Acid Rain Essay Example for Free

Acid Rain Essay Situation: The acid rain provisions of the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act were to being in 1995. Currently, it is 1992 and The Southern Company (a electric utilities holding company operating in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida) had to decide what actions they were going to take in order to comply with the new regulations. Before the Clean Air Act, firms did not have incentives to reduce emissions below the government specification. If a firm exceeded the amount, it would just simply pay a fine. Maximum limits were put into place and allowances could be bought and sold on the open market. This means that companies that were able to reduce their emissions, could make money off the allowances they sold. That provided firms incentive to reduce emissions to more appropriate levels. In contrast, a company that could not reduce would have to spend more money to buy additional allowances. The allowances would start at $250 per contract but increase by 10% each year. One of the Southern Company’s Georgia plant, Georgia Power’s Bowen a coal fired plant, had a couple options to choose from to abide by the new laws. The options included either adding scrubbers in order to drastically reduce their emissions and sell the extra allowances or spend more money to buy additional allowances. Either way, Bowen was looking to spend more money in the near future with the Clean Air Act. Question/ Decision: What is the lowest cost option for the plant? Knowing the plant will be extinct in 2016, what estimations can we assume from 1995 to 2016? What are the unknown factors? How long will it take to implement the scrubbers? Do we have the man power to handle the maintenance for the scrubbers? What is the best option for the company that still makes us look good to the public? Will allowance prices increase by more than 10%? Will there be enough allowance contracts on the open market for Bowen to purchase in order to maintain it’s current level of emissions? Hypothesis: Bowen had two main possibilities to comply with the new law: purchase allowances or sell allowances. Purchasing contracts appears to be the easy option but has the potential to get very costly especially in phase two (2000) since emissions will be reduced by almost 50%. Also, we have no idea if it will be possible to purchase all the contracts we need. If there are not enough contracts on the market, it could turn into a bidding war for the available contracts. In order to sell allowances, Bowen would have to drastically reduce their emissions. The most logical way to do this would be to install scrubbers that would remove sulfur dioxide from the exhaust gases of the generators. Installing the scrubbers was expensive but would reduce the emission by so much making it possible for Bowen to sell the extra allowances to on the open market for a profit. If the company plans to stay in business for longer than 2016, they should purchase the scrubbers to begin working in the second phase. This would help the company look better in the public’s eyes and will pay off more in the future. Since the company does not plan to stay in business, they should continue operating the way they do now and purchase the additional contracts. Even though it is the riskier option, this is the lowest cost option for the company. Proof of Action: The least cost alternative is to purchase additional allowances and continue operating as usual. The cost to the firm, if all estimations hold true, would be 267. Installing scrubbers could run up the costs to either 408 or 294 depending on when they are installed. Graph 1, PV of Cash Flows illustrates the cash flows for all high high-sulfer coal options. Option 1 offers almost no cost to the firm at the beginning stages, but increases in 2000. By 2005, the no scrubber option will be costing the firm more than the other two options. However, installing the scrubbers is much more costly at the beginning stages of the Clean Air Act. As time goes on though, the money made from selling the contracts and the costs of maintaining the scrubbers will offset each other. Installing the scrubbers to be ready for the second phase would reduce the costs to the firm much more throughout the 2000’s. Graph 1: PV of Cash Flows Option 1, no scrubbers, does not come without a lot of risk. The two main risk factors the company faces are government policies and the purchasing/selling of the allowances on the open market. a. The change in government policy. As the government becomes more and more concerned about pollution, there are possibilities that more policies or stimulus such as ecological taxation would be carried out. Although the current effective tax rate is 37. %, the company will save a portion of tax expense by installing scrubbers to control once a tax refund policy is implemented to low level pollutants emission companies. b. The change in allowance price. The company planners assume the price of allowances would be $250 per ton of sulfur dioxide in 1995 and would rise at 10% per year through 2010 and stay at that price since after. However, since the allowances could be traded in open market, their value is volatile. If the starting price of allowance rises to a certain level or the price increases at a higher rate, the PV cost of option 1 will be higher. graph 2 and 3). Graph 2: PV cost of option V. S. starting price of allowance Graph 3: The PV of option cost v. s. Allowance inflators Conclusion: In conclusion, according to the NPV of costs we should not install the scrubbers at this time. We should continue operating at our current levels and purchase contracts on the open market. This option is the riskier option but it is the lowest cost. If we are more concerned about risk, we should install the scrubbers to be ready for the second phase. The question becomes, how accurate do we think our estima tions are?

Gravity Concentration By Jigs Engineering Essay

Gravity Concentration By Jigs Engineering Essay Gravity concentration methods separate minerals of different specific gravity. They are used to treat a great variaty of materials [ranging from Au ( sp. gr. 19.3 ) to coal ( sp. gr. 1.3 ) ]. Gravity concentration methods remained, however the main concentrating methods for iron , tungsten, tin ores and coal. This methods are usually preferred to flotation due to its low cost . Minerals liberated at sizes above flotation range may be concentrated even more economically using gravity methods (also cause efficient dewatering due to decreased surface area.). The main principles of appliying this method is different size and shape of minerals having different specific gravity. This method can be applied at the range of 7.5 1.3. And, the advantages of this method are its simplicity, having high capacity and low cost. In order to apply gravity concentration method concentration criteria ( cc ) shoud be at optimum range. CC = dh df dl df CC >2.5 ( 74 micron ) CC

Analysing Corruption and Organised Crime in Russia

Analysing Corruption and Organised Crime in Russia Corruption as will be examined, was nothing new in the post-Soviet economy for its perceived rise and that of organised crime had their origins in the Soviet era. In the Soviet Union private enterprise on an individual or business basis had officially not been allowed from when the New Economic Policy was abandoned in the 1920s and with the forced collectivization of agriculture during the 1930s. Under the Stalinist State the economy was planned and commanded by the Communist Party via the Soviet Union’s state structure. In theory the Soviet State controlled every aspect of the Soviet economy. It set prices; it controlled industrial outputs, banking services and foreign exchange rates. However, in practice there was a flourishing black market in luxury goods and foreign exchange rates before the political and economic reforms started by Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s. His twin policies of Glasnost and Perestroika, political openness and economic restructuring were intended to prolong the Soviet Union. Instead the Soviet Union would collapse leaving its successor states working towards democracy and capitalism whilst facing up to the problem of increasing corruption and organised crime. The level of corruption if not organised crime during the Soviet era might not be too easy to establish exactly. The Soviet authorities after all kept the true state of the economy hidden from the West even if its citizens experienced hardships and shortages. The leading members of the politburo had been the only ones with a realistic view of the economy. The liberalisation of the economy in all parts of the former Soviet Union since 1991 have generally led to an increase of corruption and organised crime. Clampdowns on organised crime and corruption have often been half hearted when they have been carried out both during and after the Soviet era. Explanations for this rise in corruption and organised crime will now be described and examined. Some of these causes pre-date the collapse of the Soviet Union whilst others emerged later. Black markets existed prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union often bringing consumers goods that were unavailable in the state-run shops, goods that were sometimes exchanged instead of sold to avoid breaking the law. Hand in hand with the black markets went corruption and bribery. Black marketers frequently resorted to bribing communist party officials, the police and the KGB or they in turn extorted money off the black marketers. The KGB sometimes recruited some of the black marketers to inform on their rivals and their customers. The more the Soviet economy faltered the faster the black-market grew, providing people with goods not available in the shops. Those marketers that did not bribe officials often found their homes or businesses raided or got put in jail, those that paid up could go about their business undisturbed. The Soviet leadership started to have concerns about economic stagnation, organised crime and to a lesser extent corruption in the early 1980s but none of the m seemed to understand the extent of the economic malaise. The long years of stagnation continued until despite the rapid deaths of three general secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) between 1982-1985. Leonid Brezhnev during his time in charge had done nothing to halt economic decline and in fact worsened it by accelerating the arms race with the United States and invading Afghanistan. It has been estimated that as much as 50% of the Soviet Union’s annual budges was spent on defence or related products and projects. However, that was money that the Soviet Union no longer had to spare. His immediate successor Yuri Andropov started a campaign against bribery and corruption that petered out with his death in 1984. When Gorbachev replaced Konstantin Chernenko a year later he pledged to reform the Soviet Union. Instead his policies would promote its collapse and lead to increased corruption and organised crime in the sixteen successor states. The problem with Stalinist economic planning was that it â€Å"created and perpetuated a shortage economy motivated only by harsh orders from the centre.