Essays / Perseverance essay in relation to ice hokey [7]

Hi all, I'm writing an essay on perseverance, in relation to ice hockey (Bobby Orr in this case). Feel free to pitch ideas, as I can really use them.

Thanks

Writing Feedback / Journal essay (welfare state) [3]

1. Do you think that the state has a responsibility to provide for its citizens? Do you agree with the welfare state? Use examples of Kenya and Canada.

If I was Head of State of any given state, there would be a lot of decisions that I would have to make. For instance, how should the state be run, or should it be a welfare state? The concept of a welfare state very much intrigues my attention. A welfare state, by definition is a government that provides for the welfare, or the well-being, of its citizens completely. A government as must be involved in citizens' lives at every level. It provides for physical, social and material needs rather than the people providing for their own. The main purpose of the welfare state is to create economic equality or to assure equitable standards of living for all. This, obviously sounds great, however there is a great deal of responsibility involved. A welfare state must have the responsibility to provide for its citizens. I believe that my state or a welfare state in general must provide for education, housing, sustenance, healthcare, pensions, unemployment insurance, and equal wages through price and wage controls. Also, other services must be taken under consideration such as public transportation and childcare. With this in mind, I strongly agree with the welfare state, mainly because of how everything is, in a sense, standardized. With all of these services mentioned, it can be assumed that my government will take care of our citizens very well. I must admit that I was inspired by this whole idea from Canada. Canada is a very interesting country. It is a welfare state, and succeeds with its citizens. Canada takes care of its citizens, such as providing health care, public transportation, and plenty of other services and goods that I have mentioned before. With this in mind, I can compare a welfare state to a non-welfare state, such as Kenya. Kenya is a third world country, and I believe the reason for this is partly because it is not a welfare state. Kenya barely cares for its citizens, so it seems and is almost falling apart in my opinion. Kenya's main problem is that the government does have enough money, in general to take care of its citizens, in terms of health care and education, which is very unlike Canada's case. I would compare my state to Canada, because of our financial advantages, which is why I am very comfortable using the welfare system for my new state. To conclude, I realize that maintaining the welfare system requires a great deal of responsibility especially because very few countries and states have succeeded in creating efficient systems. This is why I am following Canada's routs, where I will do my best not to provide too much for the citizens, as eventually many of them will become dependant on the government. It's all about rationing the goods and services in moderation and properly. My main goal (and purpose) is to create equality for my citizens and maintain a strong welfare system!

Writing Feedback / Smoking law that was inflicted on Quebec, use examples in relation to Jeremy Bentham [2]

2. (smoking law that was inflicted on Quebec, use examples in relation to Jeremy Bentham)

A few years ago, Quebec has brought upon its province a no-smoking law inside public buildings. Many people were satisfied; however there were many people that were upset after this law took place. The supporters were happy because they would not have to breathe in smoke all the time and hopefully it would encourage people to quit the terrible habit of smoking as well. The opposers are particularly the bar owners throughout Quebec. Bars were the main place people used to go to if they wanted to smoke publicly. Because of this new law inflicted, bars lost a lot of jobs, and statistics show it. Of about 8,000 bars in the province of Quebec, 10 had to shut down and another 10 were on the brink of closing. The others remained concerned and tried to complain as much as they could. Jeremy Bentham, a well-known philosopher deeply believed in the concept of Utilitarianism. Bentham was an ethical scholar and believed that Utilitarianism represented the contribution to happiness or pleasure. It also refers to the fact that pleasure is determined to happiness and that laws should only be passed if they promote the most amount of happiness or for the most amount of people, which the majority. The majority of the people in Quebec would support Bentham's theory of Utilitarianism in regards to the newly passed smoking law. It certainly does promote the most amount of happiness for the most amount of people, which is in fact the majority of the province. Many arguments have started after this law had been passed. For instance, would reversing the law be bad for society? The bar owners definitely believe that the law should be reversed, especially because they are losing significant amounts of money. They think the law is "paternalistic, excessive, abusive and far too broad" as they are obviously upset due to their loss in business. On a different note, I believe that this law will promote success for the future. Smoking is a terrible habit and it is about time the government started to do something about it. I believe the government is trying something new and experimenting with the law. This can be much better for Quebec's society, however not specifically for the bars, but for Quebec's citizens in general. This leads to better health standards (as smoking is terrible for the human body), and better awareness so to speak. Overall, the new smoking law is benefiting more people and is leading to the most amount of happiness possible, which Jeremy Bentham would totally agree.