Impact of FDI on Host Country

Impact of FDI on Host Country ABSTRACT This project critically examines the negative effects that FDI poses to the host economy. The impact of FDI on the host economy can be understood with the help of The Standard Theory of International Trade and The Theory of Industrial Organisation. FDI has both positive and negative impacts on the host-country. FDI has an adverse effect on the host countrys economy, environment, domestic firms, political environment, labour market and trade balance. Through this project, it is concluded that the government policies should be such that they exploit the benefits of FDI completely in order to overrule its drawbacks. INTRODUCTION There is an increasing acknowledgment to recognize the forces of economic globalization which first requires looking at Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) by multinational corporations (MNCs): that is, when a firm based in one country locates or acquires production facilities in other countries. (Blonigen, 2006). Over the past decade Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has grown noticeably as a major form of international capital transfer. Between 1980 and 1990, world flows of FDI- defined as cross-border expenditures to acquire or expand corporate control of productive assets have approximately grown three times (Froot, 1993). â€Å"FDI has turned out to be a major form of net international borrowing for Japan and the United States, the worlds largest international lender and borrower respectively† (Froot, 1993, pp. 1). The most introspective effect of FDI has been seen in developing countries, wherein annual Foreign Direct Investment flows have increased from an average of less than $10 billion in the 1970s to an annual average of $208 billion in 1999 (Source: UNCTAD). A large portion of global FDI is driven by mergers and acquisitions and internationalization of production in a range of industries (Graham and Spaulding, 2005). Despite the noticeable importance of FDI and MNCs in the world economy, research on the factors that decide FDI patterns and the impact of MNCs on parent and host countries is in its early stages. The most significant general questions are: what factors determine where FDI occurs, and what impacts do those MNC operations have on the parent and host economies? This report mainly analyses the negative impact of FDIs on host economies. FORIEGN DIRECT INVESTMENT â€Å"Foreign Direct Investment reflects the objective of obtaining a lasting interest by a resident entity in one economy (â€Å"direct investor†) in an entity resident in an economy other than that of the investor (â€Å"direct investment enterprise†)† (OECD). In other words, it is a direct investment made by a corporation in a commercial venture in another country. What separates FDI from portfolio investment is the control over the investment (Gillies, 2005). In case of FDI at least 10 percent of the voting rights must be held by the foreign investing company (Daniels et al., 2004). The difference between FDI and other ventures in foreign countries is mainly that the new venture operates completely outside the economy of the companys home country. The main motivators behind FDI are resource acquisition, sales expansion and risk minimisation. Besides this governments may also encourage FDIs due to various political motives (Daniels et al., 2004). TYPES OF FDI Foreign Direct Investment can be classified into three broad categories on the basis of direction, target or motives. On the basis of direction FDI can be classified into Inward or Outward FDI. When foreign capital is invested in local resources, it is referred to as Inward FDI, on the other hand when investments are made by local firms in foreign resources it is referred to as Outward FDI. Outward FDI is also known as â€Å"direct investment abroad† and is always backed by government support in case of any risks. On the basis of target FDI can be classified into Greenfield Investments, mergers and acquisition, horizontal and vertical FDI. Greenfield Investment refers to direct investment in new arenas or the development of existing amenities. This leads to creation of production capacity, employment opportunities, transfer of technology and expertise as well as linking of the host economy to the global marketplace. Mergers and acquisition are a major kind of FDI whereby there is a transfer of existing resources from local businesses to foreign businesses. Cross border mergers take place when the management of resources and business operations is relocated from a local company to a foreign company, with the local organisation becoming an associate to the foreign organisation. Acquisitions take place when the foreign company takes over a domestic company, and establishes itself as the new owner of the domestic company. Horizontal FDI refers to an investment made by a foreign company in the same industry in which it operates in its home country. Vertical FDI can be classified further into backward and forward vertical FDI. Backward Vertical FDI occurs when a domestic firm is provided input by a foreign firm in order to aid its production process whereas Forward Vertical FDI occurs when the output of a domestic firm is sold by an industry abroad it is known as forward vertical FDI. Lastly on the basis of motives, FDI can be classified into four types. The first type is of FDI takes place when the various factors of production may not be available in the home country of the firm or be more efficient in the host country, thereby encouraging firms to make investments. This is known as Resource seeking FDI. The second type of FDI which can be used as a defensive strategy is Market-seeking FDI. These investments are made either to maintain existing markets or to penetrate into new markets. The third type is Efficiency Seeking FDI, where the firms hope to increase their competency by exploiting the advantages of economies of scale and also common ownership. The firms thus try to achieve the objective of profit maximization. the last type is Strategy -asset seeking FDI, which is a common tactic used by firms to stop their competitors from acquiring resources. Thus these are the various types of FDI. IMPACT OF FDI ON HOST ECONOMY There are two approaches in economic theory which contribute to studying the effects of Foreign Direct Investment on host countries. One is the standard theory of international trade by Macdougall (1960). This theory is a â€Å"partial equilibrium comparative-static approach intended to examine how marginal increments in investment from abroad are distributed† (Blomstrom, 1997, p.1). The main assumption of this model is that there is an increase in the marginal productivity of labour and a decrease in the marginal productivity of capital. The other theory was proposed by Hymmer (1960) and is called the theory of industrial organisation. The main question of the theory is why firms make investments in other countries in order to manufacture the similar goods they manufacture at home. The answer to this question has been rightly devised by Kindleberger, 1969, p.13), who says, â€Å"for direct investment to thrive there must be some imperfection in markets for goods or factors, including among the latter technology, or some interference in