United States v. Barrington===Computer Crime.  

Make an argument. Do you agree or disagree.  

Search the internet for this case, then search the book's PDF to find it.  

Why has the HRM function increased in stature and influence in many organizations and How has increased globalization influenced the way HRM is practiced in the United States?

A group of college students from Canada, France, and the United Kingdom participate in the international internship exchange program at the hospital where you work, and they are learning more about population health in the United States.

On several occasions, the students have expressed a desire to learn more about why a wealthy country such as the United States does not offer universal health care coverage to its residents. The students argue that the people in their countries are healthier than Americans, that their citizens live longer, and that their countries pay less per capita on healthcare than the United States.

Because you are a recent graduate of CSU-Global with a degree in healthcare management and are a newly promoted member of the management staff, the CEO has asked that you take the lead in ensuring that questions posed by the interns are addressed.

Through your course in population health, you understand that healthcare policies in the United States are influenced by many factors. You have decided to prepare a two- to three-page handout using a table format* that explains some of the historical, political, legal, cultural, and economic influences that shape healthcare policies relevant to population health in the United States.

Consider information presented both in your textbook and that you uncover in your research.

The handout should consist of a two-column table. List the following factors in column one and a detailed explanation of each in column two. See example below*.

The table should include in-text citations and a reference page. Support your assignment with at least three credible sources in addition to the course textbook. At least one source must be peer-reviewed. The CSU-Global Library is a good place to find these sources.

The submission should be two to three pages in length, not including the required title and reference pages.

Format your submission according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA.

Did you know that the CSU-Global Library has a research guide for Healthcare Management and Administration? Visit http://csuglobal.libguides.com/healthcare-management-administration and http://csuglobal.libguides.com/hcm for specific guides to databases, videos, company and industry research, and more.

*Example of two-column table

Do not need to answer the questions in a table format.

You are given the following information. The current dollar-pound exchange rate is $2 per pound. A representative basket of goods and services costs $100 in the US and $120 (dollars, not pounds) in the United Kingdom. For the next year, the Fed is predicted to keep U.S. inflation at 2%, and the Bank of England is predicted to keep U.K. inflation at 3%. The speed of convergence to absolute PPP is 20% per year. That is, if the real exchange rate today is 1.4 and the speed of convergence to absolute PPP is 15% per year, the real exchange rate in one year will be 1.4-0.30*0.4=1.28).

1. What is the expected U.S. minus U.K. inflation differential for the coming year?

2. What is the current U.S. real exchange rate qUS/UK with the United Kingdom? (recall that qUS/UK is defined as the ratio of prices in the UK to the US, both expressed in a common currency).

3. By what percentage is the dollar overvalued or undervalued relative to its absolute PPP level

4. What do you predict the U.S. real exchange rate with the United Kingdom will be in one year’s time?

5. What is the expected rate of real depreciation for the United States (versus the United Kingdom)?

6. What is the expected rate of nominal depreciation for the United States (versus the United Kingdom)?

7. What do you predict will be the dollar price of one pound a year from now?

You are given the following information. The current dollar-pound exchange rate is $2 per pound. A representative basket of goods and services costs $100 in the US and $120 (dollars, not pounds) in the United Kingdom. For the next year, the Fed is predicted to keep U.S. inflation at 2%, and the Bank of England is predicted to keep U.K. inflation at 3%. The speed of convergence to absolute PPP is 20% per year. That is, if the real exchange rate today is 1.4 and the speed of convergence to absolute PPP is 15% per year, the real exchange rate in one year will be 1.4-0.30*0.4=1.28).

1. What is the expected U.S. minus U.K. inflation differential for the coming year?

2. What is the current U.S. real exchange rate qUS/UK with the United Kingdom? (recall that qUS/UK is defined as the ratio of prices in the UK to the US, both expressed in a common currency).

3. By what percentage is the dollar overvalued or undervalued relative to its absolute PPP level

4. What do you predict the U.S. real exchange rate with the United Kingdom will be in one year’s time?

5. What is the expected rate of real depreciation for the United States (versus the United Kingdom)?

6. What is the expected rate of nominal depreciation for the United States (versus the United Kingdom)?

7. What do you predict will be the dollar price of one pound a year from now?

The difference between a free trade area and a customs union is, in brief, that the first is politically straightforward but an administrative headache, while the second is just the opposite.

Consider first the case of a customs union. Once such a union is established, tariff administration is relatively easy: Goods must pay tariffs when they cross the border of the union, but from then on can be shipped freely between countries. A cargo that is unloaded at Marseilles or Rotterdam must pay duties there, but will not face any additional charges if it then goes by truck to Munich.

To make this simple system work, however, the countries must agree on tariff rates: The duty must be the same whether the cargo is unloaded at Marseilles, Rotterdam, or gor that matter Hamburg, because otherwise importers would choose the point of entry that minimized their fees. So a customs union requires that Germany, France, the Netherlands, and all the other countries agree to charge the same tariffs. This is not easily done: Countries are, in effect, ceding part of their soverignty to a supranational entity, the European Union.

This has been possible in Europe for a variety of reasons, including the belief that economic unity would help cement the post-war political alliance between European democracies.

But elsewhere these conditions are lacking. The three nations that formed NAFTA would find it very difficult to cede control over tariffs to any supranational body; if nothing else, it would be hard to devise any arrangement that would give due weight to U.S. interests without effectively allowing the United States to dictate trade policy to Canada and Mexico. NAFTA, therefore, while it permits Mexican goods to enter the United States without tariffs and vice versa, does not require that Mexico and the United States adopt a common external tariff on goods they import from other countries.