† It kept most of the people equally poor except for those that found ways around the system. By the 1980s the idea of abandoning the communist command economy in favour of capitalism and liberal democracy gained ground not only in the Soviet Union but also in Central and Eastern Europe. For the reformers could look at the neo-liberal experience of the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, perhaps the devastating social and economic effects in parts of Latin America would have been more relevant. There was of course the example of the New Economic Policy that had allowed the Soviet economy to recover from the ravages of civil war, an attractive example to communists that wanted to reform the system but also for the non-communists that wished to replace it. There was one group of pro-capitalist economists that hoped to bring in a market system to Russia, they were the ‘young reformers’. Yeger Gaider whose family was amongst the elites of the Soviet nomenklatura ironically enough headed the young reformers. They were just looking for somebody to carry out their plan s and not power for themselves and would eventually team up with Boris Yeltsin a highly effective (when healthy) populist politician with only a limited understanding of economics. Alongside Yeltsin, they had the dream of dismantling communism. However, the way in which communism was dismantled across the former Soviet Union would contribute greatly to the rise of organised crime alongside the already high levels of corruption. In the first years of Gorbachev’s rule his government attempted to preserve the Soviet political system whilst reforming its economic system, little realising that these reforms would fail and thus contribute to the rise of corruption and organised crime as well as the disintegration of the Soviet Union. He wanted to make the system worktop its full capacity without moving to a capitalist economy or inducing economic suffering. The government attempted to increase productivity by reducing alcohol consumption and the sickness that was often connected to it, but he did not run an anti corruption campaign immediately. Gorbachev would have banned vodka but feared the ban would be circumvented by organised crime gangs, plus the tax revenues that kept the Soviet government solvent. One man who had started Ananta-corruption campaign was Boris Yeltsin who was the Moscow party boss until his sudden dismissal by Gorbachev during November 1987.Gorbachev believed he had removed his great est rival but had in fact made a very basic political blunder, as Yeltsin was no longer controllable and determined to avenge his fall from power. By 1989 it became clear that the Soviet economic system was unsustainable or beyond reforming and Gorbachev introduced some capitalist measures. Those measures included allowing small private businesses to operate from August 1990 and a series of de-regulations and privatisations between October 1990 and July 1991. Economic reforms brought increased opportunities to organised criminals and budding capitalist entrepreneurs, a distinction in the former Soviet Union that is not always clear. The sudden creations of small businesses increased chances for investments and money laundering or even to takeover privatised companies. Decades of communist economic and political rule left a legacy that was difficult to shake off immediately in the post-Soviet era. Yeltsin and his contemporaries found it difficult to see the world from outside of a communist perspective. The communist legacy of patronage, privileges, corruption and perks would contribute to the rise of corruption and organised cr ime in the post-Soviet era. As the system started to collapse across the Soviet Union law and order began to decline with it thus allowing increased opportunities for organised crime and corruption as well as increased nationalist and ethnic tensions.   The political disintegration of the Soviet Union went hand in hand with its economic disintegration and declining levels of law and order in all the successor republics. The end of the Soviet Union was hastened by the failure of the communist coup in August 1991. The Baltic States had already broke away from the Soviet Union and was already on their way to capitalist economies. Russian president Boris Yeltsin seeming to stand for the twin transition from communist state to liberal democracy and planned socialist economy to neo-liberal capitalism although this is not exactly what happened. Contrary to Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin had believed that the breakup of the Soviet Union could be a positive rather than a disastrous event although many of his Russian compatriots might not have agreed with him. For the other former republics, it was a case of independence at last. Perhaps those that took advantage of the break up through organised crime or corruption would have agreed with h im. The Yeltsin government at first enthusiastically backed rapid and radical reforms, radical economics carried out by a group of advisors dubbed the ‘the young reformers’. Russia and the other former republics of the Soviet Union had very primitive banking and financial systems that presented apparently ideal opportunities for Russian and foreign investors. Those acting as go-betweens in business deals could make small fortunes by doing so. The transition to capitalism offered the prospect of making millions, it also led to the increase in organised crime and corruption as gangsters threatened investors, businesses and often fought each other. The Russian and other governments seemed incapable of monitoring, containing or preventing that rise. The Yeltsin government was hampered in its efforts to control and administer the regions let alone fight the rise in crime because the remaining regional governors were by and large communist nomenklatura and apparatchiks and unwilling to do as Moscow commanded. These bureaucrats forged links with industrialists in their region providing basis for ongoing and future corruption. The bitter power struggles between President and Parliament during the 1992-1993 period distracted them from trying to solve the country’s problems and allowed the regions greater autonomy and the increasing number of organised crime gangs free rein across much of Russia and the rest of the former Soviet Union. They also spent much time and effort trying to persuade the public the other side was more corrupt and had greater links to organised crime than they did. One deputy governor indicated the scale of corruption in the remoter parts of Siberia that to start â€Å"accompany you probably have to brib e forty bureaucrats.† Organised crime gangs used the decline in government control to organise protection rackets to fleece investors and small businesses. There was an alarming increase in violent crimes and murders as gangs competed for control of their victims and clients or punished those that would not pay for their dubious protection. The number of killings related to gang warfare escalated dramatically. Moscow and the newly renamed St Petersburg have been the centres of most of that gang warfare. Corruption was not merely confined to the Mafia gangs it also extended to the police, the armed forces and civil servants. In Russia traffic police were involved in robbing motorists also teaming up with local gangs to force motorists to hand over their cars, or to pay them fines for non-existent offences or face their cars being confiscated. Corruption and the buying and selling of anything and everything was so widespread that young female university students would aim to become hard currency call girls or the mistresses of oligarchs or wealthy businessmen, whilst jobless youths would advertise their services for contract killings. One ruthless organised crime gang even went as far as murdering car owners and disposing of their bodies to steal their cars. Organised crime and the number of crime gangs increased dramatically as the political elites spent more time arguing amongst each other rather than fighting crime and corruption. Nobody in the public or the media believed that Boris Yeltsin would succeed in rooting out organised crime and corruption, after all every single Soviet leader had promised to do the same since 1917. After all his only previous crack down on corruption and organised crime in Moscow had been stopped it its tracks by Gorbachev when he was sacked as the Moscow party boss. The official crime figures for 1992 give a strong indication of the deteriorating law and order situation. The number of murders had increased by 40%whilst there was an even larger increase in robbery up by 60%. The overall number of registered crimes, bearing in mind that many crimes remained unreported went up to 2.76 million. In fact, the contending elites accused each other of corruption to score points off each other whilst the public were not interested in their squabbles and the 3,000or so crime gangs carried on regardless. Of the newly private run business in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States those3,000 gangs were able to pocket perhaps as much as 40 % of the turnovers early as 1993. Corruption was never too far from the surface in the former Soviet Union. It should have not been a surprise therefore that corruption and organised crime would rise in the post-Soviet as they already headstrong foundations and connections to outside crime gangs. During the Soviet era if an individual knew or bribed the right officials they could get the best luxury items, property deals or their children into the finest schools or universities. So, nobody could doubt that there would be greater levels of corruption when the restraints of the Soviet system were removed. In fact, corruption dated back into the Imperial Russian past, were the civil service had been unsalaried but able to accept gifts or payments in kind. The CPSU may have claimed to be responsible for the leading role in society and the economy, some of its members took a leading role in the black market or for a small bribe get people things that would not normally be available. In Belarus the movement towards independence was given a new impetus byte desire to be rid of greedy and corrupt communist party leaders. The unravelling of the Soviet hegemony over Eastern Europe gave an opportunity for the more entrepreneurial members of the withdrawing Soviet army to make their fortunes. The pickings could be rich for the Soviet army had large areas of land and housing to sell. When Gorbachev made a deal with the West German government to sell Soviet military bases in the former East Germany back to them most of the best pickings had already gone. The Soviet defence minister Dmitrii Yazov happily joined in the schemes that led to the disappearance of the Soviet army assets without a trace. Yazov may have enjoyed making money for himself but he was wholeheartedly against political and economic reform. He would be one of the main leaders of the August 1991 coup. After all, under the Soviet system the higher an individual’s position within the party, the KGB o r the armed forces they could expect greater share of the perks and the spoils. Just how much money the corrupt communist party members made may not beknown exactly, much of the evidence was destroyed just before the final failed coup of August 1991. Those party members that did not get into trouble following the coup could find themselves in a good position to make money in the brave new post -Soviet world. That was because they already knew how to operate in corrupt systems and some already had links with organised crime. For many of the small traders that operated largely illegally during the Soviet era the only real difference between the past and the post-Soviet present was whom they paid for the privilege of staying in business. Now they had to pay organised crime gangs to stay in business and to stay alive rather than bribe communist party officials or members of the KGB, or if they were unlucky they would have to pay them all. Corruption and organised crime increased in the post-Soviet era, but it had great potential during the Soviet era and the right c onditions would fuel a massive expansion. For much of the former Soviet Union these conditions were present in the early 1990s. Petty crime was rumoured to be rife amongst civil servants and state employees, for instance in 1993 the Russian Interior Ministry recorded 13,000 such crimes, that was thought to be the tip of the iceberg. It was estimated that virtually all shops paid protection and perhaps four fifths of businesses and financial institutes did the same. The organised crime gangs had a virtual free reign on their prospective victims, as the number of untainted police was inadequate even if they could find any brave or foolish enough to testify. The more successful entrepreneurs could hire bodyguards but that was not an option for the smaller traders who had to pay up or face the consequences. In Russia neither the transition to democracy and the switch to capitalist economy has developed as the Russians and those in the rest of the world that were interested hoped or expected. These transitions unintentionally led to increased corruption and organised crime. Through a combination of the collapse of the archaic economic system, assets stripping by the Russians that brought utilities at cheap prices, government failings and last but no means least corruption. Russia was in a worse economic position than the Soviet Union had been, as were most of the former Soviet republics. Inward foreign investment during the 1990s did not make up for the vast sums that left Russia of between $100 billion and $150 billion made by the oligarchs that asset stripped Russia’s industries and infra-structure and does not include any of the profits made the organised crime gangs. Foreign investors, the more sensible ones at least were put off the possibility of investing in Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union by the high risk of their investment been ruined by having to pay bribes to officials and protection to crime gangs. It seems that the only people prospering in