competition by government or by firms, which separates markets†. Thus firms of home countries must have some asset which is going to be lucrative for its associate in the home country (Blomstrom, 1997). Foreign Direct Investment has both positive and negative effects on the host economy. POSITIVE EFFECTS OF FDI ON HOST ECONOMY FDIs have a number of positive impacts on the host country. It encourages economic development by increasing the productivity and exports of the host countries. There are four channels which help in increasing the productivity of host country, namely imitation, skill acquisition, competition and exports (Gorg Greenaway, 2004). The local firms in the host countries benefit by the indirect technology transfer that takes place between the MNC and the domestic companies. Local firms can compete more successfully in the export markets by copying the superior technology or management techniques used by the multinationals (Blomstrom, 1991). Domestic firms become more exposed to the foreign markets and subsequently their knowledge of the international markets increases. The Managers and other qualified employees of the domestic firms acquire the superior managerial and technical skills, which increases their efficiency. Multinationals increase the existing market competition, instigating the local firms to become more efficient by investing in physical or human capital. They help to increase industrial efficiency and improve resource allocation in host countries by entering markets which had many entry barriers. Thus by entering these monopolistic markets they increase competition and force the local firms to become more proficient. This is how, domestic firms are provoked by multinationals and other overseas firms to improve their performance and productivity. Multinationals also influence the local suppliers of intermediate products to become more efficient with delivery speed, quality and reliability of the products so as to meet the high standards of the overseas company. It is seen that FDI has a positive impact on labour market. If the productivity of domestic firms increases by copying the multinationals production style which is based on increased labour productivity, then the domestic firms will not hesitate from paying higher wages to the labour (Lipsey Sjoholm, 2010). Multinationals also increase the standard of the host countrys labour market by providing the labourers with training and making them qualified enough to handle complicated machinery and increasing their productivity. Lastly FDI affects the economy of the host country positively by increasing their revenues in the form of taxes, strengthening the exchange rate of the country and instigating the government to make policies which would attract more MNCs towards it. NEGATIVE IMPACT OF FDI ON HOST ECONOMY As seen above FDI has a number of positive effects on the host economy but these effects do not come free of cost. FDI brings along with it a number of negative effects which prove harmful to the country in various ways. Extend of the negative effects of FDI depends on the characteristics of the multinational companies, the host country and the policies of the host country. Some of the negative effects have been highlighted below: ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION With increasing competition all over the world, companies are shifting their production base to developing countries where they can carry out the production of goods that are pollutant to the environment. These countries have flexible environmental regulations and are less stringent with their enforcements. Thus by carrying out production in such countries they are able to get a competitive edge over companies which carry out production elsewhere. Lowered trade obstacles are leading to a shift of polluting industries from countries with austere environmental regulations to countries with moderate environmental regulations. This leads to an increase in pollution in countries with lenient environmental policies because they refuse to tighten them in order to gain a stronger position over others in international trade. Trade may modify the environmental outcomes through a number of different channels. The scale effect is one such channel that has harmful implications to the environment. This is because when multinationals set up manufacturing facilities or outsource these to other local businesses, it leads to an increase in output which in turn leads to an increase in pollution (Liang, 2006). MARKET STRUCTURE FDI has a negative impact on the market structure as well. As the multinationals enter the market, it leads to the increase of concentration levels within the economy which in turn hampers market control. Therefore risk is prevalent. FDIs tend to assemble in exceedingly concentrated industries. The relationship between presence of foreign organisations in the host countries and the concentration within the economy is indebted to the nature of multinational ownership benefits rather than to anti-competitive activities. In small economies, proficient exploitation of modern advanced technology leads to concentrated market structures. If such economies have lenient trade administration then the risk of anti-competitive activities is diminished to a great extent (Lall, 2000). However it is evident that successful competition strategies are very important as multinationals have the capability to simply control an industry in a host economy. TECHNOLOGY FDIs open the doors for the host country to access new technology but this technology is controlled and possessed only by the MNEs. MNCs generally invest in capital-intensive technologies and have strict proprietary rights which prevent its spill over to local firms. The technology bought in by the MNC may not be favourable to conditions of the host country. For example if the host country is a labour-intensive country and the technology used by the multinational is capital-intensive then gradually it will have a negative effect on the host economy. Once the domestic firms start imitating the foreign firm and start using the same technology used by them, labourers will lose out on their jobs. Thus this would lead to unemployment problems which will negatively affect the economy of the host country. A country attracts FDI so that the national economy grows by creating new job opportunities but in this case it would work in the opposite direction. Pollution-intensive technology may also be exported from countries where they are banned. COMPETITION FDIs have an adverse affect on competition and hamper the prevailing market equilibrium. In developing countries, the domestic firms may not be able to cope up with the competition put up by the MNCs. Thus they would lose out on business. Some multinationals acquire monopoly status in highly profitable sectors. With their monopolistic power they wipe out all competitors from the market. New enterprises are not willing to enter these markets because of the huge capital and risks involved. Thus these multinationals are able to demand unreasonable prices form the customers, leaving them with no other choice but to pay excessively higher charges due to the limited choices available. These monopolistic companies do not even invest in new technologies to bring