Divorce Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words - 1

Divorce - Essay Example This increasing rate of divorces can be blamed on an imbalance between understanding the other person and maintaining one’s own self-esteem at the same time. The inability of the couples to appreciate their partner and the values of marriage has led to the soaring statistics of divorces (Kramer). With the advent of the same-sex marriages and state laws permitting them, a difference can be seen in couple behaviors and relationship attitudes between the same-sex and heterosexual couples. A very intriguing concept put forward by Peter D. Kramer, analyses the values of autonomy and mutuality amongst the couples and the importance of their equivalent preservation. Autonomy is one of those values that is imprinted in the American psychology and even in marriages the couples are emphasizing on maintaining their self-beliefs and their true identity against whatever the circumstances. Carl Roger states that, â€Å"a successful marriage is one that increases the self-actualization of each member†. In olden times, only men were privileged with this right of self-governance, however 1970’s introduced this ideology to the women as well. It is important to note here, when both members of the couple assert their self-importance and individuality, it is a step forward towards progress and social evolvement. But the irony of this concept is that it leads to a greater number of divorces. Therefore it is of most importance that this ideology should be in a state of equ ilibrium with mutuality and acceptance of the other person. Mutuality is a virtue that is not commonly practiced in our society and the attention of an individual is mainly directed towards self-enhancement, self-help and self-esteem. It is not something that can be taught or practiced spontaneously; rather it needs to be incorporated in our society just like the concept of autonomy is. Marriages will not be able to thrive in a healthy manner until and unless

The New Deal Saving Liberal Democracy Politics Essay

The New Deal Saving Liberal Democracy Politics Essay In 1932, in the midst of the economic depression Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected American president. He won the election with outstanding success, receiving 472 out of the possible 531 votes with the Electoral College and inflicting the worst defeat since 1912 upon his Republican rival1. The reason for this was the enthusiastic support given by the general population to his proposal of a New Deal a highly experimental programme of legislative reforms with no defined ideology, intended at stimulating economic recovery. Having to face a continuously worsening economic depression, with over 13 millions unemployed, Roosevelt acted quickly, and within the first hundred days of his presidency passed startling bursts of reform legislation2 which in effect prevented the collapse of the economy and began to tackle some of the most pressing social problems, primarily unemployment. Though, as Conkin states, the New Deal did not provide any new clarification of the dilemmas of liberal democracy3, if one assumes that the prime basis for liberal democracy is a prosperous society, then he is justified to claim that by preventing economic collapse, Roosevelt thus saved liberal democracy in America. For the purpose of this essay, let us accept the encyclopedic definition of liberal democracy as a representative democracy where the ability of elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law and moderated by a constitution which emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals and minorities (also called constitutional liberalism), and which places constraints on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised. Recently, the term liberal democracy came to acquire a socialist, or perhaps event communist undertone in America, but since this can be rather classified as a misunderstanding of the term, it will be neglected. Essentially, the question posed consists of two major issues; firstly, one must consider the extent to which the New Deal policies corresponded with the liberal democratic ideology, and secondly whether the New Deal actually saved American liberal democracy. The second question essentially consists of several issues; the extent to which the liberal democracy was under threat in America, the role of the New Deal in saving it, the role of other factors, and the extent to which the New Deal was a radical innovation as opposed to being simply a natural continuation of previous policies, in which case it could not be honored for saving liberal democracy. Effectively, the aim of the following essay is to suggest that the New Deal was not liberal democratic in its nature and that if it did support liberal democracy in America, which incidentally was not critically threatened, it did so as a by-consequence of trying to improve the economic situation and solely from an economic, as opposed to a political, perspective. In addition, the importance of the Second World War as a contributive factor to economic recovery will be underlined. So let us address the first question: How Liberal was the New Deal itself? From a political perspective the New Deal can hardly be classified as Liberal Democratic in nature since it did not aim to promote a representative democracy where the ability of elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law and moderated by a constitution. In fact, it did the exact opposite when Roosevelt proposed the Court reform bill4 by which he was planning to