Filtering by
- Creators: Department of Finance
Recent governments in France have failed to bring about meaningful labor reform, faced with opposition in the streets or within their own political party. The election of Emanuel Macron, viewed as a political outsider who had never held elected office created his own political party, En Marche, seemed like the catalyst to lasting economic reform. However, if high unemployment and slow economic growth to comparable economies have been concerns for France since the beginning of the 21st century, why were past governments unsuccessful in implementing legislative actions to address labor reform?
This paper will argue that the election of Macron and the establishment of En Marche was caused by a shift in power that allowed Macron enough support to sway the political landscape of France and implement labor market reform. This largely has to do with the power struggle between France’s Outsiders, “those without secure employment, Insiders, “those with secure employment” and the Upscale group, “employers, the upper middle class, and the business and financial community” (Rudea, 2007). However, the degree and preservation of Macron’s reform plans are threatened by Insiders who have been stripped of employee protections.
The contemporary Democratic Party has departed from their roots protecting working-class issues in favor of neoliberal ideology protecting the professional class; however, recent surges in progressive campaigns demonstrate the desire to move past this elitist ideology for New Deal-like policies, namely, young people. By utilizing the works of Thomas Frank and Anand Giridharadas to analyze the faults of the DNC, I then make case for the path forward that is more inclusive of young people and older members Black, Indigenous, Latino, Asian, and LGBTQ+ communities with progressive policies to "bringing the party home."
The United States and the Soviet Union faced off in Europe, but what did the spread of their influence look like around the globe? This is answered through researching the economic and political nuances of the Cold War.
Citizenship Politics is a term I use to distinguish how politics over citizenship is different from other political conversations and describe how politics can influence and pose a threat to citizenship as a whole in America. In this paper, I will address how politics can influence birthright citizenship, the naturalization process, and other related government initiatives. For instance, I will discuss how politics can discourage Legal Permanents Residents from seeking citizenship. This paper will also show how Citizenship Politics permeates at the federal level, such as adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. Contrastingly, an analysis into a recent League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) settlement regarding voting rights in Arizona will also be provided. Furthermore, this paper will analyze how politics leads to the creation of reactive programs like Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an initiative offering temporary protection with no pathway to citizenship. In the end, this research paper offers solutions and long-term implications.
What is a “Good Economy”? Analysis of Economic Metrics & Their Political Impact on the United States
In the end, an increase in repurchases of company stock will also influence the rate of dividends to increase. This means, an investor should not necessarily worry about the dividends they receive, but rather to see if the company is making profit at a consistent rate and reinvesting into value-added activities. Through the major pillars of finance, technology, legal, and human resources, the budget for reinvestment can be optimized by investing into these respective categories with percentages that are mindful of the specific companies needs and functions. Any firm that chooses to ensure proven methods of growth will enact a combination of these four verticals. A larger emphasis on finance will branch out efficiency in the entire organization, as finance control everything from the toilet paper to the acquisitions the company is making. The more technology is used to reduce redundancy and inefficient or costly operations, the more capability the organization will have. IT, however, comes with its technical challenges; having a team on-hand or even outsourced, to solve the critical problems to help the business continue operation. Over-reliance into technology can be detrimental to a business as well if clear processes are not set about straight to counteract problems the business will face like IT ticketing systems or recovery and continuity support. Therefore, technology will require a larger chunk of attention as well.
The upcoming legal and HR investments a company will make will depend upon its current position and thus the restructuring will differ for every firm. Each company has its own flavour and style of work. In that regard, the required legal counsel will vary; different problems will require different solutions for risk control and management, which are often professionally advised by intelligent corporate counsel. This ability to hire efficient legal counsel would not arise in the first place if a firm were to give out dividends; the leftover profit would have gone towards the shareholders and not back into growing the equity of the business. Lastly, nothing is possible without the contribution of people, and their efforts. A quality that long-lasting, successful businesses have, is they are investing in their people and development. Paying salaries, insurances, bonuses, all requires extra capital that is needed to be set aside in order to grow human capital. Good people, better people. There are qualities for each role that need to be defined and a process for attracting talent needs to be invested in. This process can also include outsourcing to an external firm who specializes in these strategies. By retaining profits internally, the company is able to stretch its legs to have further reach upon the market they work in. Financially and statistically, dividends are likely to grow as well with the increase in equity due to the increase in security an investor feels with more cash reserve and liquidity within the company.
All in all, a company should not be pressured into giving out periodic payments in predetermined timeframes, in other words a dividend, to investors even when they are insisting. Rather, pitch and prove, a new method for reinvestment within the company that will raise the value of the company, through proven methods like the value chain model, to increase the equity in the company. By expanding the scope and capability, the company is allowing for a larger target market which will reap more benefits; none of it would be possible if it had continued to give out large percentages of capital to investors as dividends. Companies, and investors, should not be worried about dividends at all as a matter of fact; an increase in stock buyback, in other words reinvesting into the company, will increase the rate of dividends anyway, due to increased confidence and capital within the company.