post-Soviet Russia are those that became nouveau riche by their investments or those that made their money less honestly through extortion or corruption. Poverty and unemployment that did not officially exist during the Soviet era increased alarmingly during the 1990s. Even if the poverty line is measured below a monthly income of less than $30 a month up to 40 million Russians appear to live in poverty. That is alarming for a country that has the largest part of the Soviet Union that had been a military superpower until1991. Economically Russia’s decline was remarkable for its severity, producing less than Belgium and barely a quarter more than Poland. In the immediate post-Soviet period the situation was more chaotic because all the former republics were still maintaining the old Soviet currency and printing money as if it was going out of fashion, adding to the inflationary consequences of ending price controls. The chaotic situation increased the ease in which organised crime gangs could operate in the former Soviet Union. Whilst the resulting hyperinflation (added to by the removal of price controls) meant that many more ordinary people had to find alternative methods of supplementing their incomes. Russia was not the slowest country to reform its economy or political institutions Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Belarus according to European Bank of Reconstruction and Development were amongst the least reformed and most poverty struck. In contrast the Baltic States of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia progressed well enough to be admitted in the European Union by 2004. The adoption of free market capitalism brought an end to queuing in empty shops and replaced it with full shops where most people could not afford to buy anything. Hence people were searching for legal or illegal means of boosting their incomes and thus more likely to become involved in corruption and bribery. Uneconomic factories were shut making millions unemployed. Under the Soviet system people had less money but there was better state provisions and prices were fixed so inflation was virtually non-existent. The Soviet system had given privileges to countless petty state workers and junior party members. They were known as apparatchiks, whilst high ranking officials and senior party members with better perks were known as nomenklatura. With the end of the Soviet system some of these apparatchiks and nomenklatura exchanged their privileges for money, those still in state employment that had remained honest now exchanged favours for bribes. Corruption increased during the post-Sovi et era simply out of economic necessity right across all the former Soviet Union as ordinary citizens and government officials found that they did not enough to live on. Throughout the former Soviet Union, the pace of economic liberalisation varied. By the middle of 1994 the Baltic States and Russia in terms of the total percentage of gross domestic product generated by the private sector of the economy were well ahead of the Asian republics, Belarus and Moldova. In Estonia and Latvia, it was 55%, in Russia and Lithuania50 % with Belarus, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan lagged far behind on only 15%. In post-Soviet Russia nomenklatura were better placed than most to survive the harsher economic climate particularly those that lived in regions such as Siberia found it harder to survive especially when state subsidies ended leaving food and fuel far more expensive than in the major cities. The collapse of communism cut off many of the remote industrial and mining areas from the central government leading to social and economic decay. Such neglect has allowed for the growth of organised crime and corruption as desperate people turn to drugs and alcohol. Drug and alcohol abuse leads to health problems or addiction. To counter some of th e incursions into those remote areas by crime gangs the Putin government once more restricted travel in to those areas. A factor that contributed to the rise of organised crime in the post-Soviet was the wide availability of weapons for organised crime gangs and individual gangsters or thugs to use. Weapons were often obtained from members of the armed forces. Military and naval personnel were increasingly eager to sell weapons to supplement their wages, assuming they had been paid on time. The Russian commanders are said to have done worse during the first Chechen war of 1994 -1996. They sold Grozny back to the rebels in August 1996 leading to the deaths of defenceless conscripts. Corruption within the Russian military seems to be endemic, which given its role in maintaining central government authority and internal security in some of the remoter regions of the Russian Federation certainly permitted and even encouraged organised crime to rise, for instance in Chechnya. During the second Chechen war that began in 1999 the local police observed the illicit trade between Russian soldiers and local blac k marketers. These soldiers would exchange boxes of ammunition for locally distilled vodka or locally grown cannabis with the tacit approval of their superior officers. Indeed, officers often accompanied their men when these exchanges took place. The black marketers then sell the ammunition to the Chechen fighters. Local police could intervene and arrest everybody, but they have either been told not to or bribed motto. The army was supposed to keep all the roads into Chechnya secure to prevent the rebels escaping or gaining supplies and money. However, the reporter Anna Politkovskaya was told â€Å"one person on foot must pay100 roubles; a light vehicle costs about 500-600 roubles†. Politkovskaya did not readily accept those claims until she successfully bribed the soldiers to get past the checkpoint. The greed and corruption of the army must have been counterproductive. They sold ammunition that was used by the Chechens and they allowed access to restricted areas to anybody who could have smuggled weapons in and people out. The corruption of the Russian armed forces in the area in and around Chechnya lowered the security and containment of Chechen fighters and contributed to the apparent ease in which rebels were able to take hostages in the Moscow theatre during October 2002. More horrifically the siege of a Beslan high school in September 2004 showed that the Russian military were incompetent as well as riddled with corruption. Gangsters did not always buy weapons; they could often steal weapons from poorly guarded or neglected military bases. Due to the Soviet Union having national service most of the organised crime gang members could already use weapons. Troops leaving the army could also consider employment as either bodyguard for the newly rich and the justifiably concerned business owners or joining the organised crime gangs themselves as thugs and assassins. Violent crime is probably not as prevalent as people in the West might believe, however crime gangs would have no qualms about settling accounts with intimidation, assault and murder. Some murders have shown that the crime gangs and contract killers are able to gain hold of sophisticated weapons such as rocket launchers to kill bodyguards as well as their bosses in St Petersburg. Gangs must be well connected as well as rich to acquire such weapons. The dramatic rise in the murder rate witnessed not only the deaths of politicians (three members of the Duma were shot dead in cold blood) but also businessmen and journalists. Business executives and more lowly bank employees could be and were at risk of being killed due tithe rise in corruption and organised crime. Not many gang members were afraid of being caught and convicted, for they were confident that even if the police did catch them that either the police or the courts could be persuaded to let them get away with it. In the period between 1992and 1995, the number of killed bank workers ranging from clerks to senior executives was 46. The most publicized killing was that of Pivanilide who the president of Rosbiznesbank had been. Kivelidi was poisoned in August 1995 for not complying with the demands of organised criminals. There are still a high number of deaths because of fighting between rival gangs still demonstrating that there are enough guns and money up for grabs to m ake the high risks of being killed seem worthwhile. Over 2,000 gang members are gunned down every year in gang wars in the Moscow region alone. Until the Putin presidency the situation in St Petersburg had been worse although Putin seems to want to clean up his home city. The difficulty and the danger of uncovering the true level of crimes being committed aided the rise in organised crime and corruption. With so many bureaucrats, police and politicians involved or thought to be involved in corruption much of the uncovering of crimes and evidence of corruption came from the press and journalists or even rarely independently minded politicians. For journalists it was dangerous to uncover and attempt to publish evidence and articles concerning organised crime gangs and the high levels of corruption. Considering the increasing control of the media by the state or by oligarchs whose own positions could be undermined by revelations of corruption or organised crime it has not always been easy for reporters to go public with evidence they have gathered. To illustrate the dangerous position journalists found themselves in, 36 were killed between January 1994and May 1995 throughout the former Soviet Union whilst doing their jobs and reporting on not only corrup tion and organised crime but also the conflict in Chechnya. The uncovering of evidence of the corruption and fraud within the Soviet army during its time in East Germany and before its departure appeared to be a major scope for the Murkowski Komsomolsk and its investigative journalist Dmitrii Kholod. For Kholod it proved one-story too far as a bomb blew up him and his office during October1994. Even television reporters and journalists were not immune from danger. Following his research into the corrupt or dishonest selling of television advertising Vladimir Listed was gunned down in March 1995before he could broadcast all his findings. At other times politicians, bureaucrats and business executives would inform or leak information about their rivals real or presumed links with organised crime and corruption for their own gain rather than in the public interest or to fight corruption itself. Whilst these bouts of accusations and counter accusations occupied the politicians and press attentions they occasionally removed the expendable politici ans and bureaucrats whilst leaving the level of overall corruption untouched. As noted below the Books affair would be used to force the resignations of some of the young reformers in 1999. Accusations of corruption would also be leaked to the press after an individual had lost the approval of either President Yeltsin or President Putin. The prime example of this were the accusations levelled against Boris Berezovskyafter he fell out with Putin, or more aptly when Putin regarded him as no longer useful to the Kremlin. Berezovsky is claimed to have stolen millions from his companies and state-run companies such as Aeroflot. All these events were from the early 1990s, so the Russian government had plenty of time to prove them or clear him. Berezovsky who went to exile in London has retaliated by campaigning against the Putin government’s increasing control of power. In Russia it appears that those involved in corruption or organised crime are relatively immune from arrest if they do not upset the Kremlin, or their punishment becomes politically expedient for the government. President Putin is arguably â€Å"searching for levers that will work †¦ to have in place a national authority that functions as normal governments do†. Corruption was a fact of life in the Soviet era and now seems even more endemic in the post-Soviet period; ordinary Soviet citizens were cynical about the financial honesty of their political masters and the higher-ranking communist party officials, a cynicism that continues with post-Soviet politicians and officials. Evidence of corruption and bribery would often be collected by the KGB and used if the individuals concerned fall out of favour senior party members, its successor still collects such information only now some its officers are more likely to sell sensitive information to the highest bidders. President Yeltsinonly renamed the KGB the FSB instead of abolishing it. He also retained control of the KGB records and evidence of the corruption they contained Timely uncovering of bribe taking and corruption have often been used to discredit