Canadian cities Essay Example for Free

Canadian cities Essay This piece of essay will answer whether there are ghettos in Canadian cities and which are these cities and why them not the others. What are the main causes of ghettos and what the authorities are doing about this issue? Ghettos in Canadian Cities. There has been an increase of minority groups in most of the Canadian cities. The minority groups are linked to poverty or to be exact low income and neighbourhood distress. It has been realized that the emerging ghettos in Canadian cities are in line with what is witnessed in the United States which is brought about by racial segregation especially directed to the black people. The other cause of growing ghettos in Canadian cities is the immigration and the cost living. Many people cannot afford to live in expensive apartments or rather they choose to live in low income houses. There is a remarkable growth of the minority population which depends on where the people or the immigrants come from, their countries of origin. In this minority group there is a high birth rate hence this increases the number of people or the population of poor and jobless people in many towns. However, in the United States the definition of a ghetto is, a residential part in the town or district that is concentrated by a certain ethic group and many or the majority of the members live in poor conditions and rarely get all the basic needs. Many of these ghettos are establishing near rich estates because the low income earning people depend on the rich people from rich neighborhoods. Many of these people who have been subjugated to the ghettos are the blacks and the Hispanics. A research study is going on and the commonly used terminology is to refer to this people who stay in the ghetto. Names like, immigrants, ethnic communities and they are also referred to as racialized groups. As the ghettos or the minority increase in number the more it violates the traditional ecological models that used to see immigrants and ethnic groups integrating geographically and assimilating through culture. There is confusion in many Canadian cities because of the definition as some say enclaves as others insist that these are ghettos. But an intriguing issue is, there is a difference between an enclave and a ghetto. In a ghetto people can be from so many ethnic backgrounds that are poor and there living standards very low and an enclave is the same but people are from the same ethnical background. There is ambiguity when the relationship between ethnic and segregation and concentrated poverty need definitions in connection with ghettos. The face of Canadian cities has been totally changing since the change in the immigration policy in the 1960s. The majority of the Canadian population was born in Asia, Africa and West Indies and many the countries from these regions are poor. The growing poverty level in Canada is pushing many people to high poverty neighbourhoods. Canadian cities like Vancouver and Toronto are the ones experiencing the life of ghettos and coincidentally these are the cities with a large number of immigrants from Asia and Africa respectively. The proximity of Vancouver to the Asian neighbours put it in this situation.

Toyota Prius vs Honda Insight :: Cars Automobiles Environmental Essays

Toyota Prius vs Honda Insight This paper aims at examining on Toyota and Honda’s current environmental control systems for next century’s energy vehicles, comparing released the echo automobile, Prius, Toyota and Insight, Honda. Specification Prius was released in December 1997 in Japan in order to reduce emissions in urban areas, which startled the world. The Japan-market Prius, which has sold 35,000 units, was optimized for "stop-and-go" driving, so it needed some tuning to meet the requirements of the U.S. market. In the U.S., motorists typically drive faster for longer distances, and vehicles have stricter emissions requirements. The Prius, a four-door sedan that seats five, is designed to minimize tailpipe emissions and get excellent mileage for a car its size. It meets California's very stringent SULEV standard (super ultra-low emission vehicle), which allows only 10 percent of the smog-forming exhaust gases as the ULEV standard. To reduce emissions, the Prius operates without running the gasoline engine at speeds below 13-25 mph. The car decides which driving mode to operate in based on how it is being driven, the charge level in the batteries and driving conditions. It never needs to be plugged in to recharge; the onboard generator automatically charges the batteries when necessary. The retail price is about $23000, which is reasonable price in market now. Honda Insight, two-door seats is a simplified parallel hybrid which is superior in fuel efficiency and is known for being a â€Å"hybrid gasoline-electric propelled car. Fuel efficiency of Insight precedes 7km per 1l of the Prius. Honda jumped to the top of fuel efficiency competition. The Insight also meets California's Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle (ULEV) standards, which measures other emissions. The fuel efficiency is important in reducing consumption of non-renewable resources and green gas emissions, developing future automotive technologies because of limited range problems, battery electric or fuel cell electric cars will need to be very efficient to be successful in the marketplace Honda improved fuel expensive of the gasoline engine itself and developed the motor/generator which becomes auxiliary power, furthermore adopted aerodynamic, light and the aluminum alloy body make inherently low energy vehicles.

