First Kill After flunking out of his last attempt at college in the springÃ of 1989, Rifkin spent all of his free time with prostitutes. His fantasies about murdering the women began to fester. In early March, his mother and sister left on vacation. Rifkin drove into New York City and picked up a prostitute and brought her back to his familys home. Throughout her stay, she slept, shot heroin, then slept more, which irritated Rifkin who had no interest in drugs. Then, without any provocation, he picked up a Howitzer artillery shell and struck her repeatedly on the head with it and then suffocated and strangled her to death. When he was certain that she was dead, he went to bed. After six hours of sleep, Rifkin awoke and went about the task of getting rid of the body. First, he removed her teeth and scraped her fingerprints off of her fingers so that she could not be identified. Then using an X-Acto knife, he managed to dismember the body into six parts which he distributed in different areas throughout Long Island, New York City, and New Jersey. Futile Promises The womans head was discovered inside a paint bucket on a New Jersey golf course, but because Rifkin had removed her teeth, her identity remained a mystery When Rifkin heard on the news about the head being found, he panicked. Terrified that he was about to get caught, he made a promise to himself that it was a one-time thing and that he would never kill again. (In 2013, the victim was identified through DNA as Heidi Balch.) Second Murder The promise not to kill again lasted about 16 months. In 1990, his mother and sister left again to go out of town. Rifkin seized the opportunity of having the house to himself and picked up a prostitute named Julia Blackbird and brought her home. After spending the night together, Rifkin drove to an ATM to get money to pay her and discovered he had a zero balance. He returned to the house and beat Blackbird with a table leg, and murdered her by strangling her to death. In the basement of his home, he dismembered the body and placed the different parts into buckets that he filled with concrete. He then drove into New York City and disposed of the buckets in the East River and the Brooklyn canal. Her remains were never found. The Body Count Climbs After killing the second woman, Rifkin did not make a vow to stop killingÃ but decided that dismembering the bodies was an unpleasant task that he needed to rethink. He was out of college again and living with his mother and working in lawn care. He tried to open a landscaping company and rented a storage unit for his equipment. He also used it to temporarily hide the bodies of his victims. In early 1991 his company failed and he was in debt. He managed to get a few part-time jobs, which he often lost because the jobs interfered with what he enjoyed most - strangling prostitutes. He also grew more confident about not getting caught. More Victims Beginning in July 1991, Rifkins murders began to come more frequently. Here is the list of his victims: Barbara Jacobs, age 31, killed July 14, 1991. Her body was found inside a plastic bag that had been placed into a cardboard box and put into the Hudson River.Mary Ellen DeLuca, age 22, killed on September 1, 1991, because she complained about having sex after Rifkin bought her crack cocaine.Yun Lee, age 31, killed on September 23, 1991. She was strangled to death and her body was put into the East River.Jane Doe #1, was killed in early December 1991. Rifkin strangled her during sex, put her body into a 55-gallon oil drum and dumped it into the East River.Lorraine Orvieto, age 28, was prostituting in Bayshore, Long Island when Rifkin picked her up and strangled her during sex. He disposed of her body by placing it into an oil drum and into Coney Island River where it was discovered months later.Mary Ann Holloman, 39, was killed on January 2, 1992. Her body was found the following July, stuffed inside an oil drum in Coney Island Creek.Iris Sanchez, age 25, killed on Mothers Day weekend , May 10, 1992. Rifkin put her body under an old mattress in an illegal dump area located near the JFK International Airport. Anna Lopez, age 33, and the mother of three children, was strangled to death on May 25, 1992. Rifkin disposed of her body along I-84 in Putnam County.Jane Doe #2 was murdered mid-winter 1991. On May 13, 1992, parts of her body were found inside an oil drum floating in Newton Creek in Brooklyn, New York.Violet ONeill, age 21, was killed in June 1992 at Rifkins mothers home. There he dismembered her in the bathtub, wrapped the body parts in plastic, and disposed of them in rivers and canals in New York City. Her torso was found floating in the Hudson River and days later other body parts were found inside of a suitcase.Mary Catherine Williams, age 31, was killed at Rifkins mothers home on October 2, 1992. Her remains were found in Yorktown, New York the following December.Jenny Soto, 23, was strangled to death on November 16, 1992. Her body was found the following day floating in Harlem River in New York City.Leah Evens, 28, and the mother of two childrenÃ was killed on February 