Wideman Vs. Limerick Essay example -- essays research papers

John Edgar Wideman’s â€Å"Our Time†, and Patricia Nelson Limerick’s â€Å"Empire of Innocence†, are two very different stories about one particular theme. In these selections both authors are writing history. Wideman is writing the history of his brother’s life, and Limerick is writing the history of the old west. Although the theme is the same, the two authors’ styles, methods, and writing concerns differ greatly.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In the following passage from â€Å"Our Time†, John is visiting his brother, Robby, in prison. While listening to Robby’s story, John begins to question the type of book this project will become: The business of making a book together was new for both of us. Difficult. Awkward. Another book could be constructed about a writer who goes to a prison to interview his bother but comes away with his own story†¦.the inevitible conflict between his role as detached observer and his responsibility as a brother would be at the center of such a book. When I stopped hearing Robby and listened to myself listening, that kind of book shouldered its way into my consciousness. I didn’t like that feeling. That book compromised the intimacy I wanted to achieve with my brother. (Wideman p. 723) This passage stresses the concern Wideman expresses on how to make this book the type of book he wants to present. Later in the selection the answer to this problem appears.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Still listening to Robby’s story, John discovers their recollections of th...

Relationships and Attraction

From the beginning on time, being around others makes us feel affiliated. It is human nature to form relationships with people who attract us. As human beings, there has always been a desire to form relationships. The lack of relationships and bonds with other individuals can lead to negative feelings, such as loneliness. In order to figure out the need to form bonds we must analyze the benefits and factors of attraction and relationships. There are six factors that describe attraction. The mere exposure happens when we are around someone or something so much, we grow fond of it. For example, you go to training classes for your new positions for the next 4 weeks. When you are hired you are more likely to hang around the people who sat closest to you during your weeks of training. We are more attracted to individuals who are attractive. In a study that evaluated attraction bias and the effect it had on hiring managers, 112 managers were given four potential candidates resume and pictures to go over. The managers chose candidates who were more attractive (Marlowe, Schneider,& Nelson, 1996). We are attracted to individuals that we can relate to. For example, advocates for PETA and a person who works on a slaughter farm are less likely to be associated with each other. Along with being attracted to those we relate to, we are also attracted to individuals we look like. For example, in a room full of Hispanics and Blacks, Hispanics are more likely to mingle with Hispanics; the same with black individuals. We are less likely to befriend someone of another culture because of the factor, we are more attracted to individuals we look like. Feenstra also suggest we like individuals who are had to get because â€Å"they are selective in their social choices† (Feenstra, 2011, Ch. 3. 1, â€Å"We like Those Who Are Hard to Get†). If we can form a bond with this individual, it can possibly boost our self esteem because of the exclusivity of the relationship. Humans are more likely to be attracted to individuals they can benefit from. This involves equity. Equity in relationships is receiving back from your partner what you p ut in. A relationship can be under-benefited or over-benefited. Under-benefited relationships involve someone giving more than receiving; and an over-benefited relationship involves receiving more from your partner than giving (Feenstra,2011). Bonds and relationships are natural instincts we as humans want to have. We have an innate need to belong. The need for frequent positive contact and the need for enduring connections marked by mutual concern for the welfare of the other are two parts of the need to belong theory (Feenstra, 2011). Our social bond, emotions, and fear of deprivation are all connected to our need to belong. Positive emotions stem from relationships we have with others. Not being able to form relationships and bonds with others may lead to negative emotions. Social bonds are formed quickly and easily (Feenstra, 2011). For example, you go to a job interview and before the interview you are waiting with a group of people also waiting to get interviewed. You are more likely to end up talking to someone who is sitting next to you. We need contact and attention from others so that we do not feel deprived. Mental illnesses and depression stem from deprivation. Love is a word that is often spoken, and has many different definitions. For example, I love the Atlanta Falcons versus I am in love with Johnny Depp. There are three types of love. Being in love suggest having a desire for someone. There are three types of love, they include: companionate love, compassionate love, and passionate love. Companionate love involves intimacy and commitment. This love can be described as a love you may have for friends and family members. . Trust and past shared experiences contribute to companionate love. Passionate love describes the â€Å"in love† kind of love and involves desire, emotional arousal, and physical attraction (Feenstra, 2011). For example, a man decides to ask his girlfriend to marry him because he is in love with her. Compassionate love describes the love you may feel for your mother. This love is broken into two parts: communal relationships and exchange relationships. In communal relationships things are done for an individual without expecting something in return. In exchange relationships things are done based on whether or not something will be given in exchange. Communal relationships are ones we more likely will have with our friends and family members. For example, if your child is sick you will take care of him or her regardless if they will give you anything back in return. Communal relationships deal with people who aren’t apart of your close friends and family social circle. In Figure 14. 1, Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love distinguishes romantic love from empty love. Sternberg’s theory describes romantic love as passionate and having intimacy . Empty love is described as having only commitment (Feenstra, 2011). Along with these two theories, Sternberg also lists other different components of love. Intimacy, passion, and commitment are all components that make up the kinds of love listed in the table. Intimacy is the closeness you may have with an individual. Its about opening up emotionally and trust. Passion is the emotional desire you have for you partner. Commitments are the decisions we make within relationships. For example, a decision to move to another state along with your partner after they accept a job offers shows your level of commitment to the relationship. We stay healthy by forming bonds with others. When we are deprived we risk depression and other mental illnesses that can have lasting effects on ourselves and others around us. The benefits of relationships show us why we form bonds with other individuals.