The New Digital Era called “MP3 Technology”

Downloading of music has been a long time subject of piracy. In the 1920’s, radio stations played records that are not tracked. It is a not-so obvious manner of piracy but did impact writers who were losing money due to public performance of their works without proper accountability. No one was making money through this procedure but only radio stations via their sponsors. (Wicknick, par. 1) With this, the performance rights societies including ASCAP and BMI worked with the Congress and the FCC to change legislation to ensure that radio stations will track airplay and pay blanket licenses that were given to writers based on airplay. (Wicknick, par. 1) It is impossible to copy a record before the invention of blank tape. Its either you bought it or borrow a copy and played it until the needle lost its tip. (Wicknick, par. 3) In the mid 1960’s, even after the invention of blank tapes, copying a record is sill a clunky process. (Wicknick, par. 3) In the advent of cassette tape, people learned to do dubbing. But marketing of these tapes are low because it is still evident that it is dub due to sonic integrity has been compromised. ASCAP and BMI, together with the FCC, they began to collect blanket license fees on the sale of blank media and give them to writers and publisher members. (Wicknick, par. 4) In 1982, in the faà §ade of CD in Europe, Japan and in the United States by 1983, it was read-only. Burning to a CD is impossible before. But advancement in technology made it possible. In the year of 2003, you can burn CD from mp3 and sources like iTunes. However, MP3 and iTunes do charge for licensing, worked out deals and propose duplication allowances. (Wicknick, par. 5) The onslaught of the digital wave in 1999 started with the newly created MP3 file sharing software called Napster, stated Catherine Edwards, in her article â€Å"The Napster Challenger.†Ã‚   Lee Bockhorn, in his article â€Å"MP3 and Me: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love Online Music File Sharing (sort of)† stated that on one side of the wave is the estimated 60 million MP3 Internet users that enjoy the advantages of ala carte collection choice, downloading these selections for free and testing music before purchasing. On the other side are the artists and recording companies making strong claims for illegal sharing of copyrighted material states John Healey and Jeff Leeds in their article â€Å"Tone Deaf to the Moral Dilemma?†Ã‚   The new MP3 file sharing technology has brought to us into a new digital age madness designed for music lovers.   Claiming violation of copyright laws, the greedy recording companies and music artists do not wish to give up the present business structure and refuse to embrace the exploding expansion of digital technology that will allow ‘ala carte purchases’. The start of this digital age software began with a 19-year-old freshman at Northeastern University in Boston in 1999.   His name is Shawn Fanning.   He revolutionized the music industry, developing a software program called Napster.   Napster allows music fans to share and download music files via the Internet for free.   Shawn received $15 million to start the corporation and is now a famous CEO (Edwards 160). Then, one and a half years later, in 2001, 2 famous bands, Metallica and Dr. Dre, sued Napster. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued as well, claiming Napster violated record label copyrights.   This case is still on appeal.   Since this time, Napster has joined with BMG Entertainment (a $50 million dollar deal) offering a new fee-based system (Edwards) The RIAA has been taking drastic measures to limit piracy. Consumers of music sees file-sharing or downloading as the wave of the future and legal in their own right. The lawsuits include a twelve year old for downloading contents online and an 80 year-old grandfather who were sued for his computer activity wherein he claimed that he don’t even know how to turn a computer on. Many of the grandparents bought computer for their grandchild as a treat whenever they come to visit their place. But a twelve year old may be well aware on the usage of the computer technology as well as a graduate student but doesn’t know or understand the violations of what they have done. (Wicknick, par. 2) The next approach for RIAA is to target college students and parents with further lawsuits alleging copyright violations.   â€Å"One goal is to persuade parents to crack down on their children’s file sharing before an entire generation comes to expect music to be free† (Healey and Leeds 175).   This may prove to be a futile effort with the millions of Internet users copying music for free on the new sites that have popped up, such as Kazaa or Limewire.   Also, many parents condone students’ downloading even though it’s unethical.   RIAA lawsuits will attempt to target the Internet account that is used to share the file (Healey and Leeds 177).   These lawsuits may change the attitudes of 12-22 year-olds, that when surveyed said that 70% of them would stop if at risk of a fine or jail (Healey and Leeds 178). According to the Pew Internet Project’s national survey of adult Internet users conducted last January-February 2005 resulted that about 7 million adults downloaded files from someone’s iPod or MP3 player. (Madden and Lee par. 2) Approximately, 10 million people get their music and video files through email and instant messages. But there are people who use both the same sources. Other alternative sources of downloading include music and movie websites, blogs and online reviews. There is also a legislation being pushed in Congress by the record companies.   