down their costs since they are already enjoying the luxury of irrational prices. PRODUCTIVITY Atiken and Harrison (1999) and Konings (2001), have suggested that MNCs decrease the productivity of local organisations through competition effects. MNCs are able to carry out productions at lower costs since they bring along some proprietary knowledge which is firm specific. In addition they have superior managerial and marketing skills, reduced production costs, bulk purchases, etc which helps them reduce their marginal costs. Therefore, the demand for goods produced by MNCs increases, which in turn reduces the demand for locally produced goods. This ultimately leads to a decrease in domestic production increasing the average costs. With the establishment of multinationals, the demand for foreign inputs increases in comparison to local inputs which hinder the domestic firm from producing to its optimum capacity. Thus the domestic firms are not able to take advantage of economies of scale. Domestic firms may not be quick enough to grasp knowledge from the foreign firms, losing out on competition in the short run (Gorg Greenaway, 2004). MNCs usually offer higher wages to domestic workers, thereby attracting all the skilled ones, leaving behind only the semi or unskilled labour for the local firms. It is a common trend amongst MNCs to offer higher wages in comparison to the domestic firms in developed as well as developing countries. LABOURERS The workers in the host countries may not be comfortable with some of the foreign policies adopted by MNCs. One of the most attractive features for FDI in a host country is cheap labour. They take advantage of the cheap labour by producing labour intensive goods and thereby decreasing their costs of goods. With the establishment of labour intensive technology by MNCs, a country becomes highly dependent on them for its employment. Now multinationals are always trying to reduce their costs, so if they are able to find places with cheaper labour, they shift their base to that country. Thus there is always a fear of unemployment due to FDI withdrawal. GOVERNMENT POLICIES The government of the host country may face problems due to the establishment of FDIs. The government has less control over the operations of the foreign company that is functioning as the wholly owned subsidiary of an overseas company. Taking advantage of this, the MNC may not abide by the economic policies of the host country. They hamper the various environmental, governance and social regulations laid down by the government of the host country. With FDI there is risk that confidential information of the host country could be leaked out to rest of the world. It has been seen that due to FDIs the defence of a country has witnessed various risks. It is also noticed that multinationals are very reluctant to pay taxes of the host country. MNCs exploit the tax structure of the country by taking advantage of the lenient tax regulations of the host country and lack of enforcement by the government (Velde, 2001). Another huge problem faced by host countries is that of transfer pricing which is a financial accounting device used by MNCs to maximise profits. Transfer pricing refers to the price charged by one associate of a company to another associate of the same company. Transfer pricing relates to all transactions that take place within a company including raw materials, management fees, royalties, finished products, etc. Transfer pricing is an illegal way of making huge profits for the MNCs. Transfer prices can be fabricated, thus different from the price that unrelated firms would have to pay. Thus by using transfer prices as a weapon, MNCs manipulate their books of entry and acquire huge amounts of profits without an actual change in their physical capital. Profit transferring is a way of avoiding or saving taxes by MNCs through illegal ways. If the MNCs pay lesser taxes in the home country of their foreign affiliates in comparison to their host countries, then in order to increase profits, MNCs manipulate their book of accounts. They will inflate their expenditure on import of materials from their foreign partners or subsidiaries, this will show higher profits in the books of accounts of the foreign affiliates and less profit in the MNCs account in the host country. Thus evading taxes and at the same time they will artificially transfer profits to the home country. CROWDING OUT OF DOMESTIC INVESTMENTS FDI crowds out domestic investments by creating a monopolistic environment. This can be explained in two ways. Firstly MNCs raise funds locally in the domestic market, increasing the demand for money and in turn increasing the interest rates, which crowds out domestic investments. Secondly when MNCs enter a new country, they bring with them huge investments which increases the overall money flow of the country. This increases the aggregate demand, leading to an increase in prices, i.e. inflation, which will then increase expenses, reduce savings and ultimately force people to borrow money, leading to higher interest rates. Thus is this way the local investments are crowded out (Borensztein et al., 1997). Foreign firms have better advertising powers, ability to dominate the market and predatory pricing to prevent entry. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRAINTS Multinationals come in the way of a countrys infrastructure development. It is seen that multinationals are always attracted towards the more favourable regions of a country. Now with the establishment of multinationals in these regions, more efforts are put towards the betterment of these regions. As a result the rural and poor regions are ignored and they continue to remain underdeveloped. COUNTRYS TRADE BALANCE FDI has an adverse effect on the Balance of Payment of the host country (De Mellow, 1997). Financial inflows raise the exchange rates, making it unfavourable for exports. When MNCs enter a country, they bring along foreign exchange and thus increase their supply, which strengthens the host-country currency, making the domestic products more expensive in the international markets, and as a result of this the total exports of the host country reduces. Thus there is a decrease in the net exports (Total Exports- Total Imports) of the country. Hence the BOP may become unfavourable. The capital and current account are also hampered. When the MNC enters the host country, it might have previous raw material suppliers, or intermediary product suppliers, from whom it continues to buy its secondary material; this would lead to an increase in the import of the country making the BOP unfavourable. Secondly MNCs transfer their profits, management fees, royalty fees, etc back to their home country, hampering the capital account of the country. ECONOMY Multinationals usually tend to exist in close proximity to each other. It is seen that MNCs have a tendency to concentrate in the certain sectors taking advantage of the location, labour and resources. Thus the economy becomes extremely reliant on the MNC. A withdrawal of MNC from such areas could seriously hamper the economy and this is seen as a very severe problem in the backward areas. RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSION This research paper was carried out to analyse