allow for the packing of the Supreme Court and which also presumed a reduction of the Courts power. Since the Court was the principal guard against the governments violation of the constitution, it clearly went directly against the liberal democratic principles. The problem was that the Court declared unconstitutional several of Roosevelt projects, and he saw it as one of the main obstacles is his way to pass legislation; he was thus determined to reform it thus overcoming its opposition. The New Deal on the whole saw an expansion of the presidential functions5 and a decline of the party system, since Roosevelt considered traditional party politics an obstacle to the modernization of American government6. Since this meant weakening the power 1 Leuchtenburg p.17 2 Badger p. 7 3 Auerbach p. 19 4 Leuchtenburg p. 237 5 Ibid. p. 327 6 Milkis p. 480 of elected representatives of the people, in also stood in contradiction with democratic principles; instead of democratic liberalism Roosevelt was aiming at militant liberalism7. In the economy, a rather pragmatic as opposed to ideological approach was adopted, and Roosevelt clearly diverged from the liberal Keynesian policies of creating full employment by means of public work schemes; one of Roosevelts main convictions was the necessity to balance the budget, and thus, governmental spending was minimized8. Hence, to help cover the costs of the emerging welfare system, taxes were increased9. So in what sense was the New Deal Liberal Democratic? The bases for the argument promoting such a view were the welfare policies one of the basic pillars of liberal democracy since more progress was made in public welfare and relief than in the [previous] three hundred years10. However, this area too was not without controversy since on the one hand as Irwin Unger argues that New Deal [was] the immediate source of the liberal welfare state11, but on the other, C. Gardner stresses the fact that it did not solve any of the fundamental problems 12. Numerous welfare policies were introduce, namely the National Youth Asssociation which was a considerable success helping young people find work13, the Home Owners Loan Corporation which protected Americans who has been hit by depression from losing their property and relief programmes such as the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the Civil Works Administration and the Civilian Conservation Corps. The greatest single reform however w as the Social Security Act which included unemployment compensation, old-age and survival insurance, public assistance programs for dependant children and the blind14, housing projects, economic relief programs15. Though overall liberal, it had several flaws; national health insurance was absent and family allowances, public assistance and unemployment insurance remain ungenerous by international standards16 whilst many categories of workers were excluded from the Act all together17. Excluded too was the black population, which became another controversial issue, since liberalism actively promotes the protection of minorities. The NRA saw the blacks being paid less than the white, the TVA largely avoided employing blacks and the AAA was not effective in protecting the interest of black sharecroppers and tenant farmers. On the whole, Roosevelt did attempt to promoted racial equality as for example by promoting blacks to secondary posts in government18; yet as many of his critics poi nt out, he did not introduce a Civil Rights Legislation19 fearing opposition from the Southern states, and hence only few welfare projects, namely the NYA, benefited the black population. Similarly, the promotion of womens rights was undertaken women being included in government for the first time20, but only on a small scale. Hence, it is debatable whether the New Deal can be classified as liberal democratic, since only from a social perspective can it truly be considered such. So how could it save liberal democracy? In order to assess that, let us first identify the threats that were present. When the New Deal was first introduced, the economy was continuously declining; the banking system was collapsing as banks were failing, demand was falling, agricultural overproduction depreciated prices and droughts further undermined the income of the farmers who were struggling to pay their taxes and debt obligations, in towns unemployment rose to 15.9% in 193121 and wages were cut, production was shrinking in most fields and workers suffered from malnutrition and destitution. In we accept that economic prosperity or at least minimal wage available to the majority of the population is a necessary requirement for Liberal Democracy, then one could easily claim that from an economic perspective the latter was increasingly under threat in America at the beginning of the 1930s, as economic plight was severe and conditions were only deteriorating. One could go as far as claiming that unless a series of effective economic reforms was introduced, the economic system would collapse bringi ng an end to liberal democracy; the scale of the economic plight was reflected in the general mood of despair and the belief that depression was permanent22 as well as increasingly emigration of workers and a drastic fall in birth rate. 7 Ibid. p. 486 8 Skocpol p. 40 9 Louchheim p. 150 10 Leuchtenburg p. 332 11 Auerbach p.18 12 Auerbach p. 20 13 Louchheim p. 296 14 Skocpol p. 38 15 Louchheim p. 260 16 Skocpol p. 37 17 Louchheim p. 151 18 Ibid. p. 260 19 Leuchtenburg p. 186 20 Ibid. p. 33 21 Badger p. 18 22 Leuchtenburg p. 29 However, surprisingly perhaps, the