27, 1993. Rifkin buried the corpse in the woods on Long Island. Her body was discovered three months later. Lauren Marquez, 28, was killed on April 2, 1993, and her body was left in the Pine Barrens in Suffolk County, New York, on Long Island.Tiffany Bresciani, 22, was Joel Rifkins final victim. On June 24, 1993, he strangled her and put her body in his mothers garage for three smoldering days before getting the opportunity to dispose of it. Rifkins Crime Is Discovered At around 3 a.m. Monday, June 28, 1993, Rifkin swabbed his nose with Noxzema so that he could tolerate the pungent odor coming from the corpse of Bresciani. He placed it in the bed of his pickup truck and got on Southern State highway headed south to Melvilles Republic Airport, which is where he planned to dispose of it. Also in the area were state troopers, Deborah Spaargaren and Sean Ruane, who noticed Rifkins truck did not have a license plate. They attempted to pull him over, but he ignored them and kept driving. The officers then used the siren and a loudspeaker, but still, Rifkin refused to pull over. Then, just as the officers requested backup, Rifkin tried to correct a missed turn and went straight into a utility light pole. Unhurt, Rifkin emerged from the truck and was promptly placed in handcuffs. Both officers quickly realized why the driver had not pulled over as the distinct odor of a decaying corpse permeated the air. Tiffanys body was found and while questioning Rifkin, he casually explained that she was aÃ prostitute that he had paid to have sex with and then things went bad and he killed her and that he was headed to the airport so that he could get rid of the body. He then asked the officers if he needed a lawyer. Rifkin was taken to police headquarters in Hempstead, New York, and after a short period of questioning by detectives, he began to reveal that the body they discovered was just the tip of the iceberg and offered up the number, 17. The Search for Rifkins Victims A search of his bedroom in his mothers home turned up a mountain of evidence against Rifkin including womens drivers licenses, womens underwear, jewelry, prescription drug bottles prescribed to women, purses and wallets, photographs of women, makeup, hair accessories, and womens clothing. Many of the items could be matched to victims of unsolved murders. There was also a large collection of books about serial killers and porn movies with themes centered on sadism. In the garage, they found three ounces of human blood in the wheelbarrow, tools coated in blood and a chainsaw that had blood and human flesh stuck in the blades. In the meantime, Joel Rifkin was writing a list for the investigators with the names and dates and locations of the bodies of 17 women he had murdered. His recollection was not perfect, but with his confession, the evidence, missing person reports and unidentified bodies that had turned up over the years, 15 of the 17 victims were identified. The Trial in Nassau County Rifkins mother hired an attorney to represent Joel, but he fired him and hired law partners Michael Soshnick and John Lawrence. Soshnick was a former Nassau County district attorney and had a reputation for being a top-notch criminal lawyer. His partner Lawrence had no experience in criminal law. Rifkin was arraigned in Nassau County for the murder of Tiffany Bresciani, to which he pleaded not guilty. During the suppression hearing which began November 1993, Soshnick tried unsuccessfully to get Rifkins confession and his admission to killing Tiffany Bresciani suppressed, based on the grounds that the state troopers lacked probable cause to search the truck. Two months into the hearing, Rifkin was offered a plea deal of 46 years to life in exchange for a guilty plea of 17 murders, but he turned it down, convinced that his lawyers could get him off by pleading insanity. Throughout the four-month hearing, Soshnick offended the judge by showing up to court late or not at all and often arriving unprepared. This irritated Judge Wexner and by March he pulled the plug on the hearing, announcing that he had seen enough evidence to reject the defense motions and he ordered the trial to begin in April. Infuriated by the news, Rifkin fired Soshnick, but kept Lawrence on, even though it would be his first criminal case. The trial began on April 11, 1994, and Rifkin pleaded not guilty by reason of temporary insanity. The jury disagreed and found him guilty of murder and reckless endangerment. He was sentenced to 25 years to life. The Sentence Rifkin was transferred to Suffolk County to stand trial for the murders of Evans and Marquez. The attempt to have his confession suppressed was again rejected. This time Rifkin pleaded guilty and received an additional two consecutive terms of 25 years to life. Similar scenarios were played out in Queens and in Brooklyn. By the time it was all over, Joel Rifkin, the most prolific serial killer in the history of New York, was found guilty of murdering nine womenÃ and had received a total of 203 years in prison. He is currently housed at the Clinton Correctional Facility in Clinton County, New York.