rivals and justify the dismissal of ministers and officials. Therefore, presumably there is usually enough evidence to act against many of t hose involved in corruption or organised crime but not always the political will or judicial authority to do so. Many Russians believe that most if not all government ministers and officials are corrupt and susceptible to bribes. Officials are willing to risk public safety and even national security as well as their reputations for the sake of bribes. Allegations and counter allegations of corruption were used in the 1990s during the power struggle between President Yeltsin and hard-liners such as Rosko and Khasbulatov. Corruption both in the Soviet era and afterwards existed and increased because the majority of those accepting bribes or using their position for gain position or cash believed that they would not get caught. Even if they did get caught the rate of convictions were not that high. Soviet era clampdowns on corruption under Andropov and Gorbachev only caught small fry and the same could apply during the post-Soviet era. The only notable high ranking communist to be convicted for corruption was Yuri Churbanov in 1988. Churbanov’s father in law was the late Leonid Brezhnev, the one-time Soviet leader and General Secretar Analysing Corruption and Organised Crime in Russia Analysing Corruption and Organised Crime in Russia Corruption as will be examined, was nothing new in the post-Soviet economy for its perceived rise and that of organised crime had their origins in the Soviet era. In the Soviet Union private enterprise on an individual or business basis had officially not been allowed from when the New Economic Policy was abandoned in the 1920s and with the forced collectivization of agriculture during the 1930s. Under the Stalinist State the economy was planned and commanded by the Communist Party via the Soviet Union’s state structure. In theory the Soviet State controlled every aspect of the Soviet economy. It set prices; it controlled industrial outputs, banking services and foreign exchange rates. However, in practice there was a flourishing black market in luxury goods and foreign exchange rates before the political and economic reforms started by Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s. His twin policies of Glasnost and Perestroika, political openness and economic restructuring were intended to prolong the Soviet Union. Instead the Soviet Union would collapse leaving its successor states working towards democracy and capitalism whilst facing up to the problem of increasing corruption and organised crime. The level of corruption if not organised crime during the Soviet era might not be too easy to establish exactly. The Soviet authorities after all kept the true state of the economy hidden from the West even if its citizens experienced hardships and shortages. The leading members of the politburo had been the only ones with a realistic view of the economy. The liberalisation of the economy in all parts of the former Soviet Union since 1991 have generally led to an increase of corruption and organised crime. Clampdowns on organised crime and corruption have often been half hearted when they have been carried out both during and after the Soviet era. Explanations for this rise in corruption and organised crime will now be described and examined. Some of these causes pre-date the collapse of the Soviet Union whilst others emerged later. Black markets existed prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union often bringing consumers goods that were unavailable in the state-run shops, goods that were sometimes exchanged instead of sold to avoid breaking the law. Hand in hand with the black markets went corruption and bribery. Black marketers frequently resorted to bribing communist party officials, the police and the KGB or they in turn extorted money off the black marketers. The KGB sometimes recruited some of the black marketers to inform on their rivals and their customers. The more the Soviet economy faltered the faster the black-market grew, providing people with goods not available in the shops. Those marketers that did not bribe officials often found their homes or businesses raided or got put in jail, those that paid up could go about their business undisturbed. The Soviet leadership started to have concerns about economic stagnation, organised crime and to a lesser extent corruption in the early 1980s but none of the m seemed to understand the extent of the economic malaise. The long years of stagnation continued until despite the rapid deaths of three general secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) between 1982-1985. Leonid Brezhnev during his time in charge had done nothing to halt economic decline and in fact worsened it by accelerating the arms race with the United States and invading Afghanistan. It has been estimated that as much as 50% of the Soviet Union’s annual budges was spent on defence or related products and projects. However, that was money that the Soviet Union no longer had to spare. His immediate successor Yuri Andropov started a campaign against bribery and corruption that petered out with his death in 1984. When Gorbachev replaced Konstantin Chernenko a year later he pledged to reform the Soviet Union. Instead his policies would promote its collapse and lead to increased corruption and organised crime in the sixteen successor states. The problem with Stalinist economic planning was that it â€Å"created and perpetuated a shortage economy motivated only by harsh orders from the centre.† It kept most of the people equally poor except for those that found ways around the system. By the 1980s the idea of abandoning the communist command economy in favour of capitalism and liberal democracy gained ground not only in the Soviet Union but also in Central and Eastern Europe. For the reformers could look at the neo-liberal experience of the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, perhaps the devastating social and economic effects in parts of Latin America would have been more relevant. There was of course the example of the New Economic Policy that had allowed the Soviet economy to recover from the ravages of civil war, an attractive example to communists that wanted to reform the system but also for the non-communists that wished to replace it. There was one group of pro-capitalist economists that hoped to bring in a market system to Russia, they were the ‘young reformers’. Yeger Gaider whose family was amongst the elites of the Soviet nomenklatura ironically enough headed the young reformers. They were just looking for somebody to carry out their plan s and not power for themselves and would eventually team up with Boris Yeltsin a highly effective (when healthy) populist politician with only a limited understanding of economics. Alongside Yeltsin, they had the dream of dismantling communism. However, the way in which communism was dismantled across the former Soviet Union would contribute greatly to the rise of organised crime alongside the already high levels of corruption. In the first years of Gorbachev’s rule his government attempted to preserve the Soviet political system whilst reforming its economic system, little realising that these reforms would fail and thus contribute to the rise of corruption and organised crime as well as the disintegration of the Soviet Union. He wanted to make the system worktop its full capacity without moving to a capitalist economy or inducing economic suffering. The government attempted to increase productivity by reducing alcohol consumption and the sickness that was often connected to it, but he did not run an anti corruption campaign immediately. Gorbachev would have banned vodka but feared the ban would be circumvented by organised crime gangs, plus the tax revenues that kept the Soviet government solvent. One man who had started Ananta-corruption campaign was Boris Yeltsin who was the Moscow party boss until his sudden dismissal by Gorbachev during November 1987.Gorbachev believed he had removed his great est rival but had in fact made a very basic political blunder, as Yeltsin was no longer controllable and determined to avenge his fall from power. By 1989 it became clear that the Soviet economic system was unsustainable or beyond reforming and Gorbachev introduced some capitalist measures. Those measures included allowing small private businesses to operate from August 1990 and a series of de-regulations and privatisations between October 1990 and July 1991. Economic reforms brought increased opportunities to organised criminals and budding capitalist entrepreneurs, a distinction in the former Soviet Union that is not always clear. The sudden creations of small businesses increased chances for investments and money laundering or even to takeover privatised companies. Decades of communist economic and political rule left a legacy that was difficult to shake off immediately in the post-Soviet era. Yeltsin and his contemporaries found it difficult to see the world from outside of a communist perspective. The communist legacy of patronage, privileges, corruption and perks would contribute to the rise of corruption and organised cr ime in the post-Soviet era. As the system started to collapse across the Soviet Union law and order began to decline with it thus allowing increased opportunities for organised crime and corruption as well as increased nationalist and ethnic tensions.   The political disintegration of the Soviet Union went hand in hand with its economic disintegration and declining levels of law and order in all the successor republics. The end of the Soviet Union was hastened by the failure of the communist coup in August 1991. The Baltic States had already broke away from the Soviet Union and was already on their way to capitalist economies. Russian president Boris Yeltsin seeming to stand for the twin transition from communist state to liberal democracy and planned socialist economy to neo-liberal capitalism although this is not exactly what happened. Contrary to Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin had believed that the breakup of the Soviet Union could be a positive rather than a disastrous event although many of his Russian compatriots might not have agreed with him. For the other former republics, it was a case of independence at last. Perhaps those that took advantage of the break up through organised crime or corruption would have agreed with h im. The Yeltsin government at first enthusiastically backed rapid and radical reforms, radical economics carried out by a group of advisors dubbed the ‘the young reformers’. Russia and the other former republics of the Soviet Union had very primitive banking and financial systems that presented apparently ideal opportunities for Russian and foreign investors. Those acting as go-betweens in business deals could make small fortunes by doing so. The transition to capitalism offered the prospect of making millions, it also led to the increase in organised crime and corruption as gangsters threatened investors, businesses and often fought each other. The Russian and other governments seemed incapable of monitoring, containing or preventing that rise. The Yeltsin government was hampered in its efforts to control and administer the regions let alone fight the rise in crime because the remaining regional governors were by and large communist nomenklatura and apparatchiks and unwilling to do as Moscow commanded. These bureaucrats forged links with industrialists in their region providing basis for ongoing and future corruption. The bitter power struggles between President and Parliament during the 1992-1993 period distracted them from trying to solve the country’s problems and allowed the regions greater autonomy and the increasing number of organised crime gangs free rein across much of Russia and the rest of the former Soviet Union. They also spent much time and effort trying to persuade the public the other side was more corrupt and had greater links to organised crime than they did. One deputy governor indicated the scale of corruption in the remoter parts of Siberia that to start â€Å"accompany you probably have to brib e forty bureaucrats.