Capital Punishment: A Global Perspective Essay

               Capital punishment is also called the death penalty. It refers to the legal process where a criminal is put to death by the state, to act as a punishment for a crime that they have committed. The judgment of the jury that a person should get punished in this manner is known as a death sentence while the enforcement is an execution. Crimes that can lead to capital punishment are referred to as capital crimes or capital offenses and include murder, rape, and treason. Reasons for capital punishment Some of the reasons that support capital punishment include;                      Guilty people should get punished in proportion and magnitude to the severity of the crime they have committed. Real justice in essence requires people to suffer for their wrong doing, in an appropriate manner for their crime. Each criminal obtains what their crime deserves, and a murderer or a rapist deserves death.                         Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. Could be that the biggest reason to keep the death penalty is to prevent a crime from repeating itself. As much as a criminal is sentenced to life imprisonment, he or she still has a chance to kill while in prison. He is capable of killing his or her fellow inmates, or even the prison wardens. Worse still, a criminal can escape from prison and go on a murder or crime spree. Capital punishment prevents this process of re-offending. Those executed cannot commit more crimes. Execution removes the danger posed to the public by the criminal.                     Capital punishment promotes deterrence. By execution of criminals, it is possible to deter capable murderers from killing people. Crime would become more common if there were no means of deterring people from committing it.                  In case the death penalty is eliminated, it can contribute to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. This means that the number of prisoners being housed for life will increase. This only adds to the problem of an overcrowded prison system and the facilities in that particular prison could be greatly overstretched. Reasons against capital punishment                     Mentally ill patients may be put to death. Most of the capital crimes are committed in an emotional state in which the perpetrator doesn’t think about possible outcomes. Some people are born with brain defects that cause them to act in unacceptable ways. It could be unconstitutional to put a mentally ill person to death. However, rules have a chance of being vague, and besides, one still needs to convince a jury that the defendant is of unsound mind.                  The court goes to great lengths before settling on a death sentence. During this period, there are endless appeals and required procedures which cause congestion on the court system. These appeals and hearings consume time of judges and other court employees, as well as use up courtrooms and facilities. This time could have been used to resolve other matters if the criminal were sentenced to life imprisonment.                   The society should move away from the revenge mentality. This is because a revenge philosophy leads to an endless circle of violence. Society should be made aware that attacking one’s enemy for revenge always worsens the situation. Besides, capital punishment is useless because it does not bring the victim back to life. Hate, revenge and anger cannot cure the emptiness of a lost loved one.                  Capital punishment does not rehabilitate the criminal or other potential criminals. Instead, it sends wrong signals to the society. It does not make sense for the state to punish someone who has committed murder through murder. Conclusion                        In conclusion, capital punishment should not be brought back because it violates the Bill of Rights. This is because it involves taking away the life of another person. The bill of rights states that everybody has a right to live. When somebody is executed, the right to life is greatly infringed. Besides, punishment of the death penalty is irrevocable. Once carried out it cannot be reversed. When somebody has been executed, it is impossible to bring them back to life. Capital punishment should thus be avoided at all costs.                     Any punishment must be fair, just, adequate and most of all enforceable. Society still views murder as the greatest crime, and should be met with the most severe punishment, which is capital punishment. Whole life imprisonment could fit punishment for murderers. This is because, in prison, the criminals are isolated from their families and are confined in the walls of a prison for the rest of their lives. However, according to many people, life imprisonment seems to be a soft opinion to punish capital criminals, and this perception needs to be corrected in order to do away with capital punishment.                   Imprisonment, whilst expensive and largely pointless, except as a means of removing criminals from society for a given period, is at least enforceable upon anyone who commits murder. Besides, the jury members will not suffer from a guilty conscience of ever passing a verdict for the death of a person. From the arguments on reasons against capital punishment, I should be done away with because it is an inhumane practice. References Hood, R. (n.d.). Capital Punishment: A Global Perspective. Punishment & Society, 331-354. Melusky, J., & Pesto, K. (2011). Capital punishment. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Greenwood. Source document