Saturday, February 15, 2020
Transportation Policy-The will discuss the negative impacts of free off-street parking and possible solutions to counteract such problems - Research Paper Example ntrols by the ownership of the shopping malls, the development of free off street parking space has been considered as one of the poorest planning events in the history of building (Mukhija & Shoup, 2006). Due to the presence of free off street parking, several Americans have continued to prefer the use of personal cars. However, the state and federal government have been denied an opportunity to increase the revenue collection as mall owners continue to use this approach as a way of attracting customers. It is a good economic policy to have measurable cost for off street parking to enable regional and state governments to enhance their revenue collection activities (Mukhija & Shoup, 2006). The increasing population of motorists in the United States has created the need for the development of proper parking strategies to eliminate the challenges associated with increased vehicle population. Generally, it is estimated that the overall cost of parking ranges from $250 to $2000 which are calculated without the inclusion of other charges. Municipalities across the country have continued to face the challenge of increased management costs and the destruction of the parking spaces due to improve parking arrangement and lack of control on private malls. The emergence of different structures across the towns has reduced the efficiencies and room for the development flexible designs for parking lots (Mukhija & Shoup, 2006). The adoption of different parking strategies has different impacts on the economy and the environment of the country. off street parking facilities impacts on the development and economic benefits of central business districts in a number of ways which makes this approach less effective in busy towns. Due to the nature of our development, the landscape has continuously been occupied with cars as members of the public prefer using private cars as opposed to the public transport system. In most instances, cars spend 95% of their life parked and this has
Sunday, February 2, 2020
Acounting for pensions - Essay Example However, most employers invest the pensions to be managed by a separate entity. The entities that manage the pensions recognize the assets and liabilities on their net values. The accounting practices for pensions faces a lot of criticism such as lack of clarity in the disclosure of the postretirement accounting information. The accounting practices ignored the importance of full recognition of the effects of pension contracts on the companyÃ¢â¬â¢s performance. For this reason, a big deal of pension contract related costs are borne by the users of such information. Secondly, some investors have expressed concerns on the reporting of gains and losses. They propose the elimination of the smoothing of gains and losses as allowed under GAAP. This method should be replaced by a separate recognition of pension planÃ¢â¬â¢s assets and liabilities on the balance sheet. Lastly, preparers criticize the short-term approach to accounting for pension transactions (The United States Securities and Exchange Commission 49 Ã¢â¬â 59). In view of the above criticism, the staff members propose an improvement regarding the accounting practices. First, they suggest a long-term approach to accounting for pensions since the post retirement contract is long-lived. Second, further disclosures besides those contained in the financial statements should be provided to ensure further clarity of the contents of the financial statements. Lastly, the staff proposes that issuers should give more time the preparation of the postretirement financial information in order to facilitate the provision of more useful information to the users (The United States Securities and Exchange Commission 107 Ã¢â¬â 108). The United States Securities and Exchange Commission. N.d. Report and Recommendation Pursuant to Section 401 (c) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 On Arrangements with Off-balance sheet Implications, special purpose
