Say No to Columbus Day Essay Example for Free

Say No to Columbus Day Essay It is my belief that although many people celebrate the holiday of Columbus Day, that it should be celebrated because Christopher Columbus was not who he had seemed to be. I have learned that not only did he not know where he was, but he wasn’t even the first to discover the New World. He also committed a mass genocide against the Arawak’s. Columbus Day is a U.S. holiday that commemorates the landing of Christopher Columbus in the New World on October 12, 1492. Columbus Day was unofficially celebrated in a number of cities and states as early as the 18th century but did not become a federal holiday until the 1937. For many, the holiday is a way of both honoring Columbus achievements and celebrating Italian-American heritage. Throughout its history, Columbus Day and the man who inspired it have generated controversy, and many alternatives to the holiday have appeared in recent years When Columbus first arrived at the Bahamas, he was greeted by the Arawak Indians who showered him and his crew with gifts and food. After being around them for some time, he decided to take the search for valuable items to a new level. He took some of the people by force and demanded to know where the materials like gold and such were located and then he forced them to show him and start to find them, sort of like slaves. He also learned that the Arawak people were so generous that they would give him anything he asked them for; he then proceeded to ask them for nearly all of their belongings which had any monetary value. The fact of him doing this is easily enough to prove that he was just out for money and did not care about any of the Arawak Indians or his crew for that matter. He is said to have been greedy enough to take credit for finding land even though a crew member, Rodrigo, had found it first and it is also said that he is to have taken the $10,000 yearly pension for life (Source B). The second treachery Columbus was a part of was the taking of the Arawak Indians as slaves and servants, here is a quote from his journal: â€Å"They would make fine servants†¦With fifty men we could subjugate them and make them do whatever we want† (Source B). This just shows that he is a man who doesn’t care about other people’s feelings and is perfectly fine with killing and enslavement, two things America is against. In total, the records show that originally, Columbus rounded up 1,500 Indians, he chose 500 as the best, killed the other 1,000, and 200 died on the ship due to poor living conditions and starvation. The 300 who were left were auctioned off as slaves in Spain. Nearly all of the rest of the Arawak people were killed by foreign disease. A third and final reason why we should not celebrate Columbus Day is because Christopher Columbus did not find North America on purpose and he was also not the first to find the continent. Leif Ericsson of the Vikings found North America and had already established a settlement in Nova Scotia by the time Christopher Columbus found his way here which just proves that his skills as a navigator and a sailor were not even very great, if he kept sailing to Asia and had not found North America, he would have done a circle around the world, missed Asia and ran into Africa. Many Americans view Columbus as a heroic figure whom is celebrated every year. Children look up to him, as an amazing person for being able to â€Å"discover† America and citizens are able to spend a whole day off from work/school to reflect on his greatness. However, this greatness should in no way be glorified, because it is absurd to call Columbus a hero. Columbus had taken credit for things that he didn’t accomplish, brutally abused Native Americans and caused slave trade, which led to mistreatment of Native Americans for years to come. I strongly believe that Columbus day should not be celebrated because of the torture, slavery, and lying that was caused by him. Columbus had taken credit for things that he didn’t accomplish. He wasn’t the first to discover America since there were already people living there  and others had known about this land. Also, there was a myth being taught at schools that had said Columbus was the one to prove the earth was round. Many educated Europeans had already believed in the world not being flat during the time of Columbus. However, those who didn’t agree with this statement mocked the ones who did. Lastly, Columbus was not the first non-American to discover the new world. â€Å"There is, indeed, considerable evidence that people from all around the world, including Europe, had visited the Americas for trade, fishing, refuge, and even settlement.