If approved, it would use software to flood peer-to-peer sharing with dummy files, search public folders for illegally copies music and block users from downloading.   Even though it’s difficult to empathize with rich artists and greedy record companies, it is still, according to law, an illegal practice to share and download copyrighted music online.   Millions of people through MP3 technology are sharing files, making the concept of ‘fair use’ ridiculous (Bockhorn 163). Further in his article, Bockhorn writes of his personal exposure to the Napster era.   At the start of the Napster take-off he felt that it just wasn’t right to not pay an artist for his/her music.   He explains that his first temptation came after attending a Norah Jones concert.   He later downloaded her performance of the ‘Tennessee Waltz’ thru I-Tunes. His justification was that he had paid to see the concert and had bought previous albums (Bockhorn 162).   In a forum done by eight graders, some students thought that the music industries have huge incomes and it would not hurt if they will get a song or two from an album through the internet. A student said that the artist will still have an income because they are still buying T-shirts and watch their concerts. (Hafner, par. 13) Curiosities about MP3 file sharing, lead to Bockhorn’s downloading of Limewire, a successor to Napster.   He agrees that it is unquestionably, great technology, without paying a fee.   Drawbacks to MP3 are availability of music, modem connection speed, and the guilt of acquiring music without paying.   â€Å"If I want to download My Cherie Amour, Stevie Wonder should get a cut of whatever price a true market . . . determines the song is worth . . .† (Bockhorn 162). Currently, Bockhorn’s primary concern is that MP3 technology has definitely warped the minds of users copying illegal files to build their music collection.   But, why does the music lover continue to partake?   Number one because of choice and number two because it’s free (Bockhorn 163).   Most people will agree that it’s illegal but will continue to do it.   â€Å"Like countless millions, Miriam Philips felt no guilt in downloading music from a shared campus folder† (Healey and Leeds 175).   Philips offers no sympathy for the artist and the record company, â€Å"They’re rich, they can deal with it†, (Philips via Healey and Leeds 175). According to a 13-year old girl, if you wanted a song or two in a certain album, it is not a big deal.(Hafner, par. 3) However, when someone consistently downloaded an artist whole CD, it might be the right time to call them thieves. Almost all of the houses here in the US have Internet-connected computers in their homes. A student even asked that if downloading of music is really illegal, why do PCs were sold with CD burners? (Hafner, par. 18) Downloading of music through CD burning is very convenient especially to students who were mostly doing it.   Just a few clicks away, they will be able to have the songs they wanted. (Hafner, par. 9) Though some of these people knew that they are violating the law, but they can’t afford to give up convenience and less expensive or the free copies of the recordings of their own choice. On the other hand, there are some advantages to the downloading frenzy.   This technology has prompted some users to purchase CD's based on a new interest in a particular type of music.   It is able to give a taste of a certain type of music or unknown band before purchasing an entire CD.   Users will find that if they’re downloading more than 2-3 songs they will probably go out and buy the entire album. Internet users will also argue that it is difficult at times to locate a particular piece of music that they’re looking for.   Also, this activity is for personal use, not resale (Healey and Leeds 176).   There is also no evidence that MP3 file sharing has dramatically hurt CD sales.   In 2001, sales dropped 10% and in 2002 sales dropped 7% (Bockhorn 163). There are news and write ups on lawsuits for music-downloading like the Napsters and Metallica lawsuits but possible loss of revenue for recording industry were not perceived. Music-downloading is hurting the businesses of music retailers. While downloaders are getting music for free through downloading it from internet or MP3s, it is a loss of income for massive music retail outlets. (Bestul, par. 5) People resigned from buying or purchasing music and switch over to downloading it from the computer instead. What they haven’t thought about is the income that music retailers or outlets will lose every time they download the music for free from computer or MP3 instead of buying a CD from retail outlets. In attempting to defend this illegal behavior, consumers will argue that corrupt record companies refuse to embrace technology that will allow ‘ala carte’ purchases.   Consumers wish to purchase the one or two songs from an album that are worthy of purchase.   This choice could lead to the extinction of great albums such as the Beatles’ Sgt. Peppers album (Bockhorn 163).   