democratic government itself was not political threatened in any significant way. Whilst in Europe extremist parties made enormous gains in parliament and their popularity boosted up, America saw no such development and in the elections of 1932, Communists -the most extreme party prepared to challenge liberal democracy only polled 120 000 votes23. Moreover, general mood idleness prevailed and no major protests parallel to those is Europe were seen. Farm strikes, communist demonstrations and miners strikes did occur24, yet did propose an alternative communist political system, but rather simply expressed their grievances. In there was a threat, it came from the suggestions to strengthen the powers of the executive, radical enough to propose dictatorship; a dictatorial of twelve men, a supercouncil or simply a single dictator25. However, these suggestions did not generate violent opposition to the present democratic government. Though Hoovers govern ment was blamed for the depression and as William Dodd put it both political parties have been bankrupted26, the American people did not seem to lose faith in democracy as a political system and when Roosevelt proposed a new proposed a new program, they supported it with faith and enthusiasm. The reason why extremism did not threaten liberal democracy in America as it did in Europe was mainly due to the fact that America was founded upon the principles of liberty and freedom, and never experienced effective dictatorial rule as did most European countries under their monarchs. Hence, in the political sense, the New Deal cannot claim to have saved liberal democracy, since no critical threat actually existed. Ironically however, one could claim that New Deal created such a threat when in 1934 when strikes and riots began to spread27. The protests acquired a much strong communist inclination and Longs Share Our Wealth organization promoting wealth redistribution attracted increasing support28 whilst on Labour Day the textile workers carried out the largest strike ever in America. However, these threats were effectively handled by the government by force in the case of major strikes29; and the general public continued to fear Communist, which meant that no critical threat developed. Also, by adopting a more left-wing approach to the economy, the New Deal managed to undercut radical reforms30 destroying the attractiveness of radical parties. The development of left-wing radicalism can be explained by de Tocquevilles theory that evils become intolerable when avenues of escape are opened31; when the workers were given certain privileges, they began to want more. Hence, if the New Deal is to be acclaimed for handling a political threat to Liberal Democracy, it can only be with respect to the threat it generated itself. This is further supported by the argument that the New Deal created a real threat of dictatorship on Roosevelt part, since, as James Farley notes the presidents attempt to dominate his party indicated his thirst for personal power32 and some congress members genuinely feared his despotism33. Hence, major threat to Liberal Democracy was that of economic collapse, and it is by preventing such a development that the New Deal can claim to have saved the system. However, the issue is far more controversial, so let us now examine the economic policies of the New Deal and determine their influences. During the first hundred days, Roosevelt passed several important pieces of economic legislation; first was the Emergency Banking Act. This in effect revived the collapsing banking system and induced confidence in the population that banks were now safe34, thus being a crucial development as it inspired the general population with faith that the economic depression was about to end and re-established normal monetary relations within the country. Roosevelts next move was to balance by budget by means of the Economy Act; this reassured the business community of Roosevelts fiscal conservatism, and thus promoted the restoration of business relations. He then managed to counter deflation by taking America off the gold standard35, passed the National Recovery Act proposing minimal wages and maximum working hours, established the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to oversee the stock market and introduced the Tennessee Valley Authority which was aimed at generating both electricity fo r the South and employment opportunities36. 23 Ibid. p. 26 24 Ibid. p. 25 25 Ibid. p. 30 26 Ibid. p. 27 27 Badger p. 303 28 Leuchtenburg p. 98 29 Ibid. p. 113 30 Auerbach p. 23 31 Auerbach p. 24 32 Leuchtenburg p. 278 33 Milkis p. 483 34 Leuchtenburg p. 43 35 Ibid. p. 51 36 Ibid. p. 54 Since one of the major problems caused by the depression was the plight in agriculture, the first hundred days also saw the introduction of the Agricultural Adjustment Act; this aimed to increase crop prices37, and protect farmers from uncertainties by subsidies. Though successful in bringing relative stability and prosperity to the farming community farm income rose by 50% during Roosevelts firm term38 and rural debt decreased the Act was a controversy due to the methods it employed. Crop destruction and the slaughtering of livestock to raise prices39 at a time when many families could not afford food, was seen by some as anti-social and overly-capitalist. In general, the first hundred days brought economic recovery, and saved the economy from collapse. However, not all projects were completely successful, e.g. the National Recovery Act was violated by many enterprises, and most of the changes did not in any