Saturday, January 25, 2020
The Web of Heart of Darkness Ã Ã MarlowÃ¢â¬â¢s wilderness is not vibrant nor majestic, nor is it boisterous in its vitality, illuminating and nurturing its lush bounty within its sensuous bosom.Ã It is not a wondrous place, intoxicating with radiant color and a symphony of sounds those who journey into its interior.Ã It is not quiescent nor serene, willing to reveal its secrets, easily subdued or tamed.Ã His wilderness is a primeval, mysterious enigma that swallows light and sound, rationality and language, imprisoning them deep within its immense folds.Ã It is fascinatingly savage, menacing in its power to mesmerize and lure, and finally to seduce the Ã¢â¬Å"bearers of a spark from the sacred fireÃ¢â¬ (67). Many had set out to conquer it, dreaming of creating splendrous empires; others had embarked on a quest to extract riches, fame, and glory from deep within its heart; yet others had been beckoned by the irresistible call of the unknown.Ã Lucky were those that could Ã¢â¬Å"glide past [it], veiled...by a slightly disdainful ignoranceÃ¢â¬ (68), shielding themselves with the mantle of civilization, secure in their invincibility.Ã Marlow was luckier than most, for the wilderness called to his Ã¢â¬Å"very heart [with] its mystery, its greatness, the amazing reality of [its] concealed lifeÃ¢â¬ (95); yet he was able to realize in time that it was but an illusion, a Ã¢â¬Å"deceitful flow from the heart of an impenetrable darknessÃ¢â¬ (124), and to step back from the edge of the abyss. He was good man in search of purpose and adventure, believing he would find his aspirations by sailing the waters of a mighty river.Ã Upon arriving at his destination he was disheartened by the actions of his brethren, by their Ã¢â¬Å"conquest of the earthÃ¢â¬ , which to him mostly meant Ã¢â¬Å"taking it away from those who [had] a different complexion...than [themselves]Ã¢â¬ (70).Ã Contemptuous of their beliefs and brutal behavior, their greed and deceitfulness, he went in search of a man considered Ã¢â¬Å"the emissary of pity...science and progressÃ¢â¬ (94); believing that in him he would finally find someone to guide him through the Ã¢â¬Å"silence of the landÃ¢â¬ (95). However, the deeper he penetrated into the somber stillness of the wilderness, he could not escape the realization of his vulnerability.Ã In that landscape he could either be Ã¢â¬Å"swept off without leaving a whisper or a shadow behindÃ¢â¬ (114) or infinitely worse, Ã¢â¬Å"the powers of darkness [could] claim him for their ownÃ¢â¬ (126).
Friday, January 17, 2020
Chapter 5 Income Measurement and Profitability Analysis exercises Exercise 5Ã¢â¬â1 Requirement 1 Alpine West should recognize revenue over the ski season on an anticipated usage basis, in this case equally throughout the season. The fact that the $450 price is nonrefundable is not relevant to the revenue recognition decision. Revenue should be recognized as it is earned, in this case as the services are provided during the ski season. Requirement 2 November 6, 2013 Cash450 Unearned revenue450 To record the cash collection December 31, 2013Unearned revenue ($450 x 1/5)90 Revenue90 To recognize revenue earned in December (no revenue earned in November, as season starts on December 1). Requirement 3 $90 is included in revenue in the 2013 income statement. The $360 remaining