my presentation is on Rachel Whiteread and the theme is memory+place.
1-Powerpoint slides organization:
First page : statement from the artist can be taken from the artist website
Social media accounts and websites,, a really good quote.
Second page: bio( date of birth/death, art school, what work they did, most important exhibitions and shows)
Third:summary main works (drawing “often works in”,)
Fourth: specific art pieces ( 5works in 5 slides) inspiration, quotes,
Fifth: long quote explaining the artist mentality
Last page: bibliography
Artstor, jstore are good sources to use
and put a maximum 5 minute video on the artist relevant to the presentation
A word document is needed to explain each slide and how to present them so the following organization will be helpful (slide 1 then write what to say and so forth)
presentation on Rachel Whiteread: 1-powerpoint slides 2-word document with what to say
I’m working on a physics multi-part question and need a sample draft to help me learn.
please see attached file. Method 1:Circumference of balloon (Imperial Unit)Conversion factorCircumference of balloon (Metric unit)1 in = 2.54 cmRadius of balloonRadius = Circumference / (pi x 2) Radius = ________ (cm) / (pi x 2)Radius = ________ (cm)Volume of balloon Volume = 4/3 x pi x ____ (cm) x ____ (cm) x ____ (cm) Method 2:Balloon Volume = (Water Volume + balloon) – (Water Volume) ________ (mL) = ___________(mL) – _________ (mL)*Don’t forget that 1 mL = 1 cm3*Wikipedia lists the average density of air at room temperature to be 0.001204 g/cm3. Now that we know the density of the air in the balloon and the volume of the balloon, we can solve for the mass of the air in the balloon. Use the formulas below to calculate the mass of the air in the balloon.Density(g/mL) = mass(g) / volume(mL) Therefore:Mass(g) = Density(g/mL) x Volume(mL)_____ (g) = _____(g/mL) x _____(mL)
Dominican University of California Circumference of Balloon Physics Exercises
Corruption in Russia Essay
Table of Contents Introduction Causes of corruption Effects of Corruption in Russia Works Cited Introduction As Boylan (1-2) argues, corruption is one of the prime causes of Russia’s political, economic and, social problems, because of the rampant involvement of most government officials in corruption. As he further adds, although the government has put down measures to contain the practice, for example, the adoption of the 1997 anti-graft legislation, such efforts have achieved little, as corruption has become a normal practice in the Russian bureaucracy. One thing that makes the whole scenario worse is the fact that, the same law enforcing officials mandated with the duty of safeguarding the Russian citizenry’s rights, have collaborated with corrupt groups to terrorize the same citizens they took oath to protect. Therefore, as a result of these “gangs” sharing their gains with law enforcing agents, the economic security of most business persons is at stake hence, the common practice of businesspersons also offering bribes to receive protection. For example, in 1999, over 5.7% of the total annual earnings of the Russian government were bribes. The same has been the trend over subsequent years, because of the increasing corruption index. Although most research findings showed a decline of revenues received from bribe tax by 0.3% from the previous 1.4% in 2006, the corruption index has risen over the recent years, as currently the Russia corruption syndicates contribute over 300 billion annually (Roaf 1-3). In addition, as media reports indicate, the extortion of money from innocent citizens in Russia has developed into a recognized institution, because the practice is not only common in business world, but also the practice is spreading into learning institutions, military recruiting agencies, and learning institutions. Because of such uncontrolled corruption levels, organizations that have failed to comply with the new corruption standards have been forced to go into liquidation and there is increased lack of media freedom. In addition, because of the clear connection between corruption and increased crime, security standards have declined in Russia, because of the ever-increasing net of criminal gangs, which evade the long arms of the law, because of the nature of bribes that they offer (Feifer 1). Considering these effects resulting from the escalating levels of corruption in Russia, corruption is one of the primary impediments on Russia’s political and economic stability and democracy. Causes of corruption Historically, the falling of communism opened doors to the economic market restructuring of Russia’s economic structures. In the process of that transition, criminal organizations rose into power as most business operators sought ways of protecting their wealth. One of such groups was the Russian Mafia, a criminal gang that controls a bigger section of Russia’s black market. In addition, back then, Russia lacked a strong police force to combat criminal gangs hence, giving way to increasing cases of insecurity, money laundering and corruption, as this was the only way of protecting one’s acquired wealth (Glenny 10-33). Although incoming and outgoing governments have put up measures to combat these practices, these historically inherited behavioral norms have been the hardest to eliminate from the streets and public offices in Russia. Get your 100% original paper on any topic done in as little as 3 hours Learn More The corruption net in Russia is very