the negative effects of FDI on the host economy and we have come to a conclusion that even though FDI helps in the development and growth of various countries all over the world, these benefits do not come free of charge. FDI can have several harmful effects on the host country. To overcome these harmful effects some recommendations gave been proposed To overcome the negative impact of environmental hazards, the host countries can use a variety of channels. One such channel is the technique effect where the local firms of the host country could learn from MNEs who often use superior technology or these firms may also exit from the market if the foreign firms seize the market share as well as labour supply. Therefore directness to trade will help in improving the quality of the environment. Another channel is the income effect whereby the local electorate may demand better environment standards as well as more strict regulations which are more enforceable by the government when the multinationals increase the income in the economy by creating jobs and thus increasing employment (Liang,2006). To overcome the competitive barriers in developing countries, the domestic firms could use various protective corporate agreements. They could either combine local firms or begin cooperative ventures with the foreign firms. Government of the host company should become more stringent with their policies. They should adopt policies which encourage proper social and environmental principles by the foreign companies. Multinationals should be penalised if they do not adhere by the policies of the country Measures should be taken to curb consumer and labour exploitation and at the same time competition should be created in the labour and product market, removing all entry barriers from the domestic markets. Encourage education, train labourers and promote infrastructure to increase the local capacity to absorb and disseminate the superior new traditions pioneered by overseas companies. By taking a few precautionary measures and by amending the government policies, the harmful effects of FDI can be avoided. Thus, these policies should be such that they are able to maximise the benefits of FDI and curtail their negative effects. REFERENCES Blomstrom, M. (1991). Host Country Benefits Of Foreign Investment. NBR Working Paper 3615, pp 1-33. Blomstrom, M. and Kokko, A. (1997). The Impact Of Foreign Investment On Host Countries: A Review Of The Empirical Evidence. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1745, pp 1-42. Blomstrom, M. and Kokko, A. (1998). Multinational Corporations And Spillovers. Journal Of Economic Surveys 12(2), pp 1-31. Blonigen, B. (2006). Foreign Direct Investment Behavior of Multinational Corporations. NBER Reporter: Research Summary. Borensztein E., Gregorio De J. And Lee J-W (1997). How does Foreign Direct Investment affect economic growth? Journal of international Economics 45(1998), pp 115-135 Daniels, J.D., Radebaugh, L.H. and Sullivan, D.P. (2004). International Business Environments And Operations. 10th ed. Delhi: Pearson Prentice Hall. De Mello L.R. (1997). Foreign Direct Investment in Developing Countries and Growth: A Selection Survey. The Journal of Development Studies 34(1), pp 1-34. Froot, K. (1993). Foreign Direct Investment. London: The University of Chicago Press Ltd. Gorg, H. and Greenaway, D. (2004). Much ado About Nothing? Do Domestic Firms Really Benefit From Foreign Direct Investment? The World Research Observer 19(2), pp 171-197. Graham,J.P. and Spaulding, R.B. (2005). Understanding Foreign Direct Investment. Citibank international portal. Lall, S. (2000). FDI and Development: Research Issues In The Emerging Context. Policy Discussion Paper 20, pp 1-27. Letto-Gillies, G. (2005). Transnational Corporations and International Production concepts, theories and effects, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing House Limited. Liang, F.H. (2006). Does Foreign Direct Investment Harm the Host Countrys Environment? Evidence from China. pp 1-24. Lipsey, R.E. (2002). Home And Host Country Effects Of FDI. NBR Working Paper Series 9293, pp 1-76. Lipsey, R.E. and Sjoholm, F. (n.d.) The Impact Of Inward FDI On Host Countries: Why Such Different Answers? Does FDI Promote Development pp 23-43. Velde D.W. (2001). Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment in Developing Countries: Emerging Best-practices and Outstanding Issues. Overseas Development Institute, London.

Messages of Strength and Pride in Three Poems

Poems from the Harlem Renaissance provide vibrance and energy for the reader as they enliven a culture and tradition never before seen in the United States.   The poems â€Å"Chicago,’ by Carl Sandburg, â€Å"The Harlem Dancer,† by Claude McKay, and â€Å"Mother to Son,† by Langston Hughes, all embody this strong culture through vivid images an lingering metaphors.   While they show the pride and substance of their subjects, the poems also hint at a bit of vulnerability as well.   Therefore, these three poems metaphorically illicit outward shows of strength and pride which hide pain, toil and even resentment underneath.Strength is an attribute of a person who has toiled and prevailed despite the overwhelming odds against him.   In the first half of the poem, â€Å"Chicago,† the first person speaker is addressing the city through a series of metaphors.   First, he addresses him as a serious of occupations which all require great physical strength but which do not have an association with upper class wealth or power:HOG Butcher for the World,  Tool Maker, Stacker of Wheat,  Player with Railroads and the Nation's Freight Handler (Sandburg, lines. 1-3).  These images create a masculine, hulking mood for the reader.   It is evident that life in this city requires brawn and even a cunning mind. The speaker notes the physical attributes of the city, which can be compared to a man:   Stormy, husky, brawling,  City of the Big Shoulders† (Sandburg, lines. 4-5).The city is personified as a hard-working and proud blue collar worker who may have to resort to underhanded dealings in order to survive.However, as the poem progresses, the metaphors change.   The speaker begins with a parallel series of descriptions – â€Å"wicked,† â€Å"crooked,† and â€Å"brutal,† to characterize the city along with a justification for each.   He notes the city is â€Å"sneering† but with  lifted head singing  so proud to be alive and coarse and strong and cunning† (Sandburg, lines. 18-19).The suggestion is that the city demands more than hard work; it sometimes takes pain and trickery from its inhabitants.   However, the messages notes that sometimes this behavior is necessary for survival, and that the city has no moral problem with crime, corruption and manipulation.Finally, the poem shifts to the metaphor not of a man at all, but a beast.   This creature is Fierce as a dog with tongue lapping for action, cunning  as a savage pitted against the wilderness† (Sandburg lines. 23-24).Now the city is not human, but savage and untamed, reflecting the problems it presents for the survival of its dwellers.   They must endure, the smoke, the dust, the teeth and the burden of the city and somehow manage to laugh,  even as an ignorant fighter laughs who has  never lost a battle† (Sandburg, lns. 34-35).The bottom line for this poem is pride. Sometimes the people had to be dishonest and brutal, but they have an immense pride in getting to where they are.   