way permanently alter the economic structure, which allowed for the same problems that caused the depression to arise later. Also, the withdrawal of capital from the economy into reserve funds may be helped to prologue the depression40. In did however induce a variety of stabilizers into the economy41 and introduced one lasting strategy the establishment of the federal government in the role of a broker and arbitrator between the different competing interest groups thus promoting private enterprise and completion, as well as succeeded in improving the overall working conditions42. One can claim that by saving America from collapse the first hundred days of the New Deal proved that democratic reform represented a viable alternative to totalitarianism43 thereby saving liberal democracy. However, one must keep in mind that it was economic recovery, not the saving of liberal democracy which was the main driving force behind the legislations. One must also consider that the success of the first hundred days was however short-lasting, and in 1937 the economy again plunged into recession after a period of revival. The economic situation deteriorated to such an extent that some of the population faced starvation44 and the problems of unemployment, though reduced, presisted. This was partly due to the failure of certain policies in the long-term, which were rather successful in the short term; in other words, the New Deal did not introduced any economic changes that would be far-reaching enough as to change the cyclic nature of the economy45 and thus did not prevent the natural recession of mid-1937. At this point it is vital to stress the importance of the Second World War for the American economy. Since the New Deal largely failed in the long term, one could easily expect that the economic problems and unemployment would persist unsolved for many years to come; the sole reason why this did not happen was the start of the Se cond World War. The war forced the government to allow large expenditures and provided an impetus for economic activity, growth and recovery (for the first time unemployment figures fell to less than 2 million) ultimately, the economic demands of the war provided demand for many industries, rising their levels of production and dragging capital into the economy. Final recovery from the depression was thus only achieved during the war, and many argue that without the opportunities that it presented, the economy under the New Deal would not be able to fully recover; A. L Hamby claims that had not World War II intervened à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ the New Deal might well have been considered a failure46. However, one must not underestimate the importance of the New Deal in developing the economy to a stage where it could take effective advantage of the opportunities provided by the war. In effect, the New Deal and the Second World War were two essential steps towards total recovery which could on ly be completely when coupled. Now let us briefly look at the relation between the New Deal and policies that preceded it; many argue that the New Deal was a continuation of the Progressives policies from the before the First World War; this argument is supported by the fact that the government included many old progressives such as Roosevelt himself, and many of the policies, namely the Social Security Act carried a great degree of resemblance to the welfare policies that were being introduced under the progressives47. However, this view by and large 37 Louchheim p. 237 38 Ibid p. 237 39 Leuchtenburg p. 73 40 Louchheim p. 151 41 Hamby p. 4 42 Leuchtenburg p. 69 43 Hamby p. 5 44 Leuchtenburg p. 249 45 Ibid. p. 265 46 Hamby p. 8 47 Ibid. p. 2 incorrect since the Progressives were closely associated with the laissez-faire which the New Deal abandoned, and were motivated in their welfare policies by Victorian humanitarianism48, whereas the New Deal politicians adopted their policies out of economic necessity and liberal considerations. The New Deal differed from the programs of the Hoover administration too, since it was not limited by narrow ideological vision and could embark on rather more radical policies49 which was essential if the economy was to be saved from collapse. Now let us conclusively assess the influence of the New Deal on Liberal Democracy. The New Deal was introduced as response to an economic depression and its policies were thus targeted at solving immediate economic problems rather than saving Liberal Democracy; thus the aims of the New Deal were not liberal. It was only the welfare policies introduced under the New Deal which were of a liberal nature, and even those were adopted out of necessity rather than because of ideological considerations. However, it is correct to acknowledge that the New Deal clearly saved the faith in liberal democracy by proving that a democratic government can fight an economic crisis successfully; it significantly revived the economy and in W. Leuchtenburgs view saved capitalism50 in America. Saving that the New Deal saved Capitalism rather than Liberal Democracy more correct also for the reason that whilst capitalism was threatened by the deteriorating economic depression, Liberal Democracy did not face any significant political threats thanks to the firm democratic tradition. However, if you accept the assumption that capitalism and a prosperous economy are essential foundations for a liberal democratic society, then it is fair to claim that to a large extent the New Deal helped prevent the collapse of the liberal democratic system in America.