wide, as it involves both government officials and most powerful business stakeholders, who control the biggest ratio of Russia’s economy. Although most individuals assume that corruption is a historical heritage in Russia, as Roaf (2-4) argues, this problem has persisted, because the government of Russia has failed to enact strong legislation to combat the vice. For example, Russia’s complex tax and custom system does not safeguard citizens from power abusers, who take advantage of weaknesses in the accounting and auditing systems to steal public funds. In addition to such deficits in regulation, the government has also failed adopt effective capital controls to manage the flow of money among its citizenry. These inadequacies have forced most low-earning government officials to engage in corrupt deals to substantiate their economic deficits. On the other hand, excessive government taxation imposed on citizens has made the scenario worse, as most low-earning employees have to carry the burden of the system. In addition to weak economic control measures, Russia has a weak legal enforcement system hence, the nature of failures that are clear when it comes to prosecuting crime perpetrators. Majority of crime perpetrators are individuals of the political class and the business elites; hence, considering the influence they have on the government, it becomes very hard to prosecute them, as this may jeopardize the stability of Russia. In addition to governmental flaws, the civil societal has also failed to defend citizens’ civil rights through monitoring all governmental processes. The fact that there are clear media biases in reporting corruption cases in the government have made the case worse, as most media reports never expose the real corruption level in Russia (Orttung 2-3). Effects of Corruption in Russia The Russian corruption takes two primary forms namely; stealing of public finances by governmental officials and soliciting of bribes by governmental officials for any service offered. Regardless of the form of corruption, all sectors of the Russian bureaucracy have felt the effects of corruption. The effects are so damaging to an extent, most foreign investors have been scared to invest more of their funds in Russia. For example, in 2009, IKEA (a Swedish firm that deals with furniture products) announced its intention to terminate its business expansion prospects, because of the unpredictability of Russia’s market structures. We will write a custom Essay on Corruption in Russia specifically for you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Considering this, corruption has greatly contributed to the declining growth and development levels in Russia, because of the increased inequality in resource and capital finance distribution. Majority of the individuals who benefit from corruption funds are politicians, prominent businesspersons, some criminalized gangs, hence, the common citizen rarely benefits from such proceeds, although they are the main taxpayers (Stott 1). One prime product of the rising Russia’s corruption levels is abuse of office power by governmental officials. Soliciting of bribes from citizens by governmental officials has become a common practice among all public office bearers in Russia. This has greatly affected the distribution of public finances, as most of these officials have diverted most public finances into personal pockets. Such diversion of public funds resulting from abuse of office powers has made the Russian government to loose billions of development revenue. For example, annually the Russian government losses billions of dollars to rogue importers who bribe custom officials hence, evading paying tax. As research studies show, although Russia has no mechanisms of accounting for this in its national budget deficit, this is a clear indication of weaknesses in its revenue management systems. Economically, corruption has reduced the level of both local and international investment levels, as most investors have expressed intentions of withholding or withdrawing their investments from Russia. Russia is one of the Asian countries with the lowest levels of foreign direct investments, as its increased corruption levels have deterred normal business operations. On the other hand, corruption is one of the primary factors that have deterred the much anticipated for industrial restructuring. There has been many corruption reported cases among most firms participating in this process, as most of them have to bribe their way into getting the contracts hence, perform poorly (Roaf 4-6). Another detrimental effect of the increasing levels of corruption in Russia is denial of media freedom. Prior to Putin’s media crackdown of 2006, the media played a central role of exposing all governmental corruption scandals. This changed with the confiscating of media rights hence, the current media biased reports of the level of corruptions. Majority of currently operating media houses in Russia are state managed or are managed by individuals who have strong ties with the government hence, the current controlled flow of information. Going hand in hand with confiscation of media rights is the declining respect of citizen’s fundamental rights. The government has failed to protect its citizens from the corrupt hands of middlepersons and law enforcing agents who have greatly abused their powers. Over the recent past, more so prior to the 2007-2008 elections, the government took most previously