Pandora: disintermediator or disintermediated? Essay

For Pandora, one of the biggest players in Internet radio, figuring out the future is both challenging and intimidating. If the regular challenges of growing a new company aren’t enough, Pandora also faces a market that is reeling in turmoil. In the new digital world, the way people listen to music continues to change dramatically. It seems likely that Pandora will either lead the changes or fall victim to them. Pandora was founded just over a decade ago. At that time, a vast majority of music listeners were still getting their groove on in one of two ways: They either popped a CD into their home, car, or personal CD player or they turned on the old AM/FM radio. But the advent of digital formats like MP3s has had a huge impact on CD sales and has drawn people away from what is now called â€Å"terrestrial radio.† Moreover, like the music business, the radio business has faced major changes of its own. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 reduced limitations on the number of stations that one owner could hold. This led to huge ownership groups that consolidated and standardized listening formats. The result is less diversity on the radio, with shorter playlists and fewer artists represented. From one city to the next, all across the United States, radio stations have started to sound more alike. Both these trends – combined with the explosion of Internet usage and changes in online technologies – have led to a deluge of companies trying to capitalize on the future of music distribution. This includes download services such as iTunes, subscription services such as Rhapsody and eMusic, an endless number of Internet radio stations, and even satellite   radio network SirriusXM. Today, with an ever†growing list of listening devices and cloud music services that store personal music libraries so they can be accessed anywhere by any device, listening trends continue to evolve. But one thing about the future is certain: The business of listening to music is full of disruption and confusion. Things are changing fast and the winning products and services—indeed, the survivors—are yet to be determined. The Power of People Amid the chaos, Pandora has carved out its own niche, setting itself apart as an automated music recommendation service. It isn’t a play†on†demand service, where members can simply choose the exact song and artist they want. Rather, listeners enter an artist or song suggestion. The playlist starts with a track by the r equested artist and inserts additional songs by that artist every once in a while. But in between, Pandora cues up songs by other artists similar in nature to the requested material. If an unliked or unwanted song plays, the listener can click the â€Å"thumbs down† icon or just skip the song and it will be removed from the list. Users can also create stations by browsing artists alphabetically, or they can tune in to pre†made genre stations or to other users’ stations. Listener’s can create as many stations as they wish, each oriented around the initial input. Lots of online services employ similar recommendation features (think Netflix and Amazon). But Pandora has set a precedent by the predictive power of its recommendation software. The Pandora software is amazingly precise at choosing material that fits with what the user wants. According to Tim Westergren, founder and Chief Strategy Officer for Pandora,

Advice on feeding children for parents with concerns about their own eating Essay