Comparing Themes in Charlotte and Ruth Hall Essay -- compare and contra

Sentimental or Social Themes in Charlotte and Ruth Hall The subject matter of early American women writers has been criticized in the past, but the messages these authors sent women and society cannot be denied. Susanna Rowson and Fanny Fern came from two different time periods in American history, but their impact on society is similar. In both cases, the women experienced great success as writers during their time. Their popularity shows how their messages were transferred to many people of their time. By exploring the themes of these novels, a better understanding of females in society can be gained. The themes of womanhood and the issues associated with being female in early America will be detailed through specific problems. The concerns that are revealed in Charlotte: A Tale of Truth and Ruth Hall will deal with some universal issues like control, reason, emotion, reality, and the individual’s role in those areas. Womanhood is defined in different ways in Charlotte and Ruth Hall. Charlotte Temple and Ruth Hall were both vulnerable women in their respective ages. What is interesting is how each woman deals with her circumstances. Charlotte depends on the help of those around her; Ruth realizes those closest to her will not help. Ruth must fin for herself in order to survive; Charlotte does not survive! Does she not know how? With Charlotte, this question is relevant. She was young and accustomed to the care of others. Being alone in a new world was overwhelming to Charlotte morally. Yet, she ultimately chooses passion over principle, which is her ultimate flaw as a woman. This leads to a series of events ending in her death. Womanhood, especially in Susanna Rowson’s historical era, was something virtuous. However, Cha... ...eties were quick to dismiss feminine strength, but the power of their written words cannot be denied. Works Cited Davidson, Cathy N. "Sentimental Novel." The Oxford Companion to Women’s Writing in the United States. Eds. Cathy N. Davidson and Linda Wagner-Martin. NY: Oxford UP, 1985. "Fanny Fern." . 11 November 2000. Fergenson, Loraine. "Susanna Haswell Rowson (1762-1824)." . 10 November 2000. Fern, Fanny. Ruth Hall. Ed. Joyce W. Warren. London: Rutgers UP, 1994. O’Higgins, Harvey. The American Mind in Action. NY: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1924. Rowson, Susanna. Charlotte: A Tale of Truth. 1791. The Norton Anthology of American Literature. Ed. Nina Baym. NY: W.W. Norton & Co., 1999. 372-407. Warren, Joyce W. "Fanny Fern." The Oxford Companion to Women’s Writing in the United States. Eds. Cathy N. Davidson and Linda Wagner-Martin. NY: Oxford UP, 1985.