† (Source: Why We Should Abolish Columbus Day by G Rebecca Dobbs) Therefore, Columbus had not truly succeeded in the things we know about him and did more negative things than positive. Columbus Day, a holiday dedicated to the famous explorer for his achievement of arriving in the New World. We construct plays, arrange parades, and have erected monuments of Columbus to praise him for his discovery; for he had triggered the wave of European interest in the Americas. When it comes to the roots of Columbus’s arrival in Hispaniola, most people think that he arrived on an island with primitive natives who gladly gave up their land to him†¦without so much as a complaint. Only recently have the true accounts of his expedition come to light. Nowadays, the innocent and naive tale of Columbus’s discovery has turned into a story about a horrifying and unjust conquering of a land, and the domination of its inhabitants. When Christopher Columbus arrived in Hispaniola in 1492, he had thought that he arrived in India, and he expected for the land to be inhabited by the Indians. Instead he landed in present day Hispaniola, which was home to the friendly, and defe nseless, Arawak people (also known as the Taino people). They had never seen Europeans before with their giant ships, extravagant clothing, and strange language; so they were excited and interested in meeting Columbus and his crew. The Arawak brought the Europeans gifts, food, and water. They wanted to open their home to the newcomers, and hoped to be able to become acquaintances with them and that they would trade with each other. Instead of returning the natives’ generosity and kindness, Columbus treated them cruelly, by making them slaves and forcing them to work to exhaustion and death, slaughtering thousands of men, women, and children till there was only five hundred Arawaks left by 1550, and not giving them  enough food, so they died from famish. Christopher Columbus has been viewed as a hero for several centuries. Children in elementary schools all over the nation are taught that he discovered America. However, there were many other people who were indigenous to the land already and the Vikings arrived in America almost 500 years before Columbus. Christopher Columbus, as it turned out, was responsible for widespread genocide; he permitted his men to rape, murder, mutilate and enslave indigenous people. The evil deeds of Columbus far outweigh the few accomplishments he achieved. It doesn’t make sense for the United States to recognize this supposed Christian with a national holiday, so America should stop celebrating Columbus Day. The initial recorded Columbus Day celebration in the United States was on October 12, 1792. Nevertheless, the first official Columbus Day happened in 1892, when President Harrison issued a proclamation for Americans to commemorate the day. The Knights of Columbus lobbied state legislatures to legalize the holiday. Colorado did so on April 1, 1907. New York followed suit in 1909. In 1971, Columbus Day was designated as a federal holiday on the second Monday of October (Library of Congress).

The New International Economic Order Essay -- Economy Economics Essays

The New International Economic Order The gap between the rich and the poor is growing more and more every day. Something has got to be done to solve this issue. In 1974 members of the Third World gathered together at the United Nations. Their purpose was to find the answers to solve the gap between the rich and the poor. A total of seventy-seven members proposed the NIEO, hoping this might solve the gap. The NIEO stands for the New International Economic Order. Its aim was to bring the rich and the poor countries together to discuss issues that might bring the gap closer together. The negotiations of the NIEO were called the North and the South Dialog. Eighteen clauses made up the NIEO. These clauses were the changes that the Group of 77 desired. One of the clauses stated that each state would be free to determine their own economic and political system. Unfortunately this did not happen due to the fact that rich countries have taken it among themselves to determine what is right for poor countries. The poor countries do not have a say in what they want. The second clause stated that each state it to control their own natural resources. This means that rich countries will no longer be able to control poor countries natural resources like they had been doing. This causes a huge problem with rich countries who gather natural resources from these countries and the corporations who make money off of the natural resources. The rich countries do not like to see this take place. One example has to do with Chili and their copper. The copper of Chili is controlled by IT&T. During a presidential election in 1970, a man by the name of Allende said that if he was elected he would nationalize the copper. He was soon elected and then... ...ms. One example deals with the AIDS epidemic in Ghauna. Twenty-five percent of the people in Ghauna have the AIDS virus. The AIDS virus is spreading even faster in the Third World Countries because of the lack of modern technology. The Third World Countries feel if the United States finds a shot that will prevent AIDS, the shot should be a Heritage of Mankind which means everyone will be intitled to it. The United States says no because they did the research and spent the time and money. Overall, the Group of 77 had very good intentions. They saw that there needed to be something done to help solve the gap between the rich and the poor. The only problem is that the rich countries are far to ahead of the game. They will not allow many of the proposals to go into action. This leads to an even larger gap between the rich and the poor that is still on the increase.