The personified images of the city portray all of these emotions for the reader.â€Å"The Harlem Dancer,† by Claude McKay, focuses on the single image and experience of a boy watching a girl dance.   While the image is softer, it can correlate with the message from â€Å"Chicago.†Ã‚   Of course, the undertone is that these dancing girls are prostitutes, tempting the boys to wrongdoing, but that is part of the magic of the experience for these Harlem youth.   Despite her degrading occupation, the dancer of note is elevated to idealistic proportions in the eyes of the speaker.First, she is half-clothed, and swaying, which reminds the young man, oddly, of a palm tree.   He notes,  To me she seemed a proudly-swaying palm  Grown lovelier for passing through a storm   (McKay, lines. 7-8).With this description, the reader understands that even the boy recog nizes that this girl does not belong in Harlem.   After all, no palm trees grow anywhere near Harlem; they are products of more tropical, exotic climates, as is the dancer.   He also insinuates that she has endured hardships herself, the storm he notes, and finds her more attractive for having survived those hardships.Next, the speaker notes the melodic, otherworldly quality of her voice.   He says,  Her voice was like the sound of blended flutes  Blown by black players upon a picnic day (McKay, lines, 3-4).  he airiness of her voice and their comparison to prayers places the girl in an almost angelic realm, oddly juxtaposed to her actual position as a prostitute. This angelic nature is further emphasized by her â€Å"gauzy† dress, her graceful body, and her â€Å"shiny curls.†Ã‚   To the speaker, she is perfection, something he has never before experienced.However, underneath the beautiful figure of the dancing girl is something else, something that the bo y eventually notices.   She is not the strong and serene figure he initially perceives.   She is, in his words, not there.   He notesBut, looking at her falsely-smiling faceI knew her self was not in that strange place (McKay, lines 13-14).The speaker comes to realize that she is not truly the confident and strong person that he initially perceived her to be.   In order to get through her day, she has to somehow transport herself elsewhere, and he has bought into it for a while.   She is not ideal or perfect but has had her own shares of struggles and deceptions.The poem â€Å"Mother to Son,† by Langston Hughes, also illuminates the theme that life is a struggle, but one that should make a person proud.   The speaker is an African-American mother who is attempting to relate a life lesson to her son.   She uses a metaphor of a crystal staircase to try to emphasize the hardships she has endured in getting to the place she is now.   The clever analogy notes that a crystal staircase would be smooth and easy to climb, unlike the experience the mother relays:Well, son, I'll tell you:  Life for me ain't been no crystal stair.  It's had tacks in it,  And splinters,  And boards torn up,  And places with no carpet on the floor —  Bare. (Hugues, lines 1-7)Her life journey was painful and filled with obstacles, and she wants her son to realize this so that he will be ready for his own obstacles and hardships in life.   Ã‚  She does not want him to grow up expecting to have things handed to him, but to expect to have to work hard for the things he wants.Another message that she wants to convey to her son is that he should never give up despite these hardships.   She wants to encourage him:So boy, don't you turn back. Don't you set down on the steps ‘Cause you finds it's kinder hard (Hughes, lines 14-16).In addition to warning him about the condition of the stairs and the difficulty of traversing them, the mother is also w arning her son of the dangers.   She notes that sometimes the stairs are dark, and she warns him against falling.   Of course, the grand metaphor for life is apparent.   Life is sometimes dark, full of pitfalls, and daunting, but she has continued the journey and is endeavoring to make her son do the same.She is not making the journey sound easy; clearly, they were not the privileged individuals, but she is attempting to instill endurance through her message.   After all, she is still climbing the stairs, and if she can do it, so can he.All three of these poems address issues of life and perseverance.   None of the lives described seem easy.   Life in â€Å"Chicago† is compared ultimately to a beast that laughs and sneers.   Life as   Ã¢â‚¬Å"TheHarlem Dancer† is empty for her, as she continually desires to be somewhere else.   Life on the broken staircase is uncertain and treacherous.   However, all three scenarios represent the continual toil of lif e, and the pride that these individuals have.   They may not have riches, easy jobs, or crystals stairs, but they have their work ethic and their sense of self-worth, and that is all that matters.WORKS CITEDMcKay, Claude.   â€Å"The Harlem Dancer.† Retrieved 9 April 2007 fromhttp://www.poetry-archive.com/m/the_harlem_dancer.htmlSandburg, Carl.   â€Å"Chicago.† Retrieved 9 April 2007 from http://carl-sandburg.com/chicago.htm

Marriage and Cohabitation

Cohabitation Research Paper Cohabitation and marriage both share effective similarities and differences. Within the last 40 years both have grown closely to represent two individuals that have a motive in life which involves commitment, financial responsibility, and the disposition to spend a majority of your life with one person. The subject of cohabitation is a popular one among many college students, upperclassmen, and middle aged divorced individuals in this day and age. In this essay we will be looking at the detailed facts in why people cohabit before they are married, why they do it and most importantly why cohabitation is not considered immoral behavior in the twenty first century as it was 40 years ago. This research will also contain real individual perspectives which will widen our thoughts and assumptions behind the theory of cohabitation. In today’s society there are many couples that are living together before getting married. The US Census Bureau calls cohabitation POSSLQ (pronounced possel-kews), which is understood as â€Å"shaking up†. The number of unmarried couples in the U. S. has increased from 0. 4 million in 1960 to almost 7 million in 2008. In the mid 1990’s more than 60 percent of American’s cohabited. (Benokraitis, pg. 246) There are advantages and disadvantages when considering cohabitation. Some of the rewards of living together before marriage are some such as getting to know your partner better, learning about one's ability/habits, if they are able to satisfy your expectations, finding common grounds, and most of all to gain that special commitment with one another. On the other end there are disadvantages in living together before marriage, some being, not having much of personal space, religious outlooks, not being able to handle fights in a proper manner, going against family values, and most of all doing it for the wrong reasons. Almost half of young Americans say they will not marry someone unless they live with them first but on the other hand most Americans reject cohabitation on moral and religious grounds. Cohabitation has increased dramatically from 40 years ago, â€Å"In 1970, about 530,000 couples reportedly lived together outside of marriage. This number increased to 1. 