owned private organizations, for example, the Gazpron energy and Yukos oil company. Not sure if you can write a paper on Corruption in Russia by yourself? We can help you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This largely has denied citizens property ownership rights, as most individuals cannot afford to pay big taxes or bribes demanded by finance officials to sustain their enterprises. In addition to taking away of media and private ownership rights, as Orttung (4-5) argues, corruption is one of the primary causative agents of the increased state insecurity as more criminal gangs have rose into power. The organized crime gang net in Russia is very extensive to an extent it operates not only in Russia, but also in other international countries, because of the increased corruption levels in Russia’s custom department. Considering this, although the present leadership has put up measures to deal with the situation, still corruption remains one of the biggest problems facing the Russian government (Serio 11-27). In conclusion, the impacts of corruption are evident in Russia with the current increasing levels of abuse of power by government officials. Therefore, to remedy the problem, there is need for the Russian government to adopt means of reforming its systems of governance, as this is the only way of cleaning its systems from negative impacts of corruption. In addition, there is need for development of a free civil society, which should go hand in hand with decentralization of power, because of the need to reduce the current abuse of office of power among its officers. Works Cited Boylan, S. Organized crime and corruption in Russia: Implications for U.S. and International law. Fordham International Law Journal, 19 (1999). Web. Feifer, G. Corruption in Russia, part 1: a normal part of everyday life. Radio Free Europe, 2007. Web. Glenny, M. A journey through the global criminal underworld. New York: Knopf Publishers, 2008. Print. Orttung, R. Causes and consequences of corruption in Putin’s Russia. Ponar’s Policy Memo, 430 (2006):1. Web. Roaf, J. Corruption in Russia. International Monetary Fund, 2000. Web. Serio, J. Investigating the Russian Mafia. Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 2008. Print. Stott, Michael. Russia corruption “may force western firms to quit”. Thomson Reuters, 2010. Web.
Ashford University Wk 5 Towards a Cultural Clinical Psychology Research Paper
essay help online Ashford University Wk 5 Towards a Cultural Clinical Psychology Research Paper.
Literature ReviewPrior to beginning work on this assignment, read the Ryder, Ban, & Chentsova-Dutton (2011) “Towards a Cultural-Clinical Psychology,” American Psychological Association (2014) “Guidelines for Prevention in Psychology,” Hage, et al. (2007) “Walking the Talk: Implementing the Prevention Guidelines and Transforming the Profession of Psychology,” and Rivera-Mosquera, et al. (2007) “Prevention Activities in Professional Psychology: A Reaction to the Prevention Guidelines” articles.Clinical and counseling psychology is a dynamic field that is constantly evolving and striving toward better treatment options and modalities. In this literature review, you will explore and integrate psychological research into a literature review, addressing current trends in three major areas of clinical and counseling psychology: assessment, clinical work, and prevention.In your review, include the following headings, and address the required content.AssessmentSupport this section with information from the Ryder et al. (2011) article “Towards a Cultural-Clinical Psychology” and at least one additional peer-reviewed article from the Ashford University Library.Compare the assessments currently in use by clinical and counseling psychologists.Explain the trend towards cultural-clinical psychology and the suitability of clinical assessments with diverse clients.Clinical workSupport this section using a minimum of three peer-reviewed articles from the Ashford University Library. The recommended articles for this week may be useful in generating your response.Compare and contrast technical eclecticism, assimilative integration and theoretical integration.Provide a historical context and identify the major theorists for each perspective.Assess the trends in psychotherapy integration.List three pros and cons for each perspective, sharing which perspective most closely aligns with your own.Analyze the major trends in psychology and explain the connection between evidenced-based practices and psychotherapy integration.PreventionReview the “Guidelines for Prevention in Psychology” (American Psychological Association, 2014), and support this section with information from the Hage, et al. (2007) “Walking the Talk: Implementing the Prevention Guidelines and Transforming the Profession of Psychology,” and Rivera-Mosquera, et al. (2007) “Prevention Activities in Professional Psychology: A Reaction to the Prevention Guidelines” articles.Describe general prevention strategies implemented by clinical and counseling psychologists at the micro, meso, exo, and macro levels.The Literature ReviewMust be 9 to 10 double-spaced pages in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Must include a separate title page with the following:Title of paperStudent’s nameCourse name and numberInstructor’s nameDate submittedMust use at least seven peer-reviewed sources in addition to the course text.Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.