Language Learning Strategies Essay

Japanese designed site meant for starters in English language. In it are so many great links that are not only useful but also interesting to kids and other ESL learners. The reason for making it interesting is that kids may get bored if the material is not appealing to them. This site is maintained by TESL, the internet journal and the input is from teachers across the globe. This gives a lot of credibility to the site. Several books also have information meant for ESL learners and teachers. One of them is Oxford’s (1990) Language Learning Strategies outlines what a teacher should know in his/her quest to make learners be competent in English as a second language. It gives all the strategies, their pros and cons, the appropriate level of learners’ cognitive abilities that are in tandem with each strategy and the methods of evaluation of the learners’ understanding after a new concept is initiated. The book cannot be said to fully cover all the participants in the learning environment. Teachers and what they should know have been heavily outlined but the learner has been considerably left out. The ESL competence of the learner will by and large depend on what the teacher has to offer and not what the learner can do to improve his/her ESL competence. Mayer, in Weinstein (1988), Learning and Study Strategies: Issues in Assessment, Instruction and Evaluation tackles issues pertinent to holistic ESL learning namely assessing, instruction and evaluation. The learner needs to be instructed, assessed and evaluated on the much that a teacher has taught him/her. The book is therefore a masterpiece in enabling a well structured acquisition of ESL competence by a learner. The focus here is on the learner and has he teacher as guide, an assessor and evaluator of the progress the learner has made after a given time. The kindergarten kids have been catered for those teaching them will gain the skills to lead them in becoming competent. Elly (`1991), in his book Acquiring Literacy in a Second Language maintains that other than using structured audio-lingual programs , children should be exposed to a variety of story books and motivated to read and share what they get with other children. This way, they are able to acquire the second language easily. Their grasping of vocabularies becomes easy since they find them in the books they read as opposed to teaching them vocabularies non-contextually. The implication in Elly’s book is that practical as opposed to theoretical approach to ESL teaching and learning should be adopted. In terms therefore it content value, this book is invaluable. Boyle and Suzanne (1990) in Literary Scaffolds outline the strategies for firs and second language leaders and writers. It provides scaffolding activities which enhance successful intercourse with the print works and shows children how to read and write. Scaffolding is discussed and how it enhances writing and reading. Teachers and students of ESL can find invaluable information in this book. Genishi (1989) in Observing the Second Language Learner: An example of Teachers Learning illustrates how a kindergarten teacher recorded her observation of some ESL learners thus making critical points on effective language teaching and learning. She observed, according to this book, that each learner followed his/her own timetable and a unique path in learning a second language. It also states that it is important to enhance the activities and situations that provide an opportunity of talking by learners. Lastly, it emphasizes the central part the teacher plays in the language learning environment. This way, they are able to practice what they already know via exchanging with others. This book borrows from the Psychological aspect of behavioral learning whereby children learn from the environment and thus cutting a niche in being one of the best books for use by both teachers and college or University students learning or preparing to teach ESL. In conclusion, the books used are generally relevant based on their individual assistance to learners and teachers of ESL although they most of them are a decade old. The sites too provide the necessary information for those teachers of ESL wishing to help kindergarten kids acquire ESL competence. Students of ESL in colleges and Universities will find these sites vital. References Starters in English language, (2005), available at http://www. aitech. ac. jp/~iteslj/ESL. html: retrieved on 12 Feb 2009. Strategies for learning English as a second language, (2007), available at theenglishweb. com, retrieved on 13 Feb 2009. English as a second language, (2008), available at http://cla. univ-fcomte. fr/english/index_s. htm: retrieved on 14 Feb 2009. ESL for Kindergarten kids, (2006), available at http://home. earthlink. net/~mediadesigns/Calendar. html, retrieved on 12 Feb 2009 ESL teaching strategies, (2007), available at http://iteslj. org/Articles/Lessard-Clouston-Strategy. html retrieved on 10 Feb 2009. Oxford, R. (1990): Language Learning Strategies. New York, Newbury House Mayer, R. (1988): Learning Strategies: An Overview, in Weinstein, C et. al (Eds. ) New York, Academic Press. Genishi, C. (1989) Observing the Second Language Learner: An Example of Teacher’s Learning New York, Prentice Hall Elly, W. B (1991): Acquiring Literacy in a Second Language, Baltimore. Collins Publishers Boyle, O. F & Suzanne, F. P. (1990): Literacy Scaffolds† Strategies for First and Second Language Readers and Writers. New York, McGraw Hill

Eastboro Machine Tools Corporation Essay