† Organised crime gangs used the decline in government control to organise protection rackets to fleece investors and small businesses. There was an alarming increase in violent crimes and murders as gangs competed for control of their victims and clients or punished those that would not pay for their dubious protection. The number of killings related to gang warfare escalated dramatically. Moscow and the newly renamed St Petersburg have been the centres of most of that gang warfare. Corruption was not merely confined to the Mafia gangs it also extended to the police, the armed forces and civil servants. In Russia traffic police were involved in robbing motorists also teaming up with local gangs to force motorists to hand over their cars, or to pay them fines for non-existent offences or face their cars being confiscated. Corruption and the buying and selling of anything and everything was so widespread that young female university students would aim to become hard currency call girls or the mistresses of oligarchs or wealthy businessmen, whilst jobless youths would advertise their services for contract killings. One ruthless organised crime gang even went as far as murdering car owners and disposing of their bodies to steal their cars. Organised crime and the number of crime gangs increased dramatically as the political elites spent more time arguing amongst each other rather than fighting crime and corruption. Nobody in the public or the media believed that Boris Yeltsin would succeed in rooting out organised crime and corruption, after all every single Soviet leader had promised to do the same since 1917. After all his only previous crack down on corruption and organised crime in Moscow had been stopped it its tracks by Gorbachev when he was sacked as the Moscow party boss. The official crime figures for 1992 give a strong indication of the deteriorating law and order situation. The number of murders had increased by 40%whilst there was an even larger increase in robbery up by 60%. The overall number of registered crimes, bearing in mind that many crimes remained unreported went up to 2.76 million. In fact, the contending elites accused each other of corruption to score points off each other whilst the public were not interested in their squabbles and the 3,000or so crime gangs carried on regardless. Of the newly private run business in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States those3,000 gangs were able to pocket perhaps as much as 40 % of the turnovers early as 1993. Corruption was never too far from the surface in the former Soviet Union. It should have not been a surprise therefore that corruption and organised crime would rise in the post-Soviet as they already headstrong foundations and connections to outside crime gangs. During the Soviet era if an individual knew or bribed the right officials they could get the best luxury items, property deals or their children into the finest schools or universities. So, nobody could doubt that there would be greater levels of corruption when the restraints of the Soviet system were removed. In fact, corruption dated back into the Imperial Russian past, were the civil service had been unsalaried but able to accept gifts or payments in kind. The CPSU may have claimed to be responsible for the leading role in society and the economy, some of its members took a leading role in the black market or for a small bribe get people things that would not normally be available. In Belarus the movement towards independence was given a new impetus byte desire to be rid of greedy and corrupt communist party leaders. The unravelling of the Soviet hegemony over Eastern Europe gave an opportunity for the more entrepreneurial members of the withdrawing Soviet army to make their fortunes. The pickings could be rich for the Soviet army had large areas of land and housing to sell. When Gorbachev made a deal with the West German government to sell Soviet military bases in the former East Germany back to them most of the best pickings had already gone. The Soviet defence minister Dmitrii Yazov happily joined in the schemes that led to the disappearance of the Soviet army assets without a trace. Yazov may have enjoyed making money for himself but he was wholeheartedly against political and economic reform. He would be one of the main leaders of the August 1991 coup. After all, under the Soviet system the higher an individual’s position within the party, the KGB o r the armed forces they could expect greater share of the perks and the spoils. Just how much money the corrupt communist party members made may not beknown exactly, much of the evidence was destroyed just before the final failed coup of August 1991. Those party members that did not get into trouble following the coup could find themselves in a good position to make money in the brave new post -Soviet world. That was because they already knew how to operate in corrupt systems and some already had links with organised crime. For many of the small traders that operated largely illegally during the Soviet era the only real difference between the past and the post-Soviet present was whom they paid for the privilege of staying in business. Now they had to pay organised crime gangs to stay in business and to stay alive rather than bribe communist party officials or members of the KGB, or if they were unlucky they would have to pay them all. Corruption and organised crime increased in the post-Soviet era, but it had great potential during the Soviet era and the right c onditions would fuel a massive expansion. For much of the former Soviet Union these conditions were present in the early 1990s. Petty crime was rumoured to be rife amongst civil servants and state employees, for instance in 1993 the Russian Interior Ministry recorded 13,000 such crimes, that was thought to be the tip of the iceberg. It was estimated that virtually all shops paid protection and perhaps four fifths of businesses and financial institutes did the same. The organised crime gangs had a virtual free reign on their prospective victims, as the number of untainted police was inadequate even if they could find any brave or foolish enough to testify. The more successful entrepreneurs could hire bodyguards but that was not an option for the smaller traders who had to pay up or face the consequences. In Russia neither the transition to democracy and the switch to capitalist economy has developed as the Russians and those in the rest of the world that were interested hoped or expected. These transitions unintentionally led to increased corruption and organised crime. Through a combination of the collapse of the archaic economic system, assets stripping by the Russians that brought utilities at cheap prices, government failings and last but no means least corruption. Russia was in a worse economic position than the Soviet Union had been, as were most of the former Soviet republics. Inward foreign investment during the 1990s did not make up for the vast sums that left Russia of between $100 billion and $150 billion made by the oligarchs that asset stripped Russia’s industries and infra-structure and does not include any of the profits made the organised crime gangs. Foreign investors, the more sensible ones at least were put off the possibility of investing in Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union by the high risk of their investment been ruined by having to pay bribes to officials and protection to crime gangs. It seems that the only people prospering in post-Soviet Russia are those that became nouveau riche by their investments or those that made their money less honestly through extortion or corruption. Poverty and unemployment that did not officially exist during the Soviet era increased alarmingly during the 1990s. Even if the poverty line is measured below a monthly income of less than $30 a month up to 40 million Russians appear to live in poverty. That is alarming for a country that has the largest part of the Soviet Union that had been a military superpower until1991. Economically Russia’s decline was remarkable for its severity, producing less than Belgium and barely a quarter more than Poland. In the immediate post-Soviet period the situation was more chaotic because all the former republics were still maintaining the old Soviet currency and printing money as if it was going out of fashion, adding to the inflationary consequences of ending price controls. The chaotic situation increased the ease in which organised crime gangs could operate in the former Soviet Union. Whilst the resulting hyperinflation (added to by the removal of price controls) meant that many more ordinary people had to find alternative methods of supplementing their incomes. Russia was not the slowest country to reform its economy or political institutions Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Belarus according to European Bank of Reconstruction and Development were amongst the least reformed and most poverty struck. In contrast the Baltic States of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia progressed well enough to be admitted in the European Union by 2004. The adoption of free market capitalism brought an end to queuing in empty shops and replaced it with full shops where most people could not afford to buy anything. Hence people were searching for legal or illegal means of boosting their incomes and thus more likely to become involved in corruption and bribery. Uneconomic factories were shut making millions unemployed. Under the Soviet system people had less money but there was better state provisions and prices were fixed so inflation was virtually non-existent. The Soviet system had given privileges to countless petty state workers and junior party members. They were known as apparatchiks, whilst high ranking officials and senior party members with better perks were known as nomenklatura. With the end of the Soviet system some of these apparatchiks and nomenklatura exchanged their privileges for money, those still in state employment that had remained honest now exchanged favours for bribes. Corruption increased during the post-Sovi et era simply out of economic necessity right across all the former Soviet Union as ordinary citizens and government officials found that they did not enough to live on. Throughout the former Soviet Union, the pace of economic liberalisation varied. By the middle of 1994 the Baltic States and Russia in terms of the total percentage of gross domestic product generated by the private sector of the economy were well ahead of the Asian republics, Belarus and Moldova. In Estonia and Latvia, it was 55%, in Russia and Lithuania50 % with Belarus, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan lagged far behind on only 15%. In post-Soviet Russia nomenklatura were better placed than most to survive the harsher economic climate particularly those that lived in regions such as Siberia found it harder to survive especially when state subsidies ended leaving food and fuel far more expensive than in the major cities. The collapse of communism cut off many of the remote industrial and mining areas from the central government leading to social and economic decay. Such neglect has allowed for the growth of organised crime and corruption as desperate people turn to drugs and alcohol. Drug and alcohol abuse leads to health problems or addiction. To counter some of th e incursions into those remote areas by crime gangs the Putin government once more restricted travel in to those areas. A factor that contributed to the rise of organised crime in the post-Soviet was the wide availability of weapons for organised crime gangs and individual gangsters or thugs to use. Weapons were often obtained from members of the armed forces. Military and naval personnel were increasingly eager to sell weapons to supplement their wages, assuming they had been paid on time. The Russian commanders are said to have done worse during the first Chechen war of 1994 -1996. They sold Grozny back to the rebels in August 1996 leading to the deaths of defenceless conscripts. Corruption within the Russian military seems to be endemic, which given its role in maintaining central government authority and internal security in some of the remoter regions of the Russian Federation certainly permitted and even encouraged organised crime to rise, for instance in Chechnya. During the second Chechen war that began in 1999 the local police observed the illicit trade between Russian soldiers and local blac k marketers. These soldiers would exchange boxes of ammunition for locally distilled vodka or locally grown cannabis with the tacit approval of their superior officers. Indeed, officers often accompanied their men when these exchanges took place. The black marketers then sell the ammunition to the Chechen fighters. Local police could intervene and arrest everybody, but they have either been told not to or bribed motto. The army was supposed to keep all the roads into Chechnya secure to prevent the rebels escaping or gaining supplies and money. However, the reporter Anna Politkovskaya was told â€Å"one person on foot must pay100 roubles; a light vehicle costs about 500-600 roubles†. Politkovskaya did not readily