balance in unearned revenue is included in the current liability section of the 2013 balance sheet. Exercise 5Ã¢â¬â3 Requirement 1 2013 cost recovery %: $234,000 = 65% (gross profit % = 35%) $360,000 2014 cost recovery %: $245,000 = 70% (gross profit % = 30%) $350,000 2013 gross profit:Cash collection from 2013 sales of $150,000 x 35%=$52,500 2014 gross profit: Cash collection from 2013 sales of $100,000 x 35%=$ 35,000 +Cash collection from 2014 sales of $120,000 x 30%= 36,000 Total 2014 gross profit $71,000 Requirement 2 2013 deferred gross profit balance: 2013 initial gross profit ($360,000 Ã¢â¬â 234,000)$126,000 Less: Gross profit recognized in 2013 (52,500) Balance in deferred gross profit account$73,500 2014 deferred gross profit balance: 2013 initial gross profit ($360,000 Ã¢â¬â 234,000)$ 126,000 Less: Gross profit recognized in 2013 (52,500)Gross profit recognized in 2014(35,000) 2014 initial gross profit ($350,000 Ã¢â¬â 245,000)105,000 Less: Gross profit recognized in 2014 (36,000) Balance in deferred gross profit account$107,500 Exercise 5Ã¢â¬â4 2013 Installment receivables360,000 Inventory234,000 Deferred gross profit126,000 To record installment sales 2013 Cash150,0 00 Installment receivables150,000 To record cash collections from installment sales 2013 Deferred gross profit52,500 Realized gross profit52,500 To recognize gross profit from installment sales 2014 Installment receivables350,000Inventory245,000 Deferred gross profit105,000 To record installment sales 2014 Cash220,000 Installment receivables220,000 To record cash collections from installment sales 2014 Deferred gross profit71,000 Realized gross profit71,000 To recognize gross profit from installment sales Exercise 5Ã¢â¬â5 Requirement 1 YearIncome recognized 2013$180,000 ($300,000 Ã¢â¬â 120,000) 2014- 0 Ã¢â¬â 2015- 0 Ã¢â¬â 2016 Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â Total$180,000 Requirement 2 Cost recovery %: $120,000 Ã¢â¬âÃ¢â¬âÃ¢â¬âÃ¢â¬â- = 40% (gross profit % = 60%) $300,000 | | | | |Year |Cash Collected |Cost Recovery(40%) |Gross Profit(60%) | |2013 |$ 75,000 |$ 30,000 |$ 45,000 | |2014 | 75,000 | 30,000 | 45,000 | |2015 | 75,000 | 30,000 | 45,000 | |2016 | 75,000 | 30,000 | 45,000 | | Totals |$300,000 |$120,000 |$180,000 | | | | | | Requirement 3 | | | | | |Year |Cash Collected |Cost Recovery |Gross Profit | |2013 |$ 75,000 |$ 75,000 | Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â | |2014 | 75,000 | 45,000 $ 30,000 | |2015 | 75,000 | Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â | 75,000 | |2016 | 75,000 | Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â | 75,000 | | Totals |$300,000 |$120,000 |$180,000 | | | | | | Exercise 5Ã¢â¬â11 Requirement 1 20132014 Contract price$2,000,000$2,000,000 Actual costs to date 300,0001,875,000 Estimated costs to complete 1,200,000 Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â Total estimated costs 1,500,0001,875,000 Gross profit (estimated in 2013)$ 500,000$ 125,000 Gross profit recognition: 2013: $ 300,000 = 20% x $500,000 = $100,000 $1,500,000 2014:$125,000 Ã¢â¬â 100,000 = $25,000 Requirement 2 2013$ Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â 2014$125,000 Requirement 3 | | | | | |Balance Sheet | | | | |At December 31, 2013 | | | |Current assets: | | | | |Accounts receivable | |$ 130,000 | | |Costs and profit ($400,000*) in excess | | | | |of billings ($380,000) | |20,000 | | | | | | | * Costs ($300,000) + profit ($100,000) Exercise 5Ã¢â¬â11 (concluded) Requirement 4 | | | | |Balance Sheet | | | | |At December 31, 2013 | | | | |Current assets: | | | | |Accounts receivable | |$ 130,000 | | | | | | | |Current liabilities: | | | | |Billings ($380,000) in excess of costs ($300,000) | |$ 80,000 | | | | | | | problems Problem 5Ã¢â¬â2 Requirement 