Acca F7

Answers Fundamentals Level – Skills Module, Paper F7 (INT) Financial Reporting (International) 1 (a) December 2008 Answers Pedantic Consolidated income statement for the year ended 30 September 2008 $’000 98,000 (72,000) ––––––– 26,000 (3,000) (7,600) (500) ––––––– 14,900 (5,400) ––––––– 9,500 ––––––– Revenue (85,000 + (42,000 x 6/12) – 8,000 intra-group sales) Cost of sales (w (i)) Gross profit Distribution costs (2,000 + (2,000 x 6/12)) Administrative expenses (6,000 + (3,200 x 6/12)) Finance costs (300 + (400 x 6/12)) Profit before tax Income tax expense (4,700 + (1,400 x 6/12)) Profit for the year Attributable to:Equity holders of the parent Non-controlling interest (((3,000 x 6/12) – (800 URP + 200 depreciation)) x 40%) (b) 9,300 200 –––à ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œ 9,500 ––––––– Consolidated statement of financial position as at 30 September 2008 Assets Non-current assets Property, plant and equipment (40,600 + 12,600 + 2,000 – 200 depreciation adjustment (w (i))) Goodwill (w (ii)) Current assets (w (iii)) Total assets Equity and liabilities Equity attributable to owners of the parent Equity shares of $1 each ((10, 000 + 1,600) w (ii)) Share premium (w (ii)) Retained earnings (w (iv)) 55,000 4,500 ––––––– 59,500 21,400 ––––––– 80,900 ––––––– 11,600 ,000 35,700 ––––––– 55,300 6,100 ––––––– 61,400 Non-controlling interest (w (v)) Total equity Non-current liabilities 10% loan notes (4,000 + 3,000) 7,000 Current liabilit ies (8,200 + 4,700 – 400 intra-group balance) 12,500 ––––––– 80,900 ––––––– Total equity and liabilities Workings (figures in brackets in $’000) (i) Cost of sales Pedantic Sophistic (32,000 x 6/12) Intra-group sales URP in inventory Additional depreciation (2,000/5 years x 6/12) $’000 63,000 16,000 (8,000) 800 200 ––––––– 72,000 ––––––– The unrealised profit (URP) in inventory is calculated as ($8 million – $5 ·2 million) x 40/140 = $800,000. 1 (ii) Goodwill in Sophistic Investment at cost Shares (4,000 x 60% x 2/3 x $6) Less – Equity shares of Sophistic (4,000 x 60%) – pre-acquisition reserves (5,000 x 60% see below) – fair value adjustment (2,000 x 60%) $’000 (2,400) (3,000) (1,200) –––––– Parent’s goodwill Non-controlling interest’s goodwill (per question) Total goodwill The pre-acquisition reserves are: At 30 September 2008 Earned in the post acquisition period (3,000 x 6/12) Alternative calculation for goodwill in Sophistic Investment at cost (as above) Fair value of non-controlling interest (see below) Cost of the controlling interestLess fair value of net assets at acquisition (4,000 + 5,000 + 2,000) Total goodwill Fair value of non-controlling interest (at acquisition) Share of fair value of net assets (11,000 x 40%) Attributable goodwill per question $’000 9,600 (6,600) –––––– 3,000 1,500 –––––– 4,500 –––––– 6,500 (1,500) –––––– 5,000 –––––– 9,600 5,900 ––––––– 15,500 (11,000) –à ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œ 4,500 ––––––– 4,400 1,500 –––––– 5,900 –––––– The 1 ·6 million shares (4,000 x 60% x 2/3) issued by Pedantic would be recorded as share capital of $1 ·6 million and share premium of $8 million (1,600 x $5). $’000 16,000 6,600 (800) 200 (600) –––––– 21,400 ––––––– (iii) Current assets Pedantic Sophistic URP in inventory Cash in transit Intra-group balance (iv) Retained earnings Pedantic per statement of financial position Sophistic’s post acquisition profit (((3,000 x 6/12) – (800 URP + 200 depreciation)) x 60%) (v) Non-controlling interest (in statement of financial position) Net assets per statement of financial position URP in inventory Net fair value adjustment (2,000 – 200) Share of goodwill (per question) 12 $’000 35,400 300 ––––––– 35,700 ––––––– 10,500 (800) 1,800 ––––––– 11,500 x 40% = 4,600 ––––––– 1,500 –––––– 6,100 –––––– (a) Candel – Statement of comprehensive income for the year ended 30 September 2008 $’000 297,500 (225,400) ––––––––– 72,100 (14,500) (21,900) (1,400) ––––––––– 34,300 (11,600) ––––––––– 22,700 Revenue (300,000 – 2,500) Cost of sales (w (i)) Gross profit Distribution costs Administrative expenses (22,200 – 400 + 100 see note below) Finance costs (200 + 1,200 (w (ii))) Profit before tax (Income tax expense (11,400 + (6,000 – 5,800 deferred tax)) Profit for the year Other comprehensive income Loss on leasehold property revaluation (w (iii)) (4,500) ––––––––– Total comprehensive income for the year 8,200 ––––––––– Note: as it is considered that the outcome of the legal action against Candel is unlikely to succeed (only a 20% chance) it is inappropriate to provide for any damages. The potential damages are an example of a contingent liability which should be disclosed (at $2 million) as a note to the financial statements. The unrecoverable legal costs are a liability (the start of the legal action is a past event) and should be provided for in full. (b) Candel – Statement of changes in equity for the year ended 30 September 2008 Balances at 1 October 2007 Dividend Comprehensive incom eBalances at 30 September 2008 (c) Equity shares $’000 50,000 Revaluation reserve $’000 10,000 ––––––– 50,000 ––––––– (4,500) –––––– 5,500 –––––– Retained earnings $’000 24,500 (6,000) 22,700 ––––––– 41,200 ––––––– Total equity $’000 84,500 (6,000) 18,200 ––––––– 96,700 ––––––– $’000 $’000 Candel – Statement of financial position as at 30 September 2008 Assets Non-current assets (w (iii)) Property, plant and equipment (43,000 + 38,400) Development costs 81,400 14,800 –––––––– 96,200 Current assets Inventory T rade receivables 20,000 43,100 ––––––– Total assets Equity and liabilities: Equity (from (b))Equity shares of 25 cents each Revaluation reserve Retained earnings 63,100 –––––––– 159,300 –––––––– 50,000 5,500 41,200 ––––––– Non-current liabilities Deferred tax 8% redeemable preference shares (20,000 + 400 (w (ii))) Current liabilities Trade payables (23,800 – 400 + 100 – re legal action) Bank overdraft Current tax payable Total equity and liabilities 13 6,000 20,400 ––––––– 23,500 1,300 11,400 ––––––– 46,700 –––––––– 96,700 26,400 36,200 –––––––– 159,300 â⠂¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œÃ¢â‚¬â€œ Workings (figures in brackets in $’000) (i) Cost of sales: Per trial balance Depreciation (w (iii)) – leasehold property – plant and equipmentLoss on disposal of plant (4,000 – 2,500) Amortisation of development costs (w (iii)) Research and development expensed (1,400 + 2,400 (w (iii))) (ii) $’000 204,000 2,500 9,600 1,500 4,000 3,800 –––––––– 225,400 –––––––– The finance cost of $1 ·2 million for the preference shares is based on the effective rate of 12% applied to $20 million issue proceeds of the shares for the six months they have been in issue (20m x 12% x 6/12). The dividend paid of $800,000 is based on the nominal rate of 8%. The additional $400,000 (accrual) is added to the carrying amount of the preference shares in the statement of financial position.As these share s are redeemable they are treated as debt and their dividend is treated as a finance cost. (iii) Non-current assets: Leasehold property Valuation at 1 October 2007 Depreciation for year (20 year life) 50,000 (2,500) –––––––– 47,500 (43,000) –––––––– 4,500 –––––––– Carrying amount at date of revaluation Valuation at 30 September 2008 Revaluation deficit Plant and equipment per trial balance (76,600 – 24,600) Disposal (8,000 – 4,000) Depreciation for year (20%) Carrying amount at 30 September 2008 Capitalised/deferred development costs Carrying amount at 1 October 2007 (20,000 – 6,000) Amortised for year (20,000 x 20%)Capitalised during year (800 x 6 months) Carrying amount at 30 September 2008 $’000 52,000 (4,000) –––––––– 48,000 (9,600 ) –––––––– 38,400 –––––––– 14,000 (4,000) 4,800 –––––––– 14,800 –––––––– Note: development costs can only be treated as an asset from the point where they meet the recognition criteria in IAS 38 Intangible assets. Thus development costs from 1 April to 30 September 2008 of $4 ·8 million (800 x 6 months) can be capitalised. These will not be amortised as the project is still in development. The research costs of $1 ·4 million plus three months’ development costs of $2 ·4 million (800 x 3 months) (i. . those incurred before 1 April 2008) are treated as an expense. 3 (a) Equivalent ratios from the financial statements of Merlot (workings in $’000) Return on year end capital employed (ROCE) Pre tax return on equity (ROE) Net asset turnover Gross p rofit margin Operating profit margin Current ratio Closing inventory holding period Trade receivables’ collection period Trade payables’ payment period Gearing Interest cover Dividend cover 20 ·9% 50% 2 ·3 times 12 ·2% 9 ·8% 1 ·3:1 73 days 66 days 77 days 71% 3 ·3 times 1 ·4 times (1,400 + 590)/(2,800 + 3,200 + 500 + 3,000) x 100 ,400/2,800 x 100 20,500/(14,800 – 5,700) 2,500/20,500 x 100 2,000/20,500 x 100 7,300/5,700 3,600/18,000 x 365 3,700/20,500 x 365 3,800/18,000 x 365 (3,200 + 500 + 3,000)/9,500 x 100 2,000/600 1,000/700 As per the question, Merlot’s obligations under finance leases (3,200 + 500) have been treated as debt when calculating the ROCE and gearing ratios. 14 (b) Assessment of the relative performance and financial position of Grappa and Merlot for the year ended 30 September 2008 Introduction This report is based on the draft financial statements supplied and the ratios shown in (a) above.Although covering many aspects of performance and financial position, the report has been approached from the point of view of a prospective acquisition of the entire equity of one of the two companies. Profitability The ROCE of 20 ·9% of Merlot is far superior to the 14 ·8% return achieved by Grappa. ROCE is traditionally seen as a measure of management’s overall efficiency in the use of the finance/assets at its disposal. More detailed analysis reveals that Merlot’s superior performance is due to its efficiency in the use of its net assets; it achieved a net asset turnover of 2 ·3 times compared to only 1 ·2 times for Grappa.Put another way, Merlot makes sales of $2 ·30 per $1 invested in net assets compared to sales of only $1 ·20 per $1 invested for Grappa. The other element contributing to the ROCE is profit margins. In this area Merlot’s overall performance is slightly inferior to that of Grappa, gross profit margins are almost identical, but Grappa’s operating profit ma rgin is 10 ·5% compared to Merlot’s 9 ·8%. In this situation, where one company’s ROCE is superior to another’s it is useful to look behind the figures and consider possible reasons for the superiority other than the obvious one of greater efficiency on Merlot’s part.A major component of the ROCE is normally the carrying amount of the non-current assets. Consideration of these in this case reveals some interesting