accept those claims until she successfully bribed the soldiers to get past the checkpoint. The greed and corruption of the army must have been counterproductive. They sold ammunition that was used by the Chechens and they allowed access to restricted areas to anybody who could have smuggled weapons in and people out. The corruption of the Russian armed forces in the area in and around Chechnya lowered the security and containment of Chechen fighters and contributed to the apparent ease in which rebels were able to take hostages in the Moscow theatre during October 2002. More horrifically the siege of a Beslan high school in September 2004 showed that the Russian military were incompetent as well as riddled with corruption. Gangsters did not always buy weapons; they could often steal weapons from poorly guarded or neglected military bases. Due to the Soviet Union having national service most of the organised crime gang members could already use weapons. Troops leaving the army could also consider employment as either bodyguard for the newly rich and the justifiably concerned business owners or joining the organised crime gangs themselves as thugs and assassins. Violent crime is probably not as prevalent as people in the West might believe, however crime gangs would have no qualms about settling accounts with intimidation, assault and murder. Some murders have shown that the crime gangs and contract killers are able to gain hold of sophisticated weapons such as rocket launchers to kill bodyguards as well as their bosses in St Petersburg. Gangs must be well connected as well as rich to acquire such weapons. The dramatic rise in the murder rate witnessed not only the deaths of politicians (three members of the Duma were shot dead in cold blood) but also businessmen and journalists. Business executives and more lowly bank employees could be and were at risk of being killed due tithe rise in corruption and organised crime. Not many gang members were afraid of being caught and convicted, for they were confident that even if the police did catch them that either the police or the courts could be persuaded to let them get away with it. In the period between 1992and 1995, the number of killed bank workers ranging from clerks to senior executives was 46. The most publicized killing was that of Pivanilide who the president of Rosbiznesbank had been. Kivelidi was poisoned in August 1995 for not complying with the demands of organised criminals. There are still a high number of deaths because of fighting between rival gangs still demonstrating that there are enough guns and money up for grabs to m ake the high risks of being killed seem worthwhile. Over 2,000 gang members are gunned down every year in gang wars in the Moscow region alone. Until the Putin presidency the situation in St Petersburg had been worse although Putin seems to want to clean up his home city. The difficulty and the danger of uncovering the true level of crimes being committed aided the rise in organised crime and corruption. With so many bureaucrats, police and politicians involved or thought to be involved in corruption much of the uncovering of crimes and evidence of corruption came from the press and journalists or even rarely independently minded politicians. For journalists it was dangerous to uncover and attempt to publish evidence and articles concerning organised crime gangs and the high levels of corruption. Considering the increasing control of the media by the state or by oligarchs whose own positions could be undermined by revelations of corruption or organised crime it has not always been easy for reporters to go public with evidence they have gathered. To illustrate the dangerous position journalists found themselves in, 36 were killed between January 1994and May 1995 throughout the former Soviet Union whilst doing their jobs and reporting on not only corrup tion and organised crime but also the conflict in Chechnya. The uncovering of evidence of the corruption and fraud within the Soviet army during its time in East Germany and before its departure appeared to be a major scope for the Murkowski Komsomolsk and its investigative journalist Dmitrii Kholod. For Kholod it proved one-story too far as a bomb blew up him and his office during October1994. Even television reporters and journalists were not immune from danger. Following his research into the corrupt or dishonest selling of television advertising Vladimir Listed was gunned down in March 1995before he could broadcast all his findings. At other times politicians, bureaucrats and business executives would inform or leak information about their rivals real or presumed links with organised crime and corruption for their own gain rather than in the public interest or to fight corruption itself. Whilst these bouts of accusations and counter accusations occupied the politicians and press attentions they occasionally removed the expendable politici ans and bureaucrats whilst leaving the level of overall corruption untouched. As noted below the Books affair would be used to force the resignations of some of the young reformers in 1999. Accusations of corruption would also be leaked to the press after an individual had lost the approval of either President Yeltsin or President Putin. The prime example of this were the accusations levelled against Boris Berezovskyafter he fell out with Putin, or more aptly when Putin regarded him as no longer useful to the Kremlin. Berezovsky is claimed to have stolen millions from his companies and state-run companies such as Aeroflot. All these events were from the early 1990s, so the Russian government had plenty of time to prove them or clear him. Berezovsky who went to exile in London has retaliated by campaigning against the Putin government’s increasing control of power. In Russia it appears that those involved in corruption or organised crime are relatively immune from arrest if they do not upset the Kremlin, or their punishment becomes politically expedient for the government. President Putin is arguably â€Å"searching for levers that will work †¦ to have in place a national authority that functions as normal governments do†. Corruption was a fact of life in the Soviet era and now seems even more endemic in the post-Soviet period; ordinary Soviet citizens were cynical about the financial honesty of their political masters and the higher-ranking communist party officials, a cynicism that continues with post-Soviet politicians and officials. Evidence of corruption and bribery would often be collected by the KGB and used if the individuals concerned fall out of favour senior party members, its successor still collects such information only now some its officers are more likely to sell sensitive information to the highest bidders. President Yeltsinonly renamed the KGB the FSB instead of abolishing it. He also retained control of the KGB records and evidence of the corruption they contained Timely uncovering of bribe taking and corruption have often been used to discredit rivals and justify the dismissal of ministers and officials. Therefore, presumably there is usually enough evidence to act against many of t hose involved in corruption or organised crime but not always the political will or judicial authority to do so. Many Russians believe that most if not all government ministers and officials are corrupt and susceptible to bribes. Officials are willing to risk public safety and even national security as well as their reputations for the sake of bribes. Allegations and counter allegations of corruption were used in the 1990s during the power struggle between President Yeltsin and hard-liners such as Rosko and Khasbulatov. Corruption both in the Soviet era and afterwards existed and increased because the majority of those accepting bribes or using their position for gain position or cash believed that they would not get caught. Even if they did get caught the rate of convictions were not that high. Soviet era clampdowns on corruption under Andropov and Gorbachev only caught small fry and the same could apply during the post-Soviet era. The only notable high ranking communist to be convicted for corruption was Yuri Churbanov in 1988. Churbanov’s father in law was the late Leonid Brezhnev, the one-time Soviet leader and General Secretar

The Expatriates of the 1920s :: American America History

The Expatriates of the 1920's 1ex†¢pa†¢tri†¢ate- 1: to withdraw (oneself) from residence in or allegiance to one's native country 2: intransitive senses: to leave one's native country to live elsewhere; also: to renounce allegiance to one's native country Merriam-Webster Dictionary Nothing before, or since has equaled the mass expatriation of the 1920's. It was as if a great draft of wind picked up these very peculiar people and dropped them off in a European life style. Europe and the rest of the world were beginning to see a large population of these American expatriates. "... the younger and footloose intellectuals went streaming up the longest gangplank in the world." (Cowley 79) Along with the intellectuals went the wealthy à ©lite, the recent college graduates, the art students, and the recent war veterans aptly called "The Lost Generation". Although many went all over the world, the largest density of these expatriates was in France. "Indeed, to young writers like ourselves, a long sojourn in France was almost a pilgrimage to the Holy Land." (Cowley 102) Many expatriates flocked to Paris to follow forerunners in the movement such as Ezra Pound and Gertrude Stein. Most of the expatriates wished to have an introduction to Gertrude Stein at her apartment. There they would discuss art, literature, and the ideals of America for hours on end. Gertrude Stein characterized the expatriates' view of America when she said, "America is my country, and Paris is my home town". (Stein) This idea, of having a place that you consider your home, but not your homeland, is the basis of the expatriate movement. The writing of this era was influenced by a few things. With the new ideas of America, there also came much criticism of it to. After World War One, many Americans became somewhat dissatisfied with the way that their own country's people and leaders acted. This was also a catalyst in the massive expatriation that occurred. Also, it is speculated that many war veterans could have developed various and unknown disorders caused by the type of warfare in which they had taken part. The optimistic culture of The Roaring Twenties also could have been a factor in the attitudes towards America and the writing that developed from it. Through a close study of the Expatriates, I will propose this list of probable influences towards the attitudes and writing that occurred. 1.) World War One, and the physical affects that it created among American and European Citizens.

Existentialist View Of Human Condition :: essays research papers

Existentialist View of Human Condition Two of the main principles of Existentialist Human Condition are: That man exists and then creates himself and what man chooses for himself he chooses for everyone else as well. Lets examine the first principle: man exists and then defines himself. What it means is that man is created on this earth and is nothing but a body, blood and guts. What he chooses to do and to be is what makes him a man. If a man comes into this world and chooses to steal, cheat, kill and lie then that is what that man has made himself to be. While society may see him as a "evil" person, that is what is right for him. Now on the other hand if a person chooses to be generous, kind, honest and loving, society may see him as a "good" person while it is still right for him. According to the Existentialists, a person is placed on this earth with no predisposed "good" or "evil" values, one man is not created with any more good or evil than the next. By the decisions we make in life we create ourselves. Next the second view, what man chooses for himself he chooses for everyone else. This is a view I really believe in. Everything we do in life effects someone else, whether we no it or not. Every time we drive our car. Every time we eat something, spend money, go for a jog someone else is effected. For an example: a man goes to the store and buys a stereo. First of all the clerk the clerk is effected because they have to check you out, so you have taken some of their time. The store is effected because they are minus one radio from their store. The manufacturer now has to make one more to replace the one that was bought from the store. The manufacturing employees are effected because put the radio together, and so on. On the other hand a man who chooses to steal that same stereo will effect even more people.