1 2013 cost recovery % : $180,000 = 60% (gross profit % = 40%) $300,000 2014 cost recovery %: $280,000 = 70% (gross profit % = 30%) $400,000 2013 gross profit: Cash collection from 2013 sales = $120,000 x 40%= $48,000 2014 gross profit: Cash collection from 2013 sales = $100,000 x 40%= $ 40,000 +Cash collection from 2014 sales = $150,000 x 30%= 45,000 Total 2014 gross profit $85,000 Requirement 2 013 Installment receivables300,000 Inventory180,000 Deferred gross profit120,000 To record installment sales Cash120,000 Installment receivables120,000 To record cash colle ctions from installment sales Deferred gross profit48,000 Realized gross profit48,000 To recognize gross profit from installment sales Problem 5Ã¢â¬â2 (continued) 2014 Installment receivables400,000 Inventory280,000 Deferred gross profit120,000 To record installment sales Cash250,000 Installment receivables250,000 To record cash collections from installment sales Deferred gross profit85,000 Realized gross profit85,000 To recognize gross profit from installment sales Requirement 3 | | | | |Date |Cash Collected |Cost Recovery |Gross Profit | | | | | | |2013 | | | | |2013 sales |$120,000 |$120,000 |- 0 Ã¢â¬â | | | | | | |2014 | | | |2013 sales | $100,000 | $ 60,000 |$40,000 | |2014 sales | 150,000 | 150,000 | Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â | | 2014 totals |$250,000 |$210,000 |$40,000 | | | | | | Problem 5Ã¢â¬â2 (concluded) 2013 Installment receivables300,000 Inventory180,000 Deferred gross profit120,000 To record installment sales Cash120,000 Installment receivables120,000 To record cash collection from installment sales 2014 Installment receivables400,000 Inventory280,000 Deferred gross profit120,000 To record installment sales Cash250,000 Installment receivables250,000To record cash collection from installment sales Deferred gross profit40,000 Realized gross profit40,000 To recognize gross profit from installment sales Problem 5Ã¢â¬â5 Requirement 1 201320142015 Contract price$10,000,000$10,000,000$10,000,000 Actual costs to date 2,400,000 6,000,000 8,200,000 Estimated costs to complete 5,600,000 2,000,000 Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â Total estimated costs 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,200,000 Estimated gross profit (loss) (actual in 2015)$ 2,000,000$ 2,000,000$ 1,800,000 Gross profit (loss) recognition: 2013: $2,400,000 = 30. 0% x $2,000,000 = $600,000 $8,000,000 2014: $6,000,000 = 75. 0% x $2,000,000 = $1,500,000 Ã¢â¬â 600,000 = $900,000 $8,000,000 015:$1,800,000 Ã¢â¬â 1,500,000 = $300,000 Problem 5Ã¢â¬â5 (continued) Requirement 2 | | | | | | |2013 |2014 |2015 | | | | | | |Construction in progress |2,400,000 |3,600,000 |2,200,000 | | Various accounts 2,400,000 |3,600,000 |2,200,000 | |To record construction costs | | | | | | | | | |Accounts receivable |2,000,000 |4,000,000 |4,000,000 | | Billings on construction contract |2,000,000 |4,000,000 |4,000,000 | |To record progress billings | | | | | | | | | |Cash |1,800,000 |3,600,000 |4,600,000 | | Accounts receivable |1,800,000 |3,600,000 |4,600,000 | |To record cash collections | | | | | | | | | |Construction in progress | 600,000 | 900,000 | 300,000 | |(gross profit) | | | | |Cost of construction |2,400,000 |3,600,000 |2,200,000 | |(cost incurred) | | | | | Revenue from long-term contracts (1) |3,000,000 |4,500,000 |2,500,000 | |To record gross profit | | | | | | | | | (1) Revenue recognized: 2013: 30% x $10,000,000 =$3,000,000 2014: 75% x $10,000,000 =$7,500,000 Less: Revenue recognized in 2013(3,000,000) Revenue recognized in 2014$4,500,000 2015: 100% x $10,000,000 =$10,000,000 Less: Re venue recognized in 2013 & 2014 (7,500,000) Revenue recognized in 2015$2,500,000 Problem 5Ã¢â¬â5 (continued) Requirement 3 | | | | | |Balance Sheet | |2013 | |2014 | | | | | | | |Current assets: | | | | | |Accounts receivable | |$ 200,000 | |$600,000 | |Construction in progress |$3,000,000 | |$7,500,000 | | | Less: Billings |(2,000,000) | |(6,000,000) | | |Costs and profit in excess | | | | | |of billings | |1,000,000 | |1,500,000 | Requirement 4 01320142015 Costs incurred during the year$2,400,000$3,800,000$3,200,000 Estimated costs to complete as of year-end 5,600,000 3,100,000 Ã¢â¬â 201320142015 Contract price$10,000,000$10,000,000$10,000,000 Actual costs to date 2,400,000 6,200,000 9,400,000 Estimated costs to complete 5,600,000 3,100,000 Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â Total estimated costs 8,000,000 9,300,000 9,400,000 Estimated gross profit (actual in 2015)$ 2,000,000$ 700,000$ 600,000 Problem 5Ã¢â¬â5 (concluded) Gross profit (loss) recognition: 2013: $2,400,000 = 30. 0% x $2,0 00,000 = $600,000 $8,000,000 2014: $6,200,000 = 66. 6667% x $700,000 = $466,667 Ã¢â¬â 600,000 = $(133,333) $9,300,000 015:$600,000 Ã¢â¬â 466,667 = $133,333 Requirement 5 201320142015 Costs incurred during the year$2,400,000$3,800,000$3,900,000 Estimated costs to complete as of year-end 5,600,000 4,100,000 Ã¢â¬â 201320142015 Contract price$10,000,000$10,000,000$10,000,000 Actual costs to date 2,400,000 6,200,00010,100,000 Estimated costs to complete 5,600,000 4,100,000 Ã¢â¬â 0 Ã¢â¬â Total estimated costs 8,000,00010,300,00010,100,000 Estimated gross profit (loss) (actual in 2015)$ 2,000,000$ (300,000)$ (100,000) Gross profit (loss) recognition: 2013: $2,400,000 = 30. 0% x $2,000,000 = $600,000 $8,000,000 2014: $(300,000) Ã¢â¬â 600,000 = $(900,000) 2015: $(100,000) Ã¢â¬â (300,000) = $200,000
Wednesday, January 8, 2020
The Constitution of the United States was written to give citizens certain privileges and rights in the way of free thought and freedom. The Establishment Clause was one way that civilians were protecting religious liberty by the separation of church and state. Within our political and school systems there have been a number of controversial issues to include religious holidays, school prayer, teaching evolution and aid to church based schools. The Supreme Court has ruled in many cases in regards to these religious controversial issues. The First Amendment states Ã¢â¬Å"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or theÃ¢â¬ ¦show more contentÃ¢â¬ ¦The Ã¢â¬Å"wall of separationÃ¢â¬ that maintains between state and church in the Constitution was viewed and the Blacks questioned the stateÃ¢â¬â¢s interest in expeditiously and safely getting the kids to the schools needed. In the end it was ruled to get the kids to school safely. Often in parochial schools parents are given vouchers to help pay for private schools. Some say this is an issue regarding the Establishment clause. In 1973 Committee for Public Education v. Nyquist, Ã¢â¬Å"the high court invalidated a New York state program that provided tuition reimbursements to poor parents whose children attended private schools, 85% of which were religiousÃ¢â¬ (Leaming, n.d.). The courts ruled that New York had a primary effect of advancing re ligion. Since Nyquist the voucher programs are one step closer to being recognized as constitutional through the Supreme Court. The Constitution permits vouchers to be available for both religious and private schools through the government. School vouchers also raised arguments from opponents and proponents. Opponents raised concern that talented students were pulled from public schools which lowered their quality of learning while the proponents claimed their children would receive a much better education. In 1962 Engel Et Al v. Vitale Et Al case were Prayer in the Public schools was a violation of the First AmendmentÃ¢â¬â¢s