Many parents have concerns about their own eating and worry about the impact that this may have on feeding their children and on their children’s healthy development. What follows below is some advice about how best to manage feeding children for parents or caregivers with their own concerns about eating. A role model for children1 ? Children copy the behaviours of others. Your children will pick up eating behaviours exhibited by parents, siblings, other family members and friends so try to be a positive role model for your child by eating and enjoying regular meals with them if possible. Give children child-sized portions ? For parents who are limiting their own calorie intake or portion size, they may lose sight of what is an appropriate portion for their growing child. It is important to give children suitable portions, rather than those that are too large or too small. Guidance on portion size can be found here: http://www. nhs. uk/change4life/Documents/pdf/Step_By_Step_Me_Size_Meals. pdf or here: http://www. nhs. uk/change4life/pages/kids-portion-size-tips. aspx.? As a general rule, a portion of fruit or vegetables is the same size as a person’s palm. So, a child-size portion of peas on a dinner plate should be the same size as your child’s palm. Offer a healthy, balanced diet ? Children and adults need a nutritious, balanced diet for optimal development and health. Try to ensure that you are giving your children meals that include: fruit and vegetables; starchy foods (e. g. , rice, pasta, bread, potatoes); meat, fish, eggs and beans; milk and dairy foods; and moderate amounts of food containing fat and sugar (see here: http://www.nhs.k/Livewell/Goodfood/Documents/Eatwellplate. pdf). ? Don’t cut food groups out of your child’s diet (unless they have an allergy / intolerance) and do try to offer a variety of foods across mealtimes. ? Ensure that children have three meals a day, as well as healthy snacks. Research suggests that breakfast is particularly important for school children as it provides them with energy required for the day. Listen to your child ? Children are good regulators of their own levels of hunger and fullness. They will tell you when they are hungry and full. If they are often still hungry 20 minutes after finishing their meal, it may be that the portion size is too small for them. Try not to be too controlling2-5 ? Parents may feel that their child needs to eat all the food on their plate in order to be healthy. Avoid pressuring or forcing your child to eat more than he/she wishes. Pressuring children to eat food can result in the food becoming less liked and children eating less of that food. If your child tells you he/she is full, they probably are. ? Try not to overly restrict your child’s access to (unhealthy) foods. Limiting children’s intake of foods can unintentionally make these foods seem more desirable and children may then eat more of these foods if given free access to them (e. g. , at parties). ? Everything in moderation. Keeping track of what your child eats is good parenting and ensuring that your child eats a balanced diet is encouraged. However, it is important to offer your child a balance of foods from all the food groups to ensure healthy growth and development. Above all remember that food is a fuel. Your child requires a healthy, balanced diet and regular meals and snacks in order to grow and remain healthy.