issues. Merlot does not own its premises whereas Grappa does. Such a situation would not necessarily give a ROCE advantage to either company as the increase in capital employed of a company owning its factory would be compensated by a higher return due to not having a rental expense (and vice versa). If Merlot’s rental cost, as a percentage of the value of the related factory, was less than its overall ROCE, then it would be contributing to its higher ROCE.There is insufficient information to determine this. Another relevant point may be that Merlot’s owned plant is nearing the end of its useful life (carrying amount is only 22% of its cost) and the company seems to be replacing owned plant with leased plant. Again this does not necessarily give Merlot an advantage, but the finance cost of the leased assets at only 7 ·5% is much lower than the overall ROCE (of either company) and therefore this does help to improve Merlot’s ROCE. The other important issue within the composition of the ROCE is the valuation basis of the companies’ non-current assets.From the question, it appears that Grappa’s factory is at current value (there is a property revaluation reserve) and note (ii) of the question indicates the use of historical cost for plant. The use of current value for the factory (as opposed to historical cost) will be adversely impacting on Grappa’s ROCE. Merlot does not suffer this deterioration as it does not own its factory. The ROCE measures the overall efficiency of manage ment; however, as Victular is considering buying the equity of one of the two companies, it would be useful to consider the return on equity (ROE) – as this is what Victular is buying.The ratios calculated are based on pre-tax profits; this takes into account finance costs, but does not cause taxation issues to distort the comparison. Clearly Merlot’s ROE at 50% is far superior to Grappa’s 19 ·1%. Again the issue of the revaluation of Grappa’s factory is making this ratio appear comparatively worse (than it would be if there had not been a revaluation). In these circumstances it would be more meaningful if the ROE was calculated based on the asking price of each company (which has not been disclosed) as this would effectively be the carrying amount of the relevant equity for Victular. GearingFrom the gearing ratio it can be seen that 71% of Merlot’s assets are financed by borrowings (39% is attributable to Merlot’s policy of leasing its pl ant). This is very high in absolute terms and double Grappa’s level of gearing. The effect of gearing means that all of the profit after finance costs is attributable to the equity even though (in Merlot’s case) the equity represents only 29% of the financing of the net assets. Whilst this may seem advantageous to the equity shareholders of Merlot, it does not come without risk. The interest cover of Merlot is only 3 ·3 times whereas that of Grappa is 6 times.Merlot’s low interest cover is a direct consequence of its high gearing and it makes profits vulnerable to relatively small changes in operating activity. For example, small reductions in sales, profit margins or small increases in operating expenses could result in losses and mean that interest charges would not be covered. Another observation is that Grappa has been able to take advantage of the receipt of government grants; Merlot has not. This may be due to Grappa purchasing its plant (which may then be eligible for grants) whereas Merlot leases its plant.It may be that the lessor has received any grants available on the purchase of the plant and passed some of this benefit on to Merlot via lower lease finance costs (at 7 ·5% per annum, this is considerably lower than Merlot has to pay on its 10% loan notes). Liquidity Both companies have relatively low liquid ratios of 1 ·2 and 1 ·3 for Grappa and Merlot respectively, although at least Grappa has $600,000 in the bank whereas Merlot has a $1 ·2 million overdraft. In this respect Merlot’s policy of high dividend payouts (leading to a low dividend cover and low retained earnings) is very questionable.Looking in more depth, both companies have similar inventory days; Merlot collects its receivables one week earlier than Grappa (perhaps its credit control procedures are more active due to its large overdraft), and of notable difference is that Grappa receives (or takes) a lot longer credit period from its suppliers (1 08 days compared to 77 days). This may be a reflection of Grappa being able to negotiate better credit terms because it has a higher credit rating. Summary Although both companies may operate in a similar industry and have similar profits after tax, they would represent very different purchases.Merlot’s sales revenues are over 70% more than those of Grappa, it is financed by high levels of debt, it rents rather than owns property and it chooses to lease rather than buy its replacement plant. Also its remaining owned plant is nearing the end of its life. Its replacement will either require a cash injection if it is to be purchased (Merlot’s overdraft of 15 $1 ·2 million already requires serious attention) or create even higher levels of gearing if it continues its policy of leasing. In short although Merlot’s overall return seems more attractive than that of Grappa, it would represent a much more risky investment.Ultimately the investment decision may be