Ashford University Wk 5 Towards a Cultural Clinical Psychology Research Paper
Pasadena City College Monologue using Anna Deavere Smiths writing style Exercise
Pasadena City College Monologue using Anna Deavere Smiths writing style Exercise.
I’m working on a english writing question and need a sample draft to help me learn.
So after the school got shut down, I started to live with my friends, Kiko and Carrie, outside of the school. (because I went to a boarding school) It becomes so strange to cook for ourselves every meal, cause we usually have at least breakfast and lunch eating at school. And it was also hard for me to deal with online learning, because some of the class, like programming, works better in person. But we survived. Kiko and Carrie went back to China in late April, so I went to live with Linda before going back to China. I didn’t go back to China immediately because I was planning to take the SAT in person after the summer, so I was worried I couldn’t come back if I left. But after all the SAT got canceled, I finally went back home in October. Because I am studying AP Macro this year, so I know the pandemic has created a global economic recession. And with more help from fiscal policy, the economy will come back to normal soon. What this quarantine brings to people is that they have a new way of working. People don’t necessarily going to the office in person to do the work, more online school platforms will arise, and it changed how college requirements. Also, many people who couldn’t be with their family all time have the opportunity during the pandemic, spending time with their loved ones.Let me know if you need more stuffTwilight Los Angeles, 1992/Pandemic Los Angeles, 2021Final Writing Assignment; 50 pointsThis assignment asks you to use Anna Deavere Smith’s original technique for capturing historical moments to craft your own monologue about our strange and distinctive historical moment: Quarantine Los Angeles 2020. You will use your multiple written reflections on your own experience here and now as the raw material from which you will craft your own distinctive personal monologue.1) Name your monologue using a phrase that you take from the monologue itself.2) Give a description of yourself and your surroundings at the beginning of the monologue, as Smith does in hers. You may use multiple fonts (as Smith does) if you wish.3) Type your monologue out in the poetic typographical style that Smith uses rather than typing this out as you would a formal paper. Single-spacing. Don’t worry about MLA.4) You can—and I’d love it if you did—opt to theorize about the quarantine and its future effects on the world, the US, human civilization, geopolitics, or family life rather than reflecting on your own experience. This means that Cornel West’s monologue or Maxine Waters’ first monologue will be better models for you.5) This is a creative and personal writing assignment. Your piece should sound like you—like your voice. BUT this is also a graded piece of writing: Think about vocabulary, variety of sentence lengths and structures. Try to elevate your voice somewhat—make it a bit more striking and formal than your casual spoken speech. If you describe something or someone, make it vivid. Make the image come to life. Don’t just give me a bland list of things anyone else might say. Make it personal—make it such that your friends would know it was you even if your name wasn’t attached.6) Edit your work. Just because this is a creative assignment, doesn’t mean that sloppiness is acceptable.7) There is no word limit. Short or long is fine—but the length must feel authentic and suitable to what you’re saying.
