Writing Feedback / Some people claim that the goal of politics should be the pursuit of an ideal. Others argue ... [4]

Quixotic goals

Policy, which alleviates the elementary problems of the society, are necessary to be implemented for the striving of the nations. However, during the formulation of it, fervor argument develops between the politician and policy maker- should our political goal be based on the idealism or realistic? Evaluating the both sides, the policy depended on common grounds are likely to be successful, prevents the further suffering of citizen and leads to faster development of a country.

Quixotic goal, unlike real goal, are appealing when some politician gives speech about it, their goal seems grandiose, but rarely are achieved because in idealistic goal various parameter helping to shape an aim are trifle compared to actual need of parameter for achieving such goal. Nepal is reach in hydro resource, for instance, it has potential to generate upto 1200 Megawatt electricity. However, since the country lacks various infrastructure- funding, technical man power- and potential water resources are located in inaccessible areas, it is hard for Nepal to achieve optimum utilization of water resources. However, policy to harness the full power of resources has been implemented for 20 years and completion rate is not more than 5 percent. Instead, if policy makers had focused only on the accessible, low funding resources, the hydro electricity production would have been higher now. The achievement success is higher in goals based on sound reasoning and grounds rather than idealistic goal.

Furthermore, if any politician is obsessed with their grandiose plan and policy, then it will prompt many suffering to citizen. if a country, for example, where higher power personnel wants to increase their military power despite poor economic condition of country, then the citizen will suffer from dire fate. They have to pay higher tax, other facilities such as health, education-character for promoting quality of life- are focused insignificantly by government. Because it is supposed that North Korea spends large amount of budget in military personnel, we heard about suffering of many north- Korean people. Similarly, During the construction of Taaj-mahal, which was a grandiose plan, requiring enormous amount of capital and took 30 years for completion, most citizen had to pay high taxes, gave higher portion of harvest, causing them to live a miserable life. It also emptied the state money and subverted defensive power, thus making country vulnerable to attack and other havoc in country.

However, some may argue that quixotic goals are example of something unachievable, making the people believe that everything is possible. However, to achieve such goals, insurmountable of resources are required, so such aim are barely successful. If we compare successfulness between goal achieved on reasonable grounds and ideal grounds, then measure of grounds based aim are much higher than the latter. Therefore, for the rapid development of any country, society or community, policy maker should focus on reasonable grounds.

In conclusion, quixotic goals can hardly be achieved, obscures basic need of people, causing them to live in tribulation, but reasoned based goals aid in developing of the country as it has high success rate. Therefore, Politician, I believe that, should focus on policy hinged on realistic grounds.

Writing Feedback / Promotion of the well-being in societies and environments in which they operate. [2]

Hii friends, I am planning for GRE . I would be thankful if you provide any shortcoming related to a essay and rate it.

Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible.

Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.

Here we go....

participation in development of society and surrounding

There are copious corporations all over the world, related to various fields. As it operate, should it be responsible for advancement of society in which they are blend? There is always a heated debate about it. The responsibility of corporation towards society and environment is inevitable, as use of resources from the society and environment and role of corporation in shaping society make corporation morally obliged to contribute for society.

Because society is supreme need of corporation, corporation can't ignore them. The corporations such as factories, industries use various resources from the environment like air, water, raw materials and society- manpower, and earn benefits from it. So, corporations are morally obliged to contribute some hand in ascendancy of environment and society. Recognizing such obligation, corporation, from developed countries, first developed corporation social responsibility, widely known as CSR, strategy and policy applied by management of corporation for the advancement of society and environment. CSR, hinged upon each company regulation, looks after the society, in which they are blend in, aids various environmental organizations. Further, due to increases of such consciousness in other parts of world, countries such as China, India, and Pakistan are developing such policy in country company act.

Workers, who are produced by society, are back bone of corporation, so worker deterioration, either mentally or physically, can lead to down fall of it. The corporation has to look after the worker and family members. Moreover, the corporations are also threat to society and environment. Unlike old generation, corporations, nowadays, are big, use much resource, and produce much pollution. Being unconcerned about their effects, corporation can further aggravate the issue. So corporations should be responsible for the society and environment. For instance, TATA steels of India, allocate 2 percent of company profit to check the environmental deterioration, promote health status of society members.

However, some may assert that sole role of corporation it to earn money, but they forget that the corporation earns money from utilization of society and surrounding. If the company acts for profit purpose only, without alleviating various environmental caused by it, then there is a chance of hostility between corporation and society. Such companies are likely to downfall. They are many companies which are closed due to such reason. In the other hands, participating in environmental developmental plan and health plan, corporations are likely to have good reputation. Such reputation is required for sustainability and prosperity of corporation itself.

In conclusion, corporation engagement in development of society and surrounding are not avoidable as it benefits greatly from society and surrounding, possess greater hazard to environment and helps to develop affable relationship. Every corporation, I believe that, should be aware for their participation in development of society and surrounding.