White Collar Crime

Is White Collar Crime an Inside Job? Simply put, the point that Charles Ferguson is trying to get across in his documentary, The Inside Job is that economics is exactly that, it’s an inside job; with many elite employees involved. Economics is a profession, and at the end of the day, it all comes down to power, and the money being brought home by those at the top. Throughout the documentary Ferguson does an excellent job revealing the not so behind the scenes action, that many just don’t pick up on, due to the fact that companies police themselves.The documentary explains how it effects everyone, even those that are not directly involved or related. Those who are responsible for the financial meltdown in 2008, and the housing bubble are revealed, and an explanation is given as to why they are still in charge of the companies whose actions affected millions of people not only in The United States, but all over the world. Several different types of white collar crimes wer e committed leading up to the financial crisis, and several different companies were engaging in the large scale criminal activity.Financial deregulation is one of the main topics discussed in the documentary, and how financial institutions were given more freedom; thus making more risky investments with their depositors money, and seeing no consequences when these investments fell through. The documentary brings forward many thoughts about the types of white collar crime committed and how those that are guilty got away with it, how the victims were affected by the careless actions of the companies, as well as the reasons and motivation behind the crimes. The documentary stresses that this crisis was no accident, and that it was all caused by an out of control industry.Each crises causes more and more financial damage, while industries continue to make millions. While the documentary doesn’t once mention the term white collar crime, it doesn’t take much to realize that this was exactly what went on. â€Å"Not only have the vast majority of responsible parties not been convicted of any crime — they haven’t even been charged† (Andrew Leonard, 2012), the employees that destroyed their own companies, and caused crisis all over the world, walked away with all their money, and left millions of people without their savings.Defining White Collar Crime Defined by Edwin Sutherland(1949), white collar crime is â€Å"a crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation†. Countless types of white collar crime exist, many people not even being aware of them . It is strongly believed that white collar crime was the cause of the global financial crisis of 2008, which consisted mainly of mortgage, insurance, and security fraud. Marshall Clinard and Richard Quinney (1973) defined two types of white collar crime: occupational, and corporate.They defined occupational crime as being committ ed by individuals over the course of their occupation, mainly for personal gain, whereas corporate crime is committed by the corporations as a whole, the crime is planned and committed for the corporations financial gain. In The Inside Job, several types of white collar crime were committed, such as: laundering, cooking books, and defrauding customer’s money. Even though those who commit white collar crime are labeled as criminals, they often don’t fall under the typical stereotype that street criminals hold.Reducing the amount of white collar crime is something that is very important and there needs to be more attention toward it. The media definitely needs to focus more on white collar crime, as most news usually revolves around street crime, rather than revealing the crimes being committed by large corporations. A stronger punishment is needed to reduce white collar crime. Often, those who commit white collar crimes get off without jail, because they have the money to pay millions of dollars in fines. Increasing these fines drastically would not allow them to pay for their punishment. Victimization of White Collar CrimeVictimization of white collar crime is not something that is often heard of in the media. It’s not uncommon to turn on the news and see countless stories of the victims of murder and robbery, and well as drug related street crimes. But what about the victims of the crime that’s vastly underreported, and even more undetected? People who commit street crime are seen as more dangerous, and often receive a harsh punishment, because they generally have less money,therefore less power. One of the many reasons for the underreported incidences of white collar crime, is simply because there is less to show for it.It is estimated by the Canadian Securities Administration, that nearly 5% of adult Canadians have lost money to some type of investment fraud. White collar crime is often seen as less damaging than street crime, bu t in reality, victims of white collar crime do suffer from tremendous damages. Aside from the obvious financial loss, they are known to have struggles with psychological, emotional, and physical health (Kempa 2009). Numerous things can happen after people are affected by white collar crimes, such as possibly triggering them to commit street crimes, such as theft, in order to support their family after losing money.A close relationship is often built between the perpetrator and the victim, giving them the sense of trust, thus having them believe that no type of fraud could happen to them. As seen in the documentary, not just those directly involved are affected. When the Wall Street Stock Market crashed in 2008, other countries were also paying the price. Tens of millions of people were affected either directly or indirectly from the global economic crisis. With the sudden drop of employment in America, budgets of those families also decreased drastically, thus buying less in order t o save money.This cutback caused several large companies in China to cease their production; causing over 10 million to lose their job. As heard in The Inside Job, Dominique Strauss-Kahn states that â€Å"at the end of the day, the poorest, as always, pay the most†. As mentioned earlier, the employees of the large corporations committing the crimes go home with their hundreds of thousands of dollars, and those affected in poorer countries, are left with nothing. People with money have power, power that can often get them out of situations that many others are not be able to. Self-Control Theory and White Collar CrimeThe self-control theory argues that all crime stems from the problem of low self control. (Hirschi & Gottfredson, 1987). This low self control causes people to act impulsively and spontaneously, value risk and adventure, and care more about themselves than they do others. As stated in The Inside Job, Jonathan Alpert, therapist to many Wall Street exclusives, says that they’re â€Å"risk takers, and impulsive. It’s part of their behaviour, it’s part of their personality†¦ there's just a blatant disregard for the impact that their actions might have on society, on family†.Many of those that commit white collar crimes are often seen as having the need to control, being charismatic and narcissistic, as well as having a fear of losing their power and their position. Greed is often a primary motivator for white collar criminals. As heard in The Inside Job, â€Å"the bankers showered money on themselves, each other, and their friends†, they lived a wealthy and luxurious life; living in penthouse suites on Park Avenue, owning numerous vacation homes in the Hampton’s, flying around the world in private jets.Living such a wealthy and elite lifestyle, â€Å"it’s quite typical for the guys to go out, to go to strip bars, to use drugs. I see a lot of cocaine use, a lot of use of prostitution†¦ A lot of people feel that they need to really participate in that behavior to make it, to get promoted, to get recognized. † (Alpert, 2010). It’s quite clear that the main motivation behind many of those involved in committing white collar crimes, usually comes down to the power they hold, and most importantly, the money in their pockets. White Collar vs. Street CrimeThose who commit street crime are often given a harsher punishment and a more negative reputation than those who commit white collar crimes. In reality, the two types of criminals are not that different, even though their methods of crime are unalike. Should there be different punishment or sentences for those who commit fraud or embezzlement, compared to those who distribute illegal drugs? People with a higher status and more money and power often tend to get a lighter sentence, as both the money and power can often get them out of situations, but this isn’t fair.White collar crimes generally effect people more than street crime. As seen in The Inside Job, the crimes committed by a few large corporations, caused millions of people to lose copious amounts of money, as well as their jobs. A main distinction that can often separate those who commit white collar crime, and those who commit street crime, is their level of education. Many people seen in The Inside Job were those who had graduated, or even worked at respected universities. They were often well educated in economics and business, so they knew every last detail of what they were working with.White collar criminals are often known have a desire for control, causing them to engage in corporate crime, hoping to gain power. The financial crisis of 2008 that affected millions of people, causing tremendous losses of both jobs and money, is something that will be around to haunt people for years. Their victims are left to suffer, while the employees of the large corporations walk away with all their money. The people who commi t such white collar crimes are selfish, and only care about their own power and money.Even years after the crisis, news is still floating around, and people are still questioning why the corporations and their employees aren’t seeing punishment. The criminals that commit these large scale crimes, are being treated differently than those that commit street crimes, they get away with no punishment, and continue working, in time committing the same crimes over again. Reference List Barkan, S. E. Criminology: a sociological understanding. (5th ed. ). Pearson. Croall , H. (2001). Understanding white collar crime. Buckingham, England: McGraw Hill. Ferguson, C. (Director) (2010). The inside job [DVD]. Kempa, M. (2009).Combating white collar crime in canada: Serving victim needs and market integrity. (University of Ottawa). Leonard, A. (2012, May 18). Corporate criminals gone wild. Retrieved from http://www. salon. com/2012/05/18/corporate_criminals_gone_wild/ Morgenson, G. & Story, L. ,(2011, July 7). As wall st. polices itself, prosecutors use softer approach. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www. nytimes. com/2011/07/08/business/in-shift-federal-prosecutors-are-lenient-as-companies-break-the-law. html? _r=2=1=wisenberg=cse& Watt, R. (2012). University students’ propensity towards white-collar versus street crime. (University of Guelph).