Phantom Limbs, Phantom Pain, And The Essay -- Biology Essays Research

Phantom Limbs, Phantom Pain, And The "I-Function" The so-called "I-function" which describes the brain's sense of self takes on interesting connotations when discussing phantom limbs and associated phantom pain. The loss of an arm or leg through amputation is not an easy experience to endure, and is even more difficult when the patient begins to feel sensations in their now missing limb. These feelings, sometimes referred to as "stump hallucination", is the subjective sensation, not arising from an external stimulus, that an amputated limb is still present (1). Although they no longer exist, patients perceive these limbs as still being essential components of their body-image, and continues to move in sync with their torso and other limbs. For some amputees, these phantom sensations may be no more than painless distractions of pressure, warmth, and cold that do not interfere with their everyday lives. But for the majority of amputees, about 50% to 80% (2), they experience phantom pains that vary in classification from cramping, burning, tingling, shocking, shooting and stabbing pains. These episodes are severe enough to interfere with work, sleep and normal function and do require some kind of treatment. Phantom pain can occur anytime, from immediately after an amputation to several years later. The powerful impression of a stable, embodied self is taken for granted. But it's an perception that's possible only because of the body image created by the brain. A significant element of that image is a mental map of the body surface, generated by the cortex using the sensory signals it receives from the skin. Other regions of the cortex control other components, such as the position of muscles and joints (proprioception),... ... http://www.bfe.org/protocol/pro05eng.htm 3)THEY DO IT WITH MIRRORS , From New Scientist http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itweb/brynmawr_main?http_rc=400&class=session&sev=temp&type=session&cause=http%3A%2F%2Fweb1.infotrac.galegroup.com%2Fitw%2Finfomark%2F805%2F448%2F25790840w3%2Fpurl%3Drc1_EAIM_0_A63676311%26dyn%3D4!ar_fmt%3Fsw_aep%3Dbrynmawr_main&cont=&msg=No+Session+cookies&sserv=no 4) Harris, J. A. "Cortical Origin of Pathological Pain." in Lancet, vol. 354 (pg. 1464-1466) 1999 5)Scientific American, Ronald Melzack article http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro01/web1/= 6)Discover Phantom limbs , Brief Article http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_n2_v19/ai_20159526 7) Ramachandran, V.S. & Rogers-Ramachandran, D. "Phantom Limbs and Neural Plasticity." in Archives of Neurology. Vol. 57 (pg. 317-320), 2000, Ramachandran article

An Ideal Performance Evaluation System Commerce Essay

â€Å" Most folks scoff at the thought that there might be a perfect system for making employee public presentation assessment. They think that since their organisation is â€Å" alone, † so their system for analysing employee public presentation must be alone, excessively. How foolish. Do n't jeer – there is an ideal method for the appraisal procedure. In administrations that take employee public presentation assessment earnestly and utilize the procedure good, the system maps as an ongoing procedure – non simply an one-year event. † – Dick Grote 1. Among Performance Appraisal experts, there is a important sum of understanding that there is an ideal rhythm that, if followed, will by and large bring forth superior consequences 1. The distinguishable stages or the figure of stairss of this rhythm, nevertheless, varies across the literature available. While Dick Grote identifies four distinct phases2, Stephen P Robbins 3 lineations six different stairss. Back place in India, direction expert, Subba Rao 4 divides the rhythm into nine stairss. Before showing an ideal public presentation rating system, it is of import to reexamine the assorted methods or techniques that have been developed along with the development of appraisal systems. A few of the of import 1s are outlined in the succeeding paragraphs.Methods and Techniques for Appraisal2. Graphic Rating Scales. This is the simplest and most popular method for measuring public presentation and offers a high grade of structure.5. It compares single public presentation to an absol ute criterion, with each employee trait or characteristic rated on a bipolar graduated table that normally has several points runing from â€Å" hapless † to â€Å" first-class † ( or some similar agreement ) . The supervisor rates each subsidiary by circling or look intoing the mark that best describes his or her public presentation for each trait. The assigned values for the traits are so totalled. The traits assessed on these graduated tables include employee properties such as cooperation, communications ability, enterprise, promptness and proficient ( work accomplishments ) competency. The nature and range of the traits selected for inclusion is limited merely by the imaginativeness of the graduated table ‘s interior decorator, or by the administration ‘s demand to cognize. The one major proviso in choosing traits is that they should be in some manner relevant to the appraisee ‘s occupation. The traits selected by some administrations have been u nwise and have resulted in legal action on the evidences of discrimination.6 3. Advantages. The following are the advantages of following this system: – ( a ) Graphic Rater Scales are structured and standardised. This allows evaluations to be easy compared and contrasted – even for full work forces. Each employee is subjected to the same basic assessment procedure and evaluation standards, with the same scope of responses. This encourages equality in intervention for all appraisees and imposes standard steps of public presentation across all parts of the organization.7 ( B ) Rating scale methods are besides really simple to utilize and understand. The construct of the evaluation graduated table makes obvious sense ; both valuators and appraisees have an intuitive grasp for the simple and efficient logic of the bipolar graduated table. The consequence is widespread credence and popularity for this attack. 4. Disadvantages. The major drawbacks of the evaluation graduated table have been discussed below: – ( a ) Trait Relevance. The traits selected may non be relevant in the same grade across all occupations of the appraisees. For illustration, the trait â€Å" instructional ability † might non be really of import in a occupation that is tightly defined and stiffly structured. In such instances, a low assessment evaluation for the same may non intend that an employee lacks the ability. Rather, it may reflect the fact that an employee has few chances to utilize and expose that peculiar trait. ( B ) Systemic Disadvantage. Rating graduated tables, and the traits selected, by and large attempt to supply an overall appraisal standards or criterion for the apraisees. There is an premise that all the possible indexs of public presentation are included, and all false and irrelevant indexs are excluded. This is an premise really hard to turn out in pattern. It is possible that an employee ‘s public presentation may depend on factors that have non been included in the selected traits. Such employees may stop up with evaluations that do non genuinely or reasonably reflect their attempt or value to the organisation. Employees in this category are systemically disadvantaged by the evaluation graduated table method. ( degree Celsius ) Perceptual Errors. This includes assorted well-known jobs of selective perceptual experience ( such as the horns and halos consequence ) every bit good as jobs of sensed significance. Selective perceptual experience is the human inclination to do private and extremely subjective appraisals of what a individual is â€Å" truly similar † , and so seek grounds to back up that position ( while disregarding or understating grounds that might belie it ) . 8 In other words, we see in others what we want to see in them. An illustration is the supervisor who believes that an employee is inherently good ( halo consequence ) and so ignores grounds that might propose otherwise. On the other manus, a supervisor may hold formed the feeling that an employee is bad ( horns consequence ) . The supervisor becomes unreasonably rough in their appraisal of the employee and ever ready to knock and sabotage them. ( vitamin D ) Perceived Meaning. Problems of sensed significance occur when valuators do non portion the same sentiment about the significance of the selected traits and the linguistic communication used on the evaluation graduated tables. For illustration, to one valuator, an employee may show the trait of inaugural by describing work jobs to a supervisor. To another valuator, this might propose an inordinate dependance on supervisory aid – and therefore a deficiency of enterprise. ( vitamin E ) Rating Mistakes. The job here is non so much mistakes in perceptual experience as mistakes in valuator opinion and motivation. Unlike perceptual mistakes, these mistakes may be ( at times ) deliberate. The most common evaluation mistake is cardinal inclination. Busy valuators, or those wary of confrontations and reverberations, may be tempted to dole out excessively many inactive, centrist evaluations ( e.g. â€Å" satisfactory † or â€Å" equal † ) , irrespective of the existent public presentation of a subsidiary. Thus the spread of evaluations tends to clop overly around the center of the graduated table. This job is worsened in administrations where the assessment procedure does non bask strong direction support, or where the valuators do non experience confident with the undertaking of assessment. 5. Ranking Method. Ranking employees from best to pip on a trait or traits is another option. Since it is normally easier to separate between the worst and best employees, an alternation ranking method is most popular. First, list all subsidiaries to be rated, and so traverse out the names of any non known good plenty to rank. Then, on a signifier indicate the employee who is the highest on the characteristic being measured and besides the 1 who is the lowest. Then take the following highest and the following lowest, jumping between highest and lowest until all employees have been ranked. 9 6. Paired Comparison Method. In this method all possible braces of employees are formed.10 The judge indicates which single in each brace is a better performing artist. An employee ‘s rank is determined by the figure of times he or she is chosen as the better performing artist in a brace. The individual chosen most frequently is ranked foremost. Use of this method requires the comparing of many braces even when the entire figure of employees is non really big. This method helps to do the superior method more precise, though it is more complicated than consecutive ranking. 7. Checklist Methods. The checklist is a simple evaluation technique in which the supervisor is given a list of statements or words and asked to look into statements stand foring the features and public presentation of each employee. There are three types of checklist methods viz. , simple checklist, weighted, and forced pick method. ( a ) Simple Checklist. The checklist consists of a big figure of statements9 like â€Å" is he punctual † or â€Å" is his behavior gracious † etc. The rater cheques to bespeak if the behavior of an employee is positive or negative to each statement. Employee public presentation is rated on the footing of figure of positive cheques. The negative cheques are non considered. A trouble may originate because the words or statements may hold different significances to different raters. ( B ) Weighted Checklists. This involves burdening different points in the checklist, to bespeak that some are more of import than others. The public presentation evaluations are multiplied by the weights of the statements and the coefficients are added up. The leaden public presentation mark is compared with the overall appraisal criterions to happen out the overall public presentation of the person. However, it is expensive to plan, and clip consuming. Though this method is appraising every bit good as developmental, it has the basic job of the judge non cognizing the points which contribute most to successful public presentation. 