I’m Ready to Write :: Graduate College Admissions Essays

I’m Ready to Write I had been scribbling in diaries and journals for years. My letters to the editor were known for their eloquent ferocity. A talent for writing was the only plausible explanation for my behavior. I had only recently discovered the essay as a genre. I took to it immediately and had had some modest success in getting my essays published on a wide range of websites, from off-the-wall e-zines to on-line literary journals. Was I ready? Was I ready for a real test-to submit my work to the state arts commission for an individual writers grant? At first I thought the idea was laughable. Who the hell did I think I was? My mom knew. She would hold my face in her hands and stare directly into my eyes and say, "You are a writer! Repeat after me: 'I am a writer!' " If my mom believed that, I would not argue with her. I would collaborate in the fiction for now. I began to search for the pieces I would submit. I looked for the essays with a real punch to them. I would include those that had been published or had received at least an honorable mention. There was that one I wrote about going to Mexico. Then one of my canoe essays. Not something corny like me and Ed on the Allegheny, but the one where I used paddling as a platform to view our Mad Max transportation system. I included another longer piece and then a couple of my short pieces. Reviewing the essays, I became self-conscious about my style. It is too popular to be literary, and too literary to be popular. It combines gravitas with humor. There are well-regarded authors whose style is not so different from my own, but what style are the reviewers looking for? Are they the super pure literary types that will dismiss my essays for having a social or political consciousness? Literature! Not polemics! Jack Warner was right: 'If you want to send a message, go to Western Union! Take your soap box and be gone!' I was making myself crazy. I am a writer. This writer will now print off these selections in the format required by the arts council, will put them into a manila envelope, go to the post office and send them to Columbus.

Bureaucratic vs Democratic

bureaucratic VS The structure of the organization alone is not sufficient for the efficiency of the organization, the manpower of the organization employed in that structure also have an equally important part to play. In the absence of efficient and specialized personnel, even the effective structure power is a failure. Therefore public administration places a great deal of importance to the study of personnel management. There are different types of personnel systems being practiced by different countries around the world. Two of which are: * Bureaucratic system of personnel Democratic system of personnel BUREAUCRATIC SYSTEM OF PERSONNEL â€Å"A personnel system where a body of public servants are organized in a hierarchical system which stands outside the sphere of public control. † DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM OF PERSONNEL â€Å"A personnel system where no one man has any more intrinsic right to official station than other. † COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN BUREAUCRATIC AND DEMOC RATIC Feature 1 Bureaucratic System: The main feature of this system is that the officials are servants of the ruler in the fullest sense of the term. They are responsible to him and him alone.It is through them that the ruler exercises his autocratic powers and they, being the agents of the ruler, in their turn, wield high authority over the people and are, as a rule deaf to public opinion. Democratic System: There is no class division in the services. An employee may begin in the lowest grade of the public service and may progress to the top of the service. In every service methods of objective tests, like efficiency ratings and rating scales, have been established and promotions are based upon these records there being absolutely no restriction on promotions from one class to another.Comparison: While comparing the above contrasting feature of both the systems it became quite evident that in Bureaucratic system the officials major concern is to be in accordance with the expectati ons of the ruler or government. They don’t care about the general public because there public credibility or the decisions taken solely for the welfare of the public is not going to provide them benefit but on the other hand if they take any decision which is not very likeable or favorable for the government then the officials might face some frictions.Whereas in democratic system, different forms of evaluation methods are in practices and based on these standard methods the officials are promoted. That’s why the officials perform their duties efficiently to increase their ratings on these evaluations. So to sum it up, the major concern of attention of officials in bureaucratic system is the government or the rulers whereas the in democratic system, officials are not under authority of the government to the extent as the bureaucratic ones are. Therefore their major concern is their own better performance. Feature 2Bureaucratic System: The officials are organized as a d istrict branch of the government like those of the military branch. They are recruited and trained on strict technical lines so as to make them expert administrators in their respective branches of administration. Thus, they have to apply their skill and experience to the solution of the problems of the civil government of the country just as the military officials have to apply their military skill to the defence of the country. Democratic System: Educational requirements at the time of entrance are of a highly specialized ature rather than of a general character. â€Å"The effort is made to secure persons already possessing the particular technical