6 million in 1980, 2. 9 million in 1990, 4. 2 million in 1998, and 5. 5 million in the year 2000. † (Diduck, Alison. Marriage and Cohabitation. Aldershot, Hampshire, England: Ashgate, 2008. Print. ) As statistics show, there has been a huge change in our life styles over the years. Unmarried couples over sees 17 percent of all relationships today. This trend is mostly happening in the younger age groups, ages 18 until 30 and for the older age groups the percentage is considerably lower. This is because many cohabiters, if they are still together by then after many years, they tend to eventually get married. There are many different types of cohabitation, the most common ones are, dating cohabitation, premarital cohabitation, trial marriage and substitute marriage. Dating cohabitation usually occurs with young adults sometime during or after college. These young adults take place in cohabiting for a combination of reasons, some being for convenience, sexual needs, companionship, and financial benefits. This kind of relationship is somewhat like being single and for that reason is tends to terminate faster than any other. Premarital cohabitation is a basic â€Å"test† for the couple to see if they are committed enough to move to the next step, which is marriage. Trial marriage is a type of cohabitation for partners that doubt they can succeed in a marriage and everything that it holds. Finally, substitute marriage is a long term relationship between two people living together that don’t plan on getting married. Cohabitation is followed with more detailed than what is classified, but is outlined with these characteristics. This has created a percentage that nine out of ten women will spend one point in their lives in an unmarried cohabiting relationship, an extensively higher percentage than woman who will get married at some point in their life. (Glenn T. Stanton. The Ring Makes All the Difference) This seems to be slowly devaluating the importance of marriage and the secrets involved in it. Also, studies have shown that when individuals are cohabiting they don’t fully understand the adaptation that is needed; this comes from the lack of commitment and stableness for that next step. The cohabitation effect naturally takes place in most situations, people tend to accept their living status with their partner and treat it as a marriage. Cohabiting gives the individual something to hold on to it a relationship which shows they aren’t in a stable environment to begin with. Studies show that woman try holding on to every relationship they are involved in by cohabiting. When this is done woman are usually left pregnant or with children, without a partner and in poverty. Statistics show that woman who cohabit two or more times end up in divorce 141 percent igher than the average woman who only cohabits with the person they marry. Many authors, such as Linda J Waite have made comments stating, â€Å"These tentative and uncommitted relationships are bound together by the ‘cohabitation deal’ rather than the ‘marriage bargain,’ but that deal has costs. † The â€Å"cohabitation deal,† will have especially disappointing outcomes for people who expect it to deliver the same benefits the â€Å"marriage bargain† delivers. People who cohabit often say that marriage is just about a piece of paper. However, that there is quite a bit of difference between being married and living together. † (Waite, Linda J. and Christine Bachrach. The Ties That Bind: Perspectives on Marriage and Cohabitation. ) Results have shown that when couples cohabit together, they’re usually shortly lived, and typically don’t last longer than two years, after that it either goes into the next level which is marriage or dissolves into a break up. There are no signs that cohabitation is forming in a long term alternative to marriage in the United States. Cohabitation still remains in the status of temporary convenience for growing relationships but just because an individual lives with their partner doesn’t mean it’s considered a stable social arrangement between the two. Researchers says that the convenience of moving in together does not compare on the same level to making a thought through decision on committing to one person for the rest of your life. This has nothing to do with just having it on paper or not, people tend to get the statement mixed into the actual concept. The process of getting married includes the commitment, responsibility, maturity, devotion, respect, genuine love and experience that shows this is what you are asking for in a life partner, but not because we can or want to just live together. Marriage basically finalizes that this is the path you picked for yourself and not because it was wanted at the time or an easy change but because it was truly wanted. When two people agree on marriage this shows they are developed enough where they want to share what they have built of themselves with their partner and share that success as they grow together rather than trying to complete one another without much thought. This is what separates cohabitation and marriage, in marriage one has seen things at its worst and knows the effort it will need to keep the relationship strong and healthy. This is done because both parties have the determined thought through agreement established and because of that, cohabitation will never replace marriage. One opinionated advantage of living with your partner before marriage is getting to know a person that you might marry with. It is important for a person to know almost everything about the other person that he/she is going to get marry to. People need to know how a person is handling his/her life from all aspects such as behavior, emotional, mental, financial and other things before a person decides to get married to them. This can’t be analyzed just by seeing them when out on dates, it is said that it’s important to live together for a while before deciding whether it is the right choice for marriage or not. On another note, unmarried couples do not have the same rights as married individuals. Through my face to face 6 interviews, it was noticed that a cohabiting relationship depends on each individual, their style, family background, emotional status, age, and the morals and values they established for their lives. I interviewed five women from the ages of 23 to 26 and one 30 year old male. When asking interviewee A what her views were towards marriage, she responded saying, â€Å"marriage is similar to a business partner, and both individuals need to be devolved on their own so that both can bring something into the relationship. † This was followed by asking what her views were about couples who live together who are not married, â€Å"I think if you are ready for marriage and starting a family with the person you love then settling to move in with them will not fulfill your goals. Her statement gave me a reminder to the saying â€Å"why buy the cow when the milk is free† this is true, because cohabiting can just be a way of delaying a marriage from happening. Interviewee