Pasadena City College Monologue using Anna Deavere Smiths writing style Exercise
Analysis Of The Cuban Missile Crisis In Cuba History Essay
Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev of the U.S.S.R. had sent missiles sent to Cuba, for defensive purposes. When U.S President John F. Kennedy heard about that, he sent planes on reconnaissance missions to spy on what Cuba and the U.S.S.R. was using the missies for. Khrushchev responded this with an argument, arguing that the missiles were for defensive purposes only and would not be used against the United States unless necessary. Kennedy called for a blockade to stop the flow of defensive weapons into Cuba, but could not successfully call a blockade unless the United States was at war with Cuba. If the United States went to war with Cuba, then the United States would have declared war against the U.S.S.R. also. By declaring war with the U.S.S.R. and Cuba, Khrushchev told Kennedy that this was possibly putting world peace at risk. Knowing this Kennedy created a quarantine to check Soviet ships that bring cargoes into Cuba, instead of a blockade. The United States would not need to be at war with Cuba to create a quarantine. Khrushchev tried to argue that a quarantine would complicate the lives of Cuban residents. Most likely because this would slow down the rate at which food and supplies entered the country. Kennedy wanted the missiles in Cuba to be removed immediately or else the military have to remove them by destroying them themselves. Also a U-2 spy plane was shot down while flying reconnaissance missions over Cuba. Kennedy said the planes were unarmed. Khrushchev then said that the reconnaissance missions were violating Cuba airspace. After this the United States wanted Kennedy to arm planes on spy missions so that if fired upon could fire back to defend themselves. After all this Khrushchev agreed to remove this missiles from Cuba, if the United States promised to keep peace in the Caribbean, and never invade Cuba. Also the United States needed to remove their missiles from Turkey that were built in case Cuba and the U.S.S.R. used the missiles in Cuba. Khrushchev had the strongest argument because Kennedy just constantly said that if the bases weren’t removed, the United States would just simply destroy the bases no matter what consequences to world peace this way of handling the weapons came in contact with. Kennedy knew that blowing up the weapons was most likely going to lead to something larger than just Khrushchev and Castro being unhappy. While Khrushchev is trying to convince Kennedy that the weapons from the U.S.S.R. being sent to Cuba were just defensive weapons. Khrushchev argued that the weapons being sent from the U.S.S.R. were strictly defensive weapons for Cuba to defend themselves from invasions and other kinds of attacks, since Cuba is smaller than most other nations. Khrushchev also argued that Cuba needed these weapons, because Cuba is surrounded by other countries like the United States that are much larger and stronger than Cuba is. Everyone in the U.S.S.R., Cuba, and the United States knew Cuba could not defeat the United States. “Who would believe that Cuba was a nightmare for US? It was to small; even if it wanted to gobble up US, it couldn’t.” (US Ambassador to USSR, Foy Kohler, October 16, 1962, 7 p.m.) Khrushchev claimed all the weapons being sent into Cuba were defensive and only in times of defense were these missiles to be used. “We confirm that armaments now on Cuba, regardless of classification to which they belong, are destined exclusively for defensive purposes,” (Khrushchev to JFK, October 23, 1962, 5 p.m.) Since the U.S.S.R. was supplying Cuba with the missiles, Cuba and the U.S.S.R. became allies. This meant that even though Khrushchev knew the United States didn’t want to start a war, if the United States did attack Cuba then the U.S.S.R. would help protect their ally Cuba. Khrushchev said that attacking Cuba is like attacking the U.S.S.R. so the U.S.S.R. will be prepared to fight back. Khrushchev also doesn’t want to start a war, but said if the United States attacks the U.S.S.R. and Cuba then most likely a war will break loose and possibly threaten world peace. Khrushchev was saying that he will only launch the missiles and attack the United States if the U.S.S.R. or one of the U.S.S.R’s allies were attacked by the United States first. Also in Khrushchev’s arguments most of the arguments that Khrushchev said he correctly argues that the United States solution to getting rid of the missiles by destruction was a possible threat to world peace. Khrushchev knows that neither The United States nor the U.S.S.R. wants to threaten world peace and he also knows neither wants to go to war so he kept sending weapons after Kennedy told him that he wants the missiles to be removed. Khrushchev kept sending cargo shipments, because some were supplies and others were considered defensive weapons. Kennedy called for a blockade on Cuba to stop supplies from going into the country, so that he could stop anymore of the defensive weapons coming into Cuba, but failed to create a blockade and had to make a quarantine instead. He couldn’t make a blockade in front of Cuba because the United States was not at war with Cuba. The United States needed to be at war with Cuba to make a blockade. If the United States started a war with Cuba to create this blockade, then the U.S.S.R. would have to fight against the United States because the United States declared war against one of U.S.S.R’s allies. Kennedy created