This, however, raises a different problem. Under NAFTA, a shirt made by Maxican workers can be brought into the United States freely. But suppose that the United States wants to maintain high tariffs on shirts imported from other countries, while Mexico does not impose similar tariffs. What is to prevent someone from shipping a shirt from, say, Bangladesh to Mexico, then putting it on a truck bond for Chicago?

The answer is that even though the United States and Mexico may have free trade, goods shipped from Mexico to the United States must still pass through a customs inspection. And they can enter the United States without duty only if they have documents providing that they are in fact Mexican goods, not trans-shipped imports from third countries.

But what is a Mexican shirt? If a shirt comes from Bangladesh, but Mexicans sew on the buttons, does that make in Mexican? Probably not. But if everything except the button were made in Mexico, it probably should be considered Mexican. The point is that administering a free trade area that is not a customs union require not only that the countires continue to check goods at the border, but that they specify an elaborate set of “rules of origin” that determine whether a goods is eligible to cross the border without paying a tariff.

As a result, free trade agreements like NAFTA impose a large burden of paperwork, which may be a significant obstacle to trade even when such trade is in principle free.

Question

1. From this case, what is the main difference between a free-trade area and a customs union?

2. Why are rules of origin needed for a free-trade area? How might they be protectionist?

Assume the spot price of the British pound is currently $1.8.

If the risk-free interest rate on 1-year government bonds is 4.4% in the United States and 7.2% in the United Kingdom, what must be the forward price of the pound for delivery one year from now?

(Do not round intermediate calculations. Round your answer to 3 decimal places.)

1. What is the “Prime Rate-1 Month Prior” for the following Countries:
   1. Canada- 2.45
   2. United States-3.25
   3. United Kingdom-0.66
   4. European Central Back
   5. Japan

What methodology was used to collect and analyze the data? Did the source collect the data? When was the data collected? Why was the data originally collected? How dependable is the data's source?

A theater has 500 seats, divided into orchestra, main, and balcony seating. Orchestra seats sell for $50, main seats for $35, and balcony seats for $25. If all the seats are sold, the gross revenue to the theater is $17,100. If all the main and balcony seats are sold, but only half the orchestra seats are sold, the gross revenue is $14,600. How many balcony seats are there?

Cities, States, and Businesses Lead the Way to Reduce Greenhouse Gases

Although the United States signed the original Kyoto Protocol, the U.S. Congress never ratified the agreement so the protocol has never been legally binding on the United States. The administration of President George W. Bush argued that there was no scientific consensus on global warming and that the costs of reducing greenhouse gases were simply too high. However, many state and local governments felt they had waited long enough for change at the federal level. In 2005, mayors from 141 cities and both major political parties gathered in San Francisco to organize their own efforts to reduce the causes and consequences of global warming. Their goal was to reduce greenhouse emissions in their own cities by the same 7 percent that the United States had agreed to in the Kyoto Protocol.

As of 2014, a total of 1,060 out of 1,139 mayors of U.S. cities had signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Among the reasons the mayors cited for supporting this agreement were concerns in their communities over increasing droughts, reduced supplies of fresh water due to melting glaciers, and rising sea levels in coastal cities. “The United States inevitably will have to join this effort,” Seattle mayor Greg Nickels said. “Ultimately we will make it impossible for the federal government to say no. They will see that it can be done without huge economic disruption and that there’s support throughout the country to do this.”

Similar actions are being taken at the state level. In 2005, then-governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger stated at a press conference, “The debate is over . . . and we know the time for action is now.” In 2006, Governor Schwarzenegger signed the California Global Warming Solutions Act. The goal of the act was to bring California into compliance with the Kyoto Protocol by 2020, an effort that would require a 25 percent reduction in greenhouse gases for a state that, if a country, would be the tenth largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world. At the signing ceremony, the governor stated, “I say unquestionably it is good for businesses.” Indeed, a cost analysis by the California Air Resources Board in 2008 indicated that the law would add $27 billion to the economy of the state and add 100,000 jobs.

The California effort is gaining popularity around the country. In the northeastern United States, for example, nine states have joined together collectively to form the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to control regional production of greenhouse gases. A similar group emerged in western North America when seven western states and four Canadian provinces joined together in 2007 to form the Western Climate Initiative. For both groups, the goal was to to regulate greenhouse emissions. By 2014, northeastern group continued to work together while the western group had a reduced membership that included only California and the four Canadian provinces.

A number of large businesses are also joining in efforts to reduce greenhouse gases. General Electric, for example, announced in 2014 that it had reduced its greenhouse emissions by 34 percent since 2004. In addition, the company has invested $12 billion for research and development of technologies that can reduce greenhouse gases and is planning to invest a total of $25 billion by 2020. In 2011, General Electric announced that its technology generated more than $100 billion in revenues, which confirmed that creating technology that would reduce greenhouse emissions was a profitable thing to do.

In 2013, the New York Times reported that a growing number of companies including Microsoft, ExxonMobil, and Google have developed long-term financial plans that include the cost of producing greenhouse gases. These companies recognize that the scientific evidence of human-caused global climate change continues to grow and that they will increasingly need to factor the costs of emissions into their budgets. Those companies that include plans to accommodate and reduce these costs are likely to profit from such planning.

From these stories, it is clear that progress on reducing greenhouse gases that cause global warming does not have to wait for national and international agreements to take effect. The public overwhelmingly understands that Earth is warming, states and cities are pushing forward with solutions that save money, and large corporations understand that reducing emissions can reduce costs and improve profits over the long term. In short, curbing greenhouse gases and global warming is not only good for humans and the environment, it can be good for business as well.

Critical Thinking Questions

1.What data might city mayors use to support their assertion that humans are causing global warming?

2.Why is it more effective for states and provinces to create regional partnerships to combat global warming rather than doing so alone?