Bockhorn believes that people want to do the right thing, and hopes that record companies will provide us options for subscription or ala carte, but thus far they have been very reluctant.   If record companies would join the new technology, all of us could rest easier know that the artist got his/her share (Bockhorn 164). It is believe to be impossible to stop the downloading of music because it is the fad as of this era. Aside from the fact that many people are music lovers, the technology that we have today is unstoppable. Advancement in technology might be the reason why people can come up in this kind of technique in getting what they want for free or at a lesser cost with much ease. Maybe in the future, we might have other ways or means of downloading music or files in a more convenient way based on how technology progress on every generation. Future growth of MP3 digital technology is yet to be determined, with many changes to come.   Millions of Internet users each day have access to use of this technology, either through free or paid Internet sites.   Consumers do have a choice, the questions remains to be, how many will lean toward their obligation of legal choice.   Future enforcement of the free technology won’t be effective unless the music industry offers a legal alternative to file sharing. References Bestul, Michael J. (11 December 2003). â€Å"Lost in the controversy.† Blogcritics.com Retrieved last October 19, 2006. Websites: http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/11/082220.php Bockhorn, Lee.   â€Å"MP3 and Me: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love Online Music File-Sharing (sort of).† The Weekly Standard 16 October 2002 Edwards, Catherine. â€Å"The Napster Challenge.† Insight on the News January 2001 Hafner, Katie (19 September 2003). â€Å"Is it wrong to share your music? (Discuss).† The New York Times Retrieved last October 19, 2006. Website: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/teachers/featured_articles/20030919friday.html Healey, John, and Jeff Leeds. â€Å"Tone Deaf to the Moral Dilemma?† The Los Angeles Times 2 September 2003 Madden, Mary and Rainie, Lee (25 March 2005). â€Å"Music and Video Downloading Moves Beyond P2P.† Pew Internet and American Life Project Retrieved last October 19, 2006. W Website: http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/153/report_display.asp Wicknick, Darcie-Nicole. â€Å"The RIAA Muic Downloading Controversy: Both Sides of the Record.† MusicBizAdvice.com Retrieved last October 19, 2006. Websites: http://www.musicbizadvice.com/a_little_history_on_music_piracy%20.htm http://www.musicbizadvice.com/the_music_downloaders_point_of_view.htm http://www.musicbizadvice.com/RIAA_Music_Downloading_Controversy.htm ; ; ; ;

The adoption rights for same sex marriages - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1299 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2019/07/10 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Gay Adoption Essay Same Sex Marriage Essay Did you like this example? Before the 1850s, adoption was an informal process where all the parties knew each other. The first adoption law passed in Texas was in 1850 and it required the adoption process to be filed with the county clerk. Adoptions were originally designed to help infertile, middle-class, and largely white couples but over time adoption process were forced to change to adapt to social needs. These changes have been occurring due to a shortage in adoption. Same sex families aspire to have a family of their own just like heterosexual couples whether it be through adoption, foster care, artificial insemination, or other resources. And because of the shortage in adoption, states and the nation have started to recognize these marriages and made adoption one of the top choices to helping them form a family. It has become important that both parents become recognized. The second parent has been gaining recognition mostly because if something happens to the first parent the states do no want for the child to go back to a foster home. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The adoption rights for same sex marriages" essay for you Create order Many myths surround same sex marriages. The most common one is that many believe is that children who grow up with same sex couples will not grow up to be as successful as children in heterosexual marriages. Children are going back and forth in foster homes which has been causing more mental health issues. The children living in this situation are at greater risk of emotional problems, delinquency, substance abuse, and academic problems. Some people also believe that just because a child grows up with same sex parents they will also grow up to be gay or lesbian. Texas is a conservative state. Our ideal image of a family is one consisting of a mother and father with biological children. Texans as a state chooses to live by the norms of society leading to the discrimination towards same sex couples. Members of the LGBT community are cataloged as immoral based on the religious beliefs of society and they have also been said to have a mental illness because of their sexual preferences. Same sex marriage acceptance has been a controversial topic for the last few years that has slowly been gaining acceptance. Same sex couples have been fighting to have the same recognition and rights as a heterosexual