Tariffs and Free Trade Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Tariffs and Free Trade - Essay Example Tariffs we can say have generally fallen in the post World War 11 period as the industrialized world has moved to desirably free trade between organizations. Tariffs do not cost too much to the economy. World Bank estimates that if all these tariffs were removed, the global economy would increase by 830 billion dollars by 2015. The economic effects of tariffs are on those countries, which are either imposing tariffs, or tariffs are being imposed on them. Foreign tariffs on a country increase the cost of domestic producers, which causes them to sell less in those foreign countries. According to Robert Longley. (2002). He states in his article US Nails Tariff on Canadian Lumber the American tariffs have cost the Canadian Lumber producers around 1.5 billion Canadian dollars. This has resulted in the reduction in production and cut down of jobs as the demand of product goes down. This all impacts other industries and overall impact the economy of the nation. The country who is imposing tariffs is also affected as the cost of it outweighs the benefits. Tariffs are bad for domestic producers as it causes reduction in competition, allows prices to rise due to reduction in competition, the sales may rise too as the competition is low. The demand may increase due to which more workers need to be recruited. Consumer spending may increase too. Hence the tariffs also increase government revenues that can be used to the benefit of the economy. There are also costs to tariffs. When the country, which is imposed with tariffs, brings the foreign products in, the overall cost of that product rises. With high prices people are less willing to buy that product. Now here the foreign country sees a decline in the demand of its products. the domestic producers of the foreign country decrease their production which overall affects the economy of that foreign country. When a foreign country imposes tariffs it forget that the same country would also impose tariffs on their export of products. Therefore we can say that tariffs overall harms both the concerned countries. In the year 2000 President Bush raised tariffs on imported steel goods between 8 and 30 percent. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy cites a study which indicates that the tariff will reduce U.S. national income by between 0.5 to 1.4 billion dollars. The study estimates that less than 10,000 jobs in the steel industry will be saved by the measure at a cost of over $400,000 per job saved. For every job saved by this measure, 8 will be lost. All the studies up till now very well prove that tariffs harm the economies more than benefiting them so the question that arises is why do countries impose tariffs Well the logic is that if one thing is harmful to A then it is somehow beneficial to B. Even though A would be affected largely than B's benefits, but this is how the economics go. When the tariffs imposed are calculated in terms of individuals within a country, the amounts are very low. Nobody would want to fight over such a meager amount. But those individuals who are at a loss and even if they would fight over their loss, they would be