A- â€Å"cohabitation cannot default into marriage, reason being, marriage is completely different then just living together, this is when your lives become one and so many responsibilities fall into line tha t wouldn’t be talked about if only living together. Does a premarital living arrangement make for a stronger marriage down the line? One should not need to live with their partner first in order to make a stronger marriage. If the couples are in the correct mind set then it should only bring in positives such as love and support. When you come from a certain culture, cohabitation is not accepted, that’s why this also depends on ones background. Marriage is classic, traditional, cultural, and most of all marriage is something sacred between two people, and the idea of cohabitation growing takes away the value of marriage until it vanishes. (Interviewee A, age 25, in a three year relationship, denied her boyfriend from moving in with her, interview took place for 30 minutes face to face on Oct. 30th 2011) Second interview took place with Interviewee B, which responses took a different tour. When asking interviewee B what her views of marriage were, she said â€Å"marria ge is a beautiful thing that joins two people together in order to fulfill a happy life, experiencing things emotionally, physically, mentally, and socially together. Interviewee B is â€Å"pro-cohabitation† because she feels that it is very important to experience life with someone first by living with them to see if it’s a right â€Å"fit† for your life style. She feels this also helps marriages from later on ending up in divorce. When getting in to depth, interviewee B said, â€Å"It is important to first make sure this is a person you love and want to make a future with before moving in, at least know them for a year. Marriage is not defaulted in, living together is the test and if you pass the test then marriage is the next step up! I feel the longer one cohabits, the stronger the relationship is because you know what you’re getting into and continue together on the say level. Depending on the individual, this can create dependence, but shouldn’t if you’re not trying to fill an empty spot in yourself. A lot of people move in together because of family issues, and moving in makes life easier. If men can have it their way, marriage would disappear but it won’t as long as it’s still every little girls dream to have her special wedding. (Interviewee B, age 23, recently came out of a two-year cohabiting experience, boyfriend changed after moving in together; interview took place for 30 minutes face to face on Nov. 1st 2011) Interviewee’s C and D both had the same thoughts towards cohabitation which might be because they both come from the same cultural background. When asking interviewees their views towards marriage they responded, â€Å"A marriage is something sacred betwe en two people in love. God gave us the gift to have feelings for someone else and because of that we should cherish and respect it. Interviewee C, moving in together before marriage defeats the purpose of a marriage and the outcome wouldn’t be the right one. † Interviewee D â€Å"Woman give in too easily and will fall for anything if it has to do with some kind of commitment. Everything comes at the right time, cohabiting is not one of them† Both interviewees, â€Å"It depends on the situation, but a lot of times they default into marriage only because they became so used to the person they live with and other times they don’t get marriage because they moved too fast. Interviewees both agreed that cohabiting builds rapport, love and support but only because one is living with someone they invested in and these characteristics come naturally by default. † Interviewee C, â€Å"I think that one day people will one longer get married because America ac cepts and influences the cohabitation behavior, if its accepted in society, it will take over† Interviewee D, â€Å"I don’t think it will happen unless the law changes, but as of now you don’t get the same benefits when you cohabit which makes them different† Both interviewees said, â€Å"The U. S. is liberal to many different things, which are followed with different cultures and religions. The way one is raised dictates whether or not people are influenced by cohabitation. Everything makes a difference, race, culture, religion, morals, values, and each lifestyle. We value ourselves too much to just live with someone without any ties attached. If you are a strong individual, you wouldn’t find a need to live with someone before marriage. (Interviewees C and D, twin sisters, 24, both still live with their parents at home and will never cohabit under any condition; interview took place for 40 minutes face to face on December 1st 2011) Interviewee E was the final interview which completed the variety of opinions. Interviewee E, â€Å"marriage is something held with a person you trust, value and are able to spend the rest of your life with. Couples who move in together are inexperienced in life and think that moving in with someone will bring them into adulthood, which i t doesn’t. It depends on how old and how ready they are to know if they will marry by default. I think cohabiting will only fail the relationship because should only move in together if they are planning on starting a life and family together not because it’s easy or saves one money. Cohabiting is a train wrack waiting to happen, one will get sick of the other faster than falling in love with them. Nothing can replace the value of marriage except the ones who disrespect the meaning of it. This would be a bad thing if it did happen because we are breaking traditions that have been around for decades. I feel the people who cohabit were not raised well enough to understand what they are actually doing. † (Interviewee E, 30, cohabited with the person he ended up divorcing, interview took place for 45 minutes on December 3rd 2011) Interviewee F, â€Å"marriage is over rated and misleading to someone who’s jumping into a serious relationship. Living with someone before marriage is great because you get the advantage of understanding someone better when living with them. I think by default cohabiters need to make the next step, either get married, or divorce. This will make a strong marriage because it’s basically a marriage just without the legal mess. Anyone who lives with another for a while ends up sharing something naturally because you’re in their presents every moment. Our social structure allows us to do whatever we want, I feel the cohabitation percent will raise which will give people the choice if they want a legal marriage or not. I think the only bad outcome is not getting legal benefits when cohabiting. (Interviewee F, 29, single but has been in 4 different cohabiting relationships, interview took place for 30 minutes on December 3rd 2011) As you can see, all had different perspectives. I believe that comments from interviewee A fell into the same category as researchers and facts based statistics and interviewee B’s outlook was more based on emotions and lack of personally experience. Both interviewees C and D had strong outlooks to their opinion and how cohabitation is looked upon. A greater impact fell with interviewee E because I was able to interview someone who personally