determ ined by Victular’s attitude to risk, possible synergies with its existing business activities, and not least, by the asking price for each investment (which has not been disclosed to us). (c) The generally recognised potential problems of using ratios for comparison purposes are: – – – – – – inconsistent definitions of ratios financial statements may have been deliberately manipulated (creative accounting) different companies may adopt different accounting policies (e. g. use of historical costs compared to current values) different managerial policies (e. . different companies offer customers different payment terms) statement of financial position figures may not be representative of average values throughout the year (this can be caused by seasonal trading or a large acquisition of non-current assets near the year end) the impact of price changes over time/distortion caused by inflation When deciding whether to purchase a company, Victular should consider the following additional useful information: – – – – – 4 in this case the analysis has been made on the draft financial statements; these may be unreliable or change when being finalised.Audited financial statements would add credibility and reliance to the analysis (assuming they receive an unmodified Auditors’ Report). forward looking information such as profit and financial position forecasts, capital expenditure and cash budgets and the level of orders on the books. the current (fair) values of assets being acquired. the level of risk within a business. Highly profitable companies may also be highly risky, whereas a less profitable company may have more stable ‘quality’ earnings not least would be the expected price to acquire a company.It may be that a poorer performing business may be a more attractive purchase because it is relatively cheaper and may offer more opportunity for improving efficienci es and profit growth. (a) A liability is a present obligation of an entity arising from past events, the settlement of which is expected to result in an outflow of economic benefits (normally cash). Provisions are defined as liabilities of uncertain timing or amount, i. e. they are normally estimates. In essence provisions should be recognised if they meet the definition of a liability.Equally they should not be recognised if they do not meet the definition. A statement of financial position would not give a ‘fair representation’ if it did not include all of an entity’s liabilities (or if it did include, as liabilities, items that were not liabilities). These definitions benefit the reliability of financial statements by preventing profits from being ‘smoothed’ by making a provision to reduce profit in years when they are high and releasing those provisions to increase profit in years when they are low.It also means that the statement of financial po sition cannot avoid the immediate recognition of long-term liabilities (such as environmental provisions) on the basis that those liabilities have not matured. (b) (i) Future costs associated with the acquisition/construction and use of non-current assets, such as the environmental costs in this case, should be treated as a liability as soon as they become unavoidable. For Promoil this would be at the same time as the platform is acquired and brought into use. The provision is for the present value of the expected costs and this same amount is treated as part of the cost of the asset.The provision is ‘unwound’ by charging a finance cost to the income statement each year and increasing the provision by the finance cost. Annual depreciation of the asset effectively allocates the (discounted) environmental costs over the life of the asset. Income statement for the year ended 30 September 2008 Depreciation (see below) Finance costs ($6 ·9 million x 8%) Statement of financ ial position as at 30 September 2008 Non-current assets Cost ($30 million + $6 ·9 million ($15 million x 0 ·46)) Depreciation (over 10 years) Non-current liabilities Environmental provision ($6 ·9 million x 1 ·08) (ii) $’000 3,690 552 36,900 (3,690) –––––– 33,210 ––––––– 7,452 If there was no legal requirement to incur the environmental costs, then Promoil should not provide for them as they do not meet the definition of a liability. Thus the oil platform would be recorded at $30 million with $3 million depreciation and there would be no finance costs. However, if Promoil has a published policy that it will voluntarily incur environmental clean up costs of this type (or if this may be implied by its past practice), then this would be evidence of a ‘constructive’ obligation under IAS 37 and the required treatment of the costs would be the same as in part (i) above. 