training fitting them to perform the work called for by the particular to be filled† Comparison: The bureaucratic system relies on the training and supervision of the officials. They don’t go for the already specialized administrations rather they believe in hiring may be an amateur person and then developing and building him into a specialized professional after keeping him under a regress.The officials are given specific training according to the requirements of the department or branch of administration where they should be serving. The democratic system does not favor training inspite it relies on hiring already specialized officials to be appointed on the positions compatible with their qualifications and specialized skills. Bureaucratic system believes that every task is specific so to deal with it specific things should be provided whereas the democratic system believes that the specialized individuals should be hired, their specialization would be enough to manage almost anything.Feature 3 Bureaucratic System: Civil service becomes a district and permanent career, with a regular gradation of positions with fixed grades, salaries and other privileges and a set system of promotions. And with these grades, certain titles and honors also are attached which continue even after the retirement of th e person. Thus, a district official class is created in the society with its own etiquette, powers and prerogatives. Democratic System: No effort is made to make public service a life career.All the above mentioned requirements point to the fact that every individual has full freedom to enter government service at any stage and similarly leave it whenever he pleases. Comparison: It can be said that the bureaucratic system bonds an individual with it. Once the individual becomes the administrative official, the title and honors remain with him forever. It is due to the fact that the system works on their official a lot by providing them training and education.Whereas in democratic system, as the individual are hired with their own skills and specialization, the system does not bond the individual with them rather the official can leave wherever he wants or gets a more appealing opportunity. This shows that the bureaucratic system is appropriate and suitable for the country where the public sector has the major share in the economic says of the country, it wants to keep the skilled and educated manpower with the state whereas the democratic system backs the private sector, the specialized individuals are given charming offers by private enterprises due to which they opt out of the public sector.CONCLUSION Both the systems are efficient in their own respective domains, both need to adopt some improvements in their structure. The bureaucratic system should take care of the hazards of red tapism, corruption etc. which are common in this system. The democratic system also needs to amend itself. It should add some time to time training to their officials according to the changing trends of the society. Also in the countries where democratic system is practiced, the public sector should introduce some incentives so that the officials stay along with the public sector.

Sharing lottery winnings - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 10 Words: 3131 Downloads: 4 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Uncategorized Essay Type Essay any type Level High school Did you like this example? Notice for Staff Room Wall (Offer) NATIONAL LOTTERY SYNDICATE : [WORKPLACE NAME] Since the National Lottery was launched in November 1994, it has been popular for groups to pool money together for the purchase of tickets for online draws. Not only is it more exciting playing in a group, but the more lines the group buys, the more entries they have in each game, and the more chances they have of winning (NL Website, 2006). We have decided to organise a syndicate at [Workplace], and hope that, as an employee of [Workplace], you will decide to join us in increasing your chances of winning a prize. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Sharing lottery winnings" essay for you Create order Remember, even if our syndicate does not win, we contribute to good causes every time we play! Syndicates are often conducted informally but, since there is a potential for a large returns, it is essential that the rights and obligations of members of the syndicate, and of the organiser, are set out clearly in writing (EFP, 2003). Also of note, if there is no appropriate syndicate agreement in place, any of the prize monies distributed to other syndicate winners may be subject to inheritance tax. We have therefore drafted a suitable Agreement for [Workplace]à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s syndicate. If, as an employee of [Workplace], you would like to participate in our syndicate, please review the provisions of our Syndicate Agreement in line with the Guidance Notes provided, and add your name and address to Schedule 1. Please then sign the Agreement in the presence of an independent witness (who should also give their name, address and signature), and return it to our Syndicate Manager, [Name]. These notes explain the Syndicate Agreement, setting out the meaning of each clause and the reasons why it has been included. If, after reading these notes, you are still unsure as to your rights and obligations under the Syndicate Agreement, we recommend that you seek independent legal advice. Why have a formal agreement? Lottery Syndicates are often conducted informally but this is unwise as there is the potential for a large payout. All sorts of difficult situations may arise à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" for example, where someone doesnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t pay their stake during a winning week, or someone demands that