experienced the down falls of cohabitation. The after effects from cohabitation seem to lead to a corruption of thoughts on marriage. Studies have also shown that most couples living together before marriage either split up before they are married or wind up in divorce. Interviewee E found out that his partner was cheating during their cohabiting era and in their marriage which caused him to believe cohabiting is built for a failing marriage. Cohabiting has serious consequences for the well-being of an individual and their relationship. In particular, cohabiting is bad for the women because it could mean there are committed to something untrue which will emotionally drain them and keep them from developing into strong independent individuals. Evidence shows that marriage is healthier and better than any other marriage â€Å"form† which should never be out sourced. In conclusions, after the collective research and data gathered, a better overview can be developed in greater detail. What advantages does cohabitation have over marriage? The idea that a cohabiting relationship is equivalent to marriage is undoubtedly unfounded. Research has showed a large difference in the commitment within the two types of relationship. I can see why cohabitation has become more accepted considering society does it for the wrong reasons such as, family and employment issues and trying to find an easy way out, but when doing so this only jeopardizes a future marriage. This is when a new marriage leads to divorce, without self development one is not able to contribute the proper needs and wants in a marriage. Couples want stability and security, this doesn’t happen overnight just because you move in together. A healthy marriage happens when you discover your partner inside and out to the point that you realize you were made to establish a life together, as one. Work Cited 1) Benokraitis, Nijole V. Marriages ; Families: Changes, Choices, and Constraints. 7th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2011. Print. 2) Ihara, Toni Lynne. Living Together a Legal Guide for Unmarried Couples. Berkeley: Nolo, 2006. Print. 3) Diduck, Alison. Marriage and Cohabitation. Aldershot, Hampshire, England: Ashgate, 2008. Print. 4) Waite, Linda J. , and Christine Bachrach. The Ties That Bind: Perspectives on Marriage and Cohabitation. Vol. 10. New York: Aldine De Gruyter, 2000. Print. 5) Interviewee A, age 25, in a 3 year relationship, denied her boyfriend from moving in with her, interview took place for 30 minutes face to face on Oct. 30th 2011 6) Interviewee B, age 23, just got out of a 2 year cohabitation, boyfriend changed after them moved in together, interview took place for 30 minutes face to face on Nov. st 2011 7) Interviewee C, 24, still lives with parents at home and will never cohabit under any condition; interview took place for 40 minutes face to face on December 1st 2011 8) Interviewee D, 24, still lives with parents at home and will never cohabit under any condition; interview took place for 40 minutes face to face on December 1st 2011 9) Interviewee E, 30, cohabited with the person he ended up divorcing, interview took place for 45 minute s on December 3rd 2011 10) Interviewee F, 29, single but has been in 4 different cohabiting relationships, interview took place for 30 minutes on December 3rd 2011 11) Cohabitation, Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage in the United States. Hyattsville, MD: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 2002. Print. 12) Landale, Nancy S. Statistics on Cohabitation, Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage in the United States. S. l. : S. n. , 2002. Print. Ser. 23. 13) â€Å"Statistics on Living Together Before Marriage. †Ã‚  Ray Fowler . org. Web. 06 Nov. 2011. ;http://www. rayfowler. org/2008/04/18/statistics-on-living-together-before-marriage/;.

The Psychology of a Serial Killer and Abuse - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 524 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2019/07/01 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Serial Killer Essay Did you like this example? Serial killers are the result of a wide range of things, one factor that is shared is abuse. Profoundly awful encounters, particularly amid youth, can have a considerably more profound effect in grown up life. They can shape a persons identity and life decisions. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Psychology of a Serial Killer and Abuse" essay for you Create order This conduct ingrains in the childs sentiments of embarrassment and defenselessness, emotions which they will later try to impart in their exploited people. Nonetheless, its critical to consider going ahead that numerous kids have endured maltreatment and did not wind up being serial killers. Thus, while abuse is by all accounts an ongoing theme and some way or another identified with culpability, it should not be viewed as the sole cause of a serial killer. Serial killer, Edmund Kemper despised women, he killed a few individuals from his own family and six young women in the Santa Cruz, California, during the 1970s. Conceived in Burbank, California, his parents separated from when he was 9 years of age and his alcoholic mother pointed the finger at him for the separation. She was excessively condemning Edmund and constrained him to live in the basement of the house so he could not accompany his sisters. Since early on, Edmund fantasized about murdering his own mom which led him to tormenting cats to discharge his dissatisfaction. At the age of 15, he was sent to live with his grandparents on their homestead and they took his rifle since he wouldnt quit murdering animals. Edmund turned his anger on his grandparents, shooting them to death. As a grown up, weighing more than 250 lbs, he exploited people both mentally and physically. He ended the lives of ten women and in spite of the fact that his safeguard group attempted to look for the not blameworthy by reason of madness he was ordered at legitimately normal. Edmund is currently in jail at the California Medical Facility. Edmund abusive relationship can be seen as the trigger of his killings, his build up frustration from his mothers lack of interest in him caused him to take it out on all women firmly because they were a reflection of his abusive mother. Another example of someone with a abusive childhood that become a serial killer is Mary Bell. Mary Bell was an English serial killer conceived in Glasgow, Scotland, where she shared a one room house with her mom. As a young lady, Mary would observer her mom, who functioned as a prostitute participate in acts with her customers frequently in the same room her daughter slept in. Her mom had made endeavors to slaughter Mary at a young age, yet rather, she understood there was additional cash to be made prostituting her own daughter. Mary Bell became a killer when she was just 11 years old. She strangled, mutilated and killed two young boys, 4 year old Martin Brown and 3 year old Brian Howe, in 1968. Following her conviction, Judge Justice Cusack said she was very grave risk to other children and sentenced to juvenile prison. Since her release, she has been granted a new identity and is believed to be living in the North East of England with a family of her own.