6 5 Year ended/as at: Income statement Depreciation (see workings) Maintenance (60,000/3 years) Discount received (840,000 x 5%) Staff training Statement of financial position (see below) Property, plant and equipment Cost Accumulated depreciation Carrying amount Workings Manufacturer’s base price Less trade discount (20%) Base cost Freight charges Electrical installation cost Pre-production testing Initial capitalised cost 30 September 2006 30 September 2007 30 September 2008 $ $ $ 180,000 270,000 119,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 (42,000) 40,000 –––––––– –––––––– –––––––– 198,000 290,000 139,000 ––––––– –––––––– –––––––– 920,000 (180,000) ––â €“––––– 740,000 –––––––– 920,000 (450,000) –––––––– 470,000 –––––––– 670,000 (119,000) –––––––– 551,000 –––––––– $ 1,050,000 (210,000) –––––––––– 840,000 30,000 28,000 22,000 –––––––––– 920,000 –––––––––– The depreciable amount is $900,000 (920,000 – 20,000 residual value) and, based on an estimated machine life of 6,000 hours, this gives depreciation of $150 per machine hour. Therefore depreciation for the year ended 30 September 2006 is $180,000 ($150 x 1 ,200 hours) and for the year ended 30 September 2007 is $270,000 ($150 x 1,800 hours).Note: early settlement discount, staff training in use of machine and maintenance are all revenue items and cannot be part of capitalised costs. Carrying amount at 1 October 2007 Subsequent expenditure Revised ‘cost’ 470,000 200,000 –––––––– 670,000 –––––––– The revised depreciable amount is $630,000 (670,000 – 40,000 residual value) and with a revised remaining life of 4,500 hours, this gives a depreciation charge of $140 per machine hour. Therefore depreciation for the year ended 30 September 2008 is $119,000 ($140 x 850 hours). 17Fundamentals Level – Skills Module, Paper F7 (INT) Financial Reporting (International) December 2008 Marking Scheme This marking scheme is given as a guide in the context of the suggested answers. Scope is given to markers to award m arks for alternative approaches to a question, including relevant comment, and where well-reasoned conclusions are provided. This is particularly the case for written answers where there may be more than one acceptable solution. Marks 1 (a) (b) Income statement: revenue cost of sales distribution costs administrative expenses inance costs income tax non-controlling interest 11/2 3 1/ 2 1 1/ 2 1/ 2 2 9 Statement of financial position: property, plant and equipment goodwill current assets equity shares share premium retained earnings non-controlling interest 10% loan notes current liabilities Total for question 2 (a) (b) (c) Statement of comprehensive income: revenue cost of sales distribution costs administrative expenses finance costs income tax other comprehensive income 2 5 11/2 1 1 2 2 1/ 2 1 16 25 1 5 1/ 2 11/2 11/2 11/2 1 12 Statement of changes in equity: rought forward figures dividends comprehensive income 1 1 1 3 Statement of financial position: property, plant and equipmen t deferred development costs inventory trade receivables deferred tax preference shares trade payables overdraft current tax payable Total for question 19 2 2 1/ 2 1/ 2 1 1 11/2 1/ 2 1 10 25 3 (a) (b) 1 mark per valid comment up to (c) Marks 8 Merlot’s ratios 1 mark per relevant point 12 Total for question 4 5 25 (a) 1 mark per relevant point 5 (b) (i) explanation of treatment depreciation finance cost non-current asset provision 2 1 2 1 7 (ii) figures for asset and depreciation if not a constructive obligation what may cause a constructive obligation subsequent treatment if it is a constructive obligation Total for question 5 1 1 1 3 15 Total for question 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 10 initial capitalised cost upgrade improves efficiency and life (therefore capitalise) revised carrying amount at 1 October 2007 annual depreciation (1 mark each year) maintenance costs charged at $20,000 each year discount received (in income statement) staff training (not capitalised and charged to income) 20

The Police Force Is Justified - 1068 Words

â€Å"A police force is a constituted body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder†. Or in layman’s terms, a body formed to serve and protect civilians. With the Ferguson incident of an African American boy getting shot by a white American police officer, it came to the limelight that how America’s police force has gone to the extent of acquiring military grade equipment, armor, gear .With sheer ignorance, unreasonable argument and lack of reliable citation sources, Fox News conveys how the militarization of the police force is justified. Ironically this militarization is supposedly necessary and justified, but in reality it only amplifies violence, distrust of police, and use of excessive force. Soon after the Michael Brown incident in Ferguson, Fox News channel during a segment of its ‘Fox and Friends’ had a panel discussion focusing on the ‘Militarization of Police’. The invited panel was made up of all white men namely- Jon Dietl (Fox News contributor), Bernie Kerik (former NYC Police Commissioner) and retired Nutley Police Commander Steven Rogers (Retd. Nutley Police Commander). The panelists spoke for the motion, defending the action taken by the police. In this segment the host and panelists were having a casual conversation on the given topic. Instead of bringing about a diverse panel with different points of view, Fox News had its panel only consisting of white Caucasian men with the same ideologies and thoughtShow MoreRelatedAllen V. the City of Oakland1266 Words   |  6 Pageslawsuits filed and won against the Oakland Police Department for police misconduct. Misconduct has always been an issue with law enforcement. Starting in the early years of law enforcement there were policies set to keep officers from committing these actions. In time, the policies have been changed, reconstructed, and updated to increase effectiveness and efficiency. To get a better view on how these policies are implemented, the