Our main concern with Eastboro is their current dividend policy. With their current 40% dividend payout ratio, they will have to continue to borrow money to pay their dividend until the end of 2006. In 2007, they finally see an excess of cash after the dividend. With this current ratio, Eastboro’s hope to expand more in the international market is very restrained. Since management does not like to take on debt, they theoretically won’t expand until 2007. However, with the recent restructuring of the company and recommendation of a name change, we feel that the dividend policy needs a make-over, as well. Management wants to focus their energy to moving the image of the company to more of a growth company as opposed to a high dividend paying mature company. To obtain this image, the dividend payout ratio needs to be lowered drastically to a payout ratio of 10%. With this decrease in the payout, the new Eastboro Advanced Systems International (EASI) will convince shareholders of their change to a growth company. Switching to a 10% payout ratio allows Eastboro to see excess cash by 2004, rather than 2007 with the current ratio, giving them the ability to fund the international growth sooner. This will also attract new investors, which in the short-term will offset the expected loss of some current shareholders. We feel that this change will help increase the value of the company and the upside will, in the future, outweigh the downside. The idea behind reducing the payout to 10% is that EASI will be able to  consistently reach this target. At the end of each year, after all projects have been funded, EASI will be able to issue a special dividend to shareholders. With this ability, Eastboro will not have a problem retaining the shareholders or obtaining new shareholders. The recent attack on September 11, 2001 has caused the market to see some low results. Since the stock price has fallen from $30 to $22.15, this would be a good opportunity for EASI to repurchase some stock to help increase the value to the shareholders. Repurchasing some stock at this point will signal to shareholders that management feels strongly about the restructuring of the company. This, also, will give the shareholders the confidence to remain with the company. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that Eastboro change their name to Eastboro Advanced Systems International, Inc. to introduce the company as heading in the new direction of becoming a more technology advanced company. We also recommend reducing the dividend payout to 10%, as well as the repurchase of stock at the current price to help increase value. This will reduce the company’s dependency on borrowed funds, reducing the forecasted loss of the company and making them more profitable in shorter time period. This will give them increased cash flows to reinvest in CAD/CAM research to keep the company on the leading edge of advancement of their Artificial Workforce and related products at home and abroad. Along with the change in company dividend payout policy, a statement should be issued to inform the stockholders of the company’s direction and the continued importance to improve the company’s CAD/CAM products. To maximize shareholder wealth, we will be sticking to a 10% dividend in the future with the possibility of special dividends. With these changes, Eastboro will be signaling their focus on becoming a high growth stock. CRITIQUE Overall group five did a very good job addressing the major issues in this  case. They tackled the issues of the dividend policy, the proposed name change for Eastboro, and whether or not to buy back shares of stock. We agree with much of their analysis and recommendations. By lowering the dividend policy to 15%, they are allowing a larger portion of funds to be used for future research and development, an idea we agree with. By cutting this percentage back from a current rate of 40%, there will obviously be a reaction by both current and prospective stockholders. By approving the name change to Eastboro Advanced Systems International, they are signaling to the street that they are committed to future growth, and will no longer be able to be relied upon for high dividend payouts. We also like the fact that they did a dividend valuation, showing that Eastboro is currently under-valued, and does have a strong future. The only major issue we have with their analysis is a couple mistakes in the data they used. In reporting net income for 2001 in their forecasts for potential dividend payouts, they used 8. The correct number here, as given by the text, is 18. Also, they used the wrong depreciation data in several years in this forecast. These mistakes would have been realized if they had reviewed their brief adequately. These mistakes skew the numbers enough to mislead readers, showing the wrong timeframe for excess cash. In conclusion, group five did a very good job on the major issues in this case. However, they should have taken more time reviewing some of their data to ensure accuracy. LIMITATIONS There are several limitations in this case. One of the main issues is what kind of fallout will be produced by the cutting of the dividend payout from the current rate of 40% to a rate of 10%. We are assuming that those who are currently holding the stock for these large dividend payments will either stay with Eastboro, or will be replaced by new investors whose goals better represent Eastboro’s vision. We are also forecasting all numbers with an assumed growth rate of 15%, which obviously has the possibility, if not the probability of fluctuating below or above this number. Also, we are assuming the recent focus on the CAD/CAM technology will be profitable for Eastboro in the long-run, and that this new vision will create value for shareholders. Lastly, we are assuming that the market as a whole will perceive this move for what it is, a change in focus for a solid company with high potential for future growth. An alternative would be that people would look at the cut in dividends for a company who had historically paid them as a signal of weakness for Eastboro. We’re going with the assumption that the name change, as well as proper marketing practices by Eastboro should adequately address this problem.