this quarantine and checked cargoes coming into Cuba to make sure that no weapons were being sent into Cuba that could used offensively against the United States. By doing this Khrushchev wrote a letter explaining to Kennedy that all the cargoes entering Cuba were harmless and that all the weapons that were being sent into Cuba are all already there. Khrushchev said “I assure you that on those ships, which are bound for Cuba, there are no weapons at all. The weapons which were necessary for the defense of Cuba are already there.” (Khrushchev to Kennedy, October 26, 1962, 7 p.m.) Khrushchev kept saying that the weapons that were needed for Cuba to defend themselves are now there and not being sent anymore and the rest of the cargoes being shipped into Cuba were peaceful, even though after Khrushchev said that, weapons still continued to come into Cuba. Khrushchev most likely argued this point to keep Kennedy from searching the cargoes during the quarantine. Khrushchev also states that if anytime during this quarantine a vessel is stopped from coming into Cuba, then Khrushchev knew just as the United States knew that this would be considered piracy and possibly be a blockade meaning that the United States is declaring war against Cuba, which is also declaring war against the U.S.S.R. So Khrushchev once again stresses that declaring war could threaten world peace. “If you stop the vessel, then, as you yourself know, that would be piracy.” (Khrushchev to Kennedy, October 26, 1962, 7 p.m.) Khrushchev also argues that the United States is complicating the life of Cuban people by having quarantines and flying over Cuba on reconnaissance missions. This is complicating the lives of Cuban residents because the quarantine was stopping supplies or extending the time it takes for the Cuban people to get supplies, making the simple life of the Cuban residents less simple and more complicated. And the constant reconnaissance missions from the United States had Cuban residents worried about planes, not knowing if the United States was bringing bombs to drop on Cuba to get rid of the defensive missiles that were placed there. During the flight over Cuba that Kennedy had sent out to look at the missile bases the first time on October 27, 1962, an unarmed American plan was shot down by Cuban forces because Khrushchev believed the United States reconnaissance missions were violating Cuban airspace, therefore took safety precautions and shot down the plane in case the plane was planning to destroy the missile sites or invading Cuba. The United States military, after the attack on an American plane started to try to get President Kennedy to arm such planes with weapons to return fire if the plane is fired upon while on reconnaissance mission over Cuba, because a plane was shot down. Kennedy did not arm these planes, but continued to send planes on reconnaissance missions. On October 27, 1962 another plane that was told to be unarmed was shot down by Cuban forces which made the military ask President Kennedy to arm these planes and to fire back when attacked because the United States did not want to lose planes during reconnaissance missions. “If the Cubans were shooting at our planes, then we were going to shoot back.” (The Attorney General to Memorandum for the Secretary of state, October 30, 1962.) Khrushchev made a deal with Kennedy that said, he will have the missile bases removed from Cuba under the supervision of the United Nations, if the United States removed the missiles that had been placed in Turkey facing the U.S.S.R, never invade onto Cuban land and keep peace in the Caribbean. Kennedy agreed to not invading Cuba and keeping peace with Cuba, but could not have the missiles removed from Turkey because the missiles in Turkey were under the control of the NATO, and Kennedy could not remove them only NATO could. Since Kennedy could not do anything about the missiles in Turkey he ignored the telegram. Kennedy agreed to the peace with Cuba and in the Caribbean, but said nothing about the missiles being removed from Turkey, and Khrushchev accepted these terms. Khrushchev removed the missiles from Cuba under the supervision of the United Nations, and the United States did not attack Cuba. The United States had the missiles removed from Turkey later on. Khrushchev had stronger arguments about the missiles being defensive missiles because Khrushchev never had the missiles used against anyone. Kennedy thought that the missile were going to be used against the United States, but never were used. Khrushchev also said Cuba is a small country and would have a hard time defending themselves from a nation like the United States which was why Khrushchev said he was sending weapons to Cuba that were necessary for defense. This was a strong statement, because Kennedy and Khrushchev both knew that the United States was much larger and stronger nation than Cuba. Khrushchev also had the stronger argument because he said he would not want to have the United States attack and destroy the missiles because it would create a threat to world peace which Khrushchev knew neither side wanted, but Khrushchev said that if the United States attacked the U.S.S.R’s allies the U.S.S.R. would have to help their ally defend themselves. This was a good argument by Khrushchev, because Kennedy want to send in the United States military and simply destroy the weapons himself. Lastly Khrushchev used a more calm approach to removing these weapons. Kennedy threatened to destroy the weapons, while Khrushchev seemed more open to negotiations.