actions of the police officers in Allen versus the city of OaklandRead MorePolice Officer s Use Of Deadly Force Against An Unarmed Teenager1249 Words   |  5 PagesBeginning in late summer, this country became bombarded with stories in the news about police officers involved in some types of controversy. The controversy that started it all was an incident that happened in Ferguson, Missouri. Since August, there has been much discussion and public debate over whether a police officer’s use of deadly force against an unarmed teenager was justified. On August 9, 2014 a young man named Michael Brown was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson after he was stoppedRead MorePolice Brutality And The Civil Rights Movement1400 Words   |  6 PagesOver the past 10 decades or more the United States has displayed a lot of police brutality and also racial profiling that leads to police brutality to American citizens. A police officer job are to serve and protect and enforce the law but in a lot cases from proven evidence it’s seems they shoot first and ask questions later. Americans are starting to feel that the police ar e scared of the citizens more than people are scared of them. Not every single cop in the world is bad or mean harm to peopleRead MorePublic Perception of the Police Essay1471 Words   |  6 Pagesand negative representations of police work. As a result, a complex relationship exists between media consumption and public attitudes towards the police. The purpose of this study is to test the impact that media consumption has on attitudes toward police misconduct. The research design proposed for use in this study would be the experimental design, a two-group, posttest-only, randomized experiment. Introduction The public impression of police use of force, as brutality, in modern day policingRead MoreThe Streetcar Killing Of Sammy Yatim1425 Words   |  6 PagesIntroduction Police institutions depend on being considered legitimate by the public in order to continue working for the public. However, with recent cases such as the streetcar killing of Sammy Yatim, the legitimacy of police has begun to be questioned. For the purpose of this essay, I will focus on how this case has brought forth conversations regarding police culture—including use of force and the visibility of police in the age of technology—and ultimately how this has shaped public perceptionRead MorePolice Brutality Of The United States1378 Words   |  6 Pagescases of police brutality. Police officers are faced with a lot of threatening situations every day. And sadly, the police have to rely on their instincts and hope for the best. They have the power to take anyone’s civil rights away and possibly even their own life. You must have responsibility in order to retain that kind of power. Much less, that much power. The use of excessive force may or may not be a big problem, but I think it should be viewed from everyone’s perspectives. Police brutalityRead MoreNew Jersey State On Use Of Excessive Force And Professional Standards Essay1655 Words   |  7 PagesNew Jersey State on Use of Excessive Force and Professional Standards There are several laws governing police misconduct as well as current laws pending. According to the State of New Jersey’s Internal Affairs Policy and Procedures enacted into law in 1978, agencies have a duty to monitor the behavior of their police officers for incidents of misconduct. When officers are found to have engaged in misconduct, agencies have an affirmative duty to correct the behavior. The courts have with increasingRead MorePolice Enforcement And Police Officers Essay1196 Words   |  5 Pages An integral training of today’s police officers duties is the physical skill of the application of use of force. This is needed skill requirement to detain and arrest a person who has committed a crime and resisting. Police officers must be trained to use force properly when the skill is required on a subject who is resisting police officers efforts to place them under arrest. This skill has the potential for the officer to exceed the needed amount of force to place them under arrest that can leadRead MorePolice Officers Have The California Penal Code 835a Under Their Disposal995 Words   |  4 PagesUse of force has been scrutinized even more recently due to the media. Recordings of officers using force (weather excessive or not) become uploaded to the web and many individuals quickly jump to conclusions. Police use of force is up to the discretion of each individual police officer, and with each action a multitude of consequences can occur. The public often gets enraged aft er a court justifies the use of force, but often individuals do not have the full facts or understand how the justice systemRead MorePolice Officers Have The California Penal Code 835a Under Their Disposal982 Words   |  4 PagesThe media has scrutinized the use of force even more recently. Recordings of officers using force (weather excessive or not) become uploaded to the web and many individuals quickly jump to conclusions. Police use of â€Å"force† is up to the discretion of each individual police officer, and with each action a multitude of consequences can occur. The public often gets enraged after a court justifies the use of force, but often individuals do not have the full facts or understand how the justice system