8. Critical Incident Method. With this method the supervisor keeps a log of positive and negative illustrations ( critical incidents ) of a subsidiary ‘s work related behaviors. Every six months or so, supervisor and low-level meet to discourse the latter ‘s public presentation, utilizing the incidents as illustrations. This method has several advantages. It provides illustrations of good and hapless public presentation the supervisor can utilize to explicate the individual ‘s evaluation. It makes the supervisor think about the subsidiary ‘s assessment all during the twelvemonth ( so the evaluation does non merely reflect the employee ‘s most recent public presentation ) . The list provides illustrations of what specifically the subsidiary can make to extinguish lacks. The downside is that without some numerical evaluation, this method is non excessively utile for comparing employees or for salary determinations. Besides it is clip devouring for the judg es, and it may be difficult to quantify or construction the incidents into a concluding narrative rating. 9. Try or Free Form Appraisal. This method requires the trough to compose a short essay depicting each employee ‘s public presentation during the evaluation period. This format emphasises rating of overall public presentation, based on strengths/weaknesses of employee public presentation, instead than specific occupation dimensions. The downside is the clip involved, there is no common criterion, and the essay composing accomplishments may be unequal with different judges. 10. Group Appraisals. Under this an employee is appraised by a group of valuators, dwelling of the immediate supervisor, other supervisors who have close contact with the employees work, directors or caputs of section and advisers. The group appraises the public presentation based on comparing with set criterions, finds out divergences, discusses grounds thereof and suggests ways to better public presentation. This method is widely used for intents of publicity, demotion and retrenchment assessment. 11. Assessment Centre. This method was foremost developed by the German ground forces in1930. This is non a technique of public presentation assessment by itself but is a system, where appraisal of several persons is done by assorted experts, utilizing assorted techniques. Persons from assorted sections are brought together to pass two or three yearss working on an person or group assignment similar to the 1s they would be managing when promoted. Perceivers rank the public presentation of each participant in order to deserve. All assesses get an equal chance to demo their endowments and capablenesss and secure publicities based on virtue. The Centre besides enables persons working in low position sections to vie with people from good known sections and heighten their publicity opportunities. 12. Management by Aims. MBO requires the director to put specific mensurable ends with each employee and so sporadically discourse the latter ‘s advancement toward these ends. The term MBO by and large refers to a comprehensive and formal administration broad end scene and appraisal plan consisting of six stairss: ( a ) Set the administration ‘s end. ( B ) Set departmental ends. ( degree Celsius ) Discuss departmental ends ( vitamin D ) Define expected consequences and set single ends ( vitamin E ) Performance reappraisal. ( degree Fahrenheit ) Provide feedback. 13. There are three jobs with MBO: ( a ) Puting ill-defined ends ( B ) It is clip devouring ( degree Celsius ) Puting aims with the subsidiary turns into a jerk of war with the direction forcing for higher aims and the subsidiary forcing for lower 1s.The Ideal Performance Appraisal Cycle14. Advisers who help administrations make effectual public presentation assessments, academicians who study the public presentation assessment procedure, human resource directors, and organizational development practicians with companies that have successfully developed their ain public presentation assessment systems come to the same decision: public presentation assessment does n't get down with the signifier, it starts with the occupation – planning what needs to be done and calculating out how it will be accomplished. 11 15. An organizational scheme is a requirement for developing an overall public presentation direction system. Before any appraisal of an person ‘s public presentation can be made, the administration ‘s way must be clarified and communicated. Until the end of the administration has non been decided, it would be bootless to make up one's mind the ends for single units or the worker ‘s public presentation appraisal criterions. Authoritative MBO ( Management by aims ) theory, the nucleus doctrine behind most successful assessment systems, begins with the demand that the administration formulate long term ends and strategic programs. These programs lead to overall organizational aims and the procedure continues downward to derivative aims for single units and subdivisions, boulder clay every member of the administration has specific and mensurable aims in consonant rhyme with the ends of the administration. Once an understanding is reached between the supervisor and the subsidiary on the occupation particulars, the following measure is to realize it, followed by the assessment, sooner by both the valuator and the appraisee. The reappraisal of the public presentation is done in a face to confront meeting. Thereafter the procedure begins afresh. Thus the ideal public presentation assessment rhythm can be divided into four stages: – 16. The Evaluation Process. The rating procedure involves: – ( a ) Performance Planning. An administration must hold its mission clearly defined prior to set abouting the public presentation assessment procedure. If the org does non hold a specific way, powerful attempts on the portion of its members wo n't supply consequences. At the clip that a occupation is designed and a occupation description formulated, public presentation criterions should besides be developed for the place. These criterions and aims should be clear and adequate to be understood and measured. Obscure phrases should non be used to specify the criterions. 12 ( B ) Communicate Performance Expectations to Employees. The valuator and the appraisee meet to be after for the approaching twelvemonth. In the treatment, they come to an understanding about five major countries: – ( I ) The cardinal answerabilities of the subsidiary ‘s occupation i.e. the major countries within which he is responsible for acquiring consequences. ( two ) The specific objectives the subsidiary will accomplish within each answerability country ( three ) The criterions that will be used to measure how good the subsidiary has achieved each aim. ( four ) The public presentation factors, competences etc that will be critical in finding how the consequences will be achieved ( how he will carry on the occupation ) . ( V ) The elements of the development program the low-level shall finish during the twelvemonth. 17. This treatment generates an improved employee public presentation as he knows precisely what is expected of them. Furthermore, the valuator can now keep the appraisee accountable. 18. Employee Performance Execution. Over the class of the twelvemonth, employee public presentation should be focused on accomplishing the ends, aims and cardinal duties of the occupation. The superior provides aid and feedback to the person so as to increase the chance of success and creates conditions that motivate and besides decide any jobs that may originate. 19. The valuator and the appraisee meet sporadically to reexamine advancement toward the programs and ends discussed in the employee public presentation planning meeting. The appraisee must seek out a feedback and the needed counsel for the hereafter. Besides elements of the program that have become disused are abandoned by common understanding and new aims to react to altering conditions are established. 20. Employee Performance Assessment. At the clip for the formal employee public presentation assessment, the valuator reflects on how good the subsidiary has performed over the class of the twelvemonth, assembles the assorted signifiers and paperwork that the organisation provides to do this appraisal, and fills them out. The Appraiser and appraisee independently measure the grade to which the different elements of the one-year program were achieved. The valuator completes an appraisal of the subsidiary ‘s public presentation and typically has it reviewed and approved by senior direction before discoursing it with the subsidiary. In an ideal system, the subsidiary besides completes a self appraisal, roll uping informations, if necessary, from equals, subsidiaries, and others. The subsidiary may subject the ego assessment to the valuator to be used as a portion of his overall appraisal. 21. Employee Performance Review. The valuator and the low-level meet, to reexamine their assessments. They discuss the consequences that were achieved and the public presentation factors that contributed to their achievement. The treatment includes: Consequences achieved ( what was done ) . Performance or behavioral effectivity ( how it was done ) . Overall public presentation appraisal. Development. At the terminal of the reappraisal meeting they set a day of the month to run into once more to keep an employee public presentation planning treatment for the approaching 12 months, get downing the procedure anew. 22. This public presentation assessment procedure non merely transforms employee public presentation direction from an one-year event to an ongoing rhythm, it besides tightly links the public presentation of each member with the mission and values of the administration as a whole. The existent value of the system is in concentrating everyone ‘s attending on what is truly of import i.e. the accomplishment of the administration ‘s strategic ends through presentation of the administration ‘s vision and values in each employee ‘s daily behavior. 23. In the best-run and most efficient administrations, employee public presentation assessment is a critical and vigorous direction tool. No other direction procedure has every bit much influence on persons ‘ callings and work lives. Employee public presentation assessment can concentrate each individual ‘s attending on the company ‘s mission, vision and values. Besides ideally, the procedure can reply the two cardinal inquiries that every individual individual in the organisation wants the replies to: What do you anticipate of me? And how am I making?________________________________1. Richard C Grote â€Å" Complete usher to appraisal systems †2. Dick Grote â€Å" htpp//ezine articles.com/expert: †3. Stephen P Robbins â€Å" Management of Human Resources †4. Subba Rao â€Å" Personnel/human Resource Management †5. Archer North â€Å" Performance assessment systems ; www.pasystems.com †6. Ibid p87. Ibid p88. Ibid p109. Subba Rao à ¢â‚¬Å" Personnel/human Resource direction †10. Fisher, Schoenfeldt, Shaw â€Å" Human resource direction † .11 Richard C Grote â€Å" Complete usher to appraisal systems †12. Archer North â€Å" Performance assessment systems ; www.pasystems.com †