Free Essays on Disarming

On September 11, 2002, we saw as a country what terrorists can do. It was the first time in my life; I had witness mass destruction in this country. The loss of so many human lives’s. People just trying to go to work, have a family, and make a living for themselves. On that day the people of this country gave up some of their freedom, and liberties that they took for granted. Because of this we saw President Bush focus his attention on Saddam Hussein. President Bush Believes that Saddam Hussein pursuit of weapons of mass destruction pose a grave danger, not only to his neighbors, but also to the United States. His regime aids, and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists to use against the Untied States. As of January 30, 2003, Eight European Leaders supported the disarming of Iraq. In a statement issue around the world, they express that more than ever in today’s world it is vital that we preserve unity, and cohesion. We know that success in the day-to-day battles against terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction demands unwarering determination, and firm international cohesion on the part of all countries for which freedom is precious. On January 30 the U.N. Weapons inspectors have confirmed that Saddam Hussein long-term established pattern of deception, denial and non-compliance with U.N. Security Council resolutions is continuing. Also on January 30, 2003, President Bush Expressed his gratitude to the eight European Leaders, and to other who are supportive of his efforts to make certain that Saddam Hussein is disarmed. But Diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful solution to the problem of Iraq’s failure to get rid of it’s weapons of mass destruction will continue indefinitely, President Bush said. The President is hoping ‘ the pressure of the free world† would convince Saddam Hussein to relinquis... Free Essays on Disarming Free Essays on Disarming On September 11, 2002, we saw as a country what terrorists can do. It was the first time in my life; I had witness mass destruction in this country. The loss of so many human lives’s. People just trying to go to work, have a family, and make a living for themselves. On that day the people of this country gave up some of their freedom, and liberties that they took for granted. Because of this we saw President Bush focus his attention on Saddam Hussein. President Bush Believes that Saddam Hussein pursuit of weapons of mass destruction pose a grave danger, not only to his neighbors, but also to the United States. His regime aids, and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists to use against the Untied States. As of January 30, 2003, Eight European Leaders supported the disarming of Iraq. In a statement issue around the world, they express that more than ever in today’s world it is vital that we preserve unity, and cohesion. We know that success in the day-to-day battles against terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction demands unwarering determination, and firm international cohesion on the part of all countries for which freedom is precious. On January 30 the U.N. Weapons inspectors have confirmed that Saddam Hussein long-term established pattern of deception, denial and non-compliance with U.N. Security Council resolutions is continuing. Also on January 30, 2003, President Bush Expressed his gratitude to the eight European Leaders, and to other who are supportive of his efforts to make certain that Saddam Hussein is disarmed. But Diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful solution to the problem of Iraq’s failure to get rid of it’s weapons of mass destruction will continue indefinitely, President Bush said. The President is hoping ‘ the pressure of the free world† would convince Saddam Hussein to relinquis...

Monopolistic Competition

Monopolistic Competition When discussing different types of market structures, monopolies are at one end of the spectrum, with only one seller in monopolistic markets, and perfectly competitive markets are at the other end, with many buyers and sellers offering identical products. That said, there is a lot of middle ground for what economists call imperfect competition. Imperfect competition can take a number of different forms, and the particular features of an imperfectly competitive market have implications for the market outcomes for consumers and producers. Features Monopolistic competition is one form of imperfect competition. Monopolistically competitive markets have a number of specific features: Many firms - There are many firms in monopolistically competitive markets, and this is part of what sets them apart from monopolies.Product differentiation - Although the products sold by different firms in monopolistically competitive markets are similar enough to one another to be considered substitutes, they are not identical. This feature is what sets monopolistically competitive markets apart from perfectly competitive markets.Free entry and exit - Firms can freely enter a monopolistically competitive market when they find it profitable to do so, and they can exit when a monopolistically competitive market is no longer profitable. In essence, monopolistically competitive markets are named as such because, while firms are competing with one another for the same group of customers to some degree, each firms product is a little bit different from that of all the other firms, and therefore each firm has something akin to a mini-monopoly in the market for its output. The Effects Because of product differentiation (and, as a result, market power), firms in monopolistically competitive markets are able to sell their products at prices above their marginal costs of production, but free entry and exit drive the economic profits for firms in monopolistically competitive markets to zero. In addition, firms in monopolistically competitive markets suffer from excess capacity, which means that they are not operating at the efficient quantity of production. This observation, together with the markup over marginal cost present in monopolistically competitive markets, implies that monopolistically competitive markets do not maximize social welfare.