marriage. These couples have held protests, conventions, and have filed a considerable number of lawsuits towards various government institutions and others to have what they consider their rights also recognized. In the case of James Obergefell v. Richard Hodges in Ohio, the plaintiff Obergefell along with other same sex couples from the states of Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee sued their respective state agencies to challenge what they believed were their constitutional rights. This case led to the historic event that occurred on June 26, 2015 when the Supreme Court declared same sex marriage legal in all fifty states on the same terms and conditions of the opposite sex couples. This meant that the Supreme Court agreed with the Constitution stating, that the right to marry is fundamental under the 14th Amendment, and that it is guaranteed by the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. The 14th Amendment was originally meant to grant citizenship and equal civil rights to slaves. Before 1996, the 14th Amendment did not fully protect or give rights to the LGBT community. After the strike down on a Colorado state constitutional amendment, the Supreme court started using the term fundamental rights. The government wanted to keep the LGBT rights to minimum protection. The ban of same sex marriage was lifted by this verdict, but the Texas Attorney Generals office argued that marriage is a right that comes with benefits the state is entitled to control. Texas is the sixth state to pass a law limiting the adoption rights for same sex marriages. Texas birth certificates only allow a mother and a fathers name to be listed. If the non biological same sex parent wants to be recognized as a legal parent, they would have to go through the adoption process but just because they are couple it does not mean that the adoption will be approved. The Freedom to Serve Children Act was signed on June 15, 2017 by governor Greg Abbott. The Freedom to Serve Children Act states that state funded, and religious based foster agencies can turn down an adoption application for these couples because of the agencies beliefs without being punished. It also prevents the state from denying the agencies an application or contract, denying them a license, or terminating a child welfare provider because their beliefs. If these agencies practice these moves, they could lead themselves to shut down the agencies. Many people do not believe that this act does not discriminate because these religious based agencies are obligated to refer same sex marriages to other agencies that could help them. Many same sex couples think that they will have a tough time adopting after being turned down, but there are other agencies that are willing to help them and place a child in a loving home. According to the Lifelong Adoptions website, more birthparents are choosing to place their children with same sex couples making the process easier for them. Like any other couple looking to adopt, they do have to go thru the process such as having an adoption home study done, attend a pre-adoption classes, and they do not believe that just because a child grows up in a same sex marriage home that they will turn out to be gay themselves. Adoption agencies and social workers acknowledge that same sex adoption is rising overall throughout the United States, but some still show concern as to how will the child react as they are growing up. Some of the concerns included are how will the couple explain to their child that they have 2 mothers or 2 fathers, will the child feel embarrassed, or will they go through bullying and being teased by their peers. I believe in the love is love idea, and that every child should be given the opportunity to have a home and a family even if is with two parents of the same gender who prove themselves capable to raise a family. I would prefer to see a child being raised and loved by them rather than their blood relatives keeping them and making them feel unwanted or keeping them and maybe not having the means to support them. And I would not want a child going thru several foster homes or being in an adoption agency throughout their childhood creating an unstable environment for them which could lead them to not knowing who they really want to be in life. Adoption processes should be redesigned to help the process for same sex couples be easier and so that may not face anymore discrimination. If they prove to be capable and apt to care for a child, then they should be allowed to. Nearly everyday we see cases of biological heterosexual parents abusing of their children in diverse ways. I personally have not seen any reporting of a same sex parent doing atrocities to children. We are not hurting the same sex couples with giving them a hard time, the ones being hurt are the children who have to suffer going from home to home while in foster care. Hispanics overall still do not accept gay marriage mostly because of religious views. About 50% more less, are Catholics, and they believe that a family should be created and raised by a man and a woman. However, the Catholic Church has started to accept the LGBTQ community. With time, Hispanics are expected to be except marriages, because the older generations will die out. The young will view it as normal because they are growing up with this modern day society.