they were entitled to a bigger share of the winnings than other people (perhaps because they have been in the syndicate for longer). A formal agreement in writing deals with all of these eventualities, setting out exactly what each Member has agreed to. We are also aware that, where National Lottery winnings are shared out among the members of a syndicate i n accordance with à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“a pre-existing enforceable arrangementà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  made before the win, there is no liability to inheritance tax since the syndicate manager does not make a à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“giftà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  or à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“chargeable transferà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" however, where no suitable agreement exists, inheritance may be payable (HMRC Statement E14 as amended in 1996, Division H3.4). Although this does not need to be recorded in writing, the HMRC advise this (HMRC Statement E14, supra). It is important to show that the parties to the syndicate intend it to be legally binding and more than a mere social arrangement so that, in the event of a prize being won, all parties are paid what they are due in accordance with what they have agreed. In Simpkins v Pays (1955), three persons regularly contributed to a competition and one week the entry was successful but the defendant refused to pay the plaintiff his share of the prize and claimed the re was no intention to create a legally binding relationship. Although the plaintiff was successful in claiming his share, other claimants have been less successful in proving that all parties intended there to be a contractually binding agreement, particularly where there has been proximity of relationship (see, for example, Balfour v Balfour (1919) in which it was held that there was no intention to create a legally binding agreement between husband and wife to pay  £30 per month maintenance to the wife; also see Hoddinott v Hoddinott (1949) 2 KB 406, CA). Clearly such disputes could have been avoided had a suitable agreement been in place à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" a written agreement can be used as legal evidence if any Member of the syndicate disagrees with how any winnings are to be distributed. The essentials of our agreement For an agreement to be binding, there must be, amongst other things, a valid offer and acceptance. An offer is an expression by one person or gr oup of persons, made to another, of his willingness to be bound to a contract with that other on terms either certain or capable of being rendered certain. The offer may be made to an individual (e.g., British Bank Foreign Trade Ltd v Novinex Ltd (1949)) or to a group of persons (e.g., The Satanita (1897)), or to the world at large (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893)). Our offer was made through a notice on the staff room wall and it is clear that we have made the offer only to employees of [Workplace]. This is simply to keep the syndicate administrable. Although advertisements and notices are not always construed as offers (such as in Partridge v Crittenden (1968) where further negotiation of terms was necessary to reach a binding agreement), we have ensured that our notice amounts to a formal offer by stating that, to join the syndicate, no further negotiations are necessary; an employee need only to avail themselves of the terms of the Agreement and insert their details i nto Schedule 1 (Part 1 or 2) to accept. In order to accept our offer to join the Syndicate, you need to comply with the terms of acceptance in the Notice, by adding your name and address to Schedule 1 (Part 1 or 2). You then need to sign the Agreement in the presence of an independent witness (who should also give their name, address and signature), and return it to our Syndicate Manager, [Name]. By doing this, you are demonstrating that you agree to the terms of the offer unequivocally and unconditionally (Taylor v Laird (1856)). Please note that this is the only mode of acceptance that we can allow à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" any other purported acceptance by some other means will amount only to a counter-offer in which case there will be no binding contract (Burton v Great Northern Rly Co (1854)). The remaining guidance notes below set out the reasons for the inclusion of the main provisions of the Agreement, and cite authority for each provision. General Clauses 1.7 à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" 1.9 are general interpretation clauses, so that for example, where the Agreement refers to à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"heà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ it also includes à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"sheà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, and where the agreement refers to à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"the Membersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ it also means a single member. Clause 2 sets out the purpose of the Agreement, for the avoidance of doubt. Members The Agreement has been designed to accommodate not only the original members of [Workplace]à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s syndicate (which are to be set out in Schedule 1 Part 1), but also any persons joining the Company in the future who may wish to play (which are to be set out in Schedule 1 Part 2). The Schedule is easily amended to accommodate new players. Because Schedule 1 Parts 1 and 2 is so easily amended, for the avoidance of doubt, we have included Clause 1.2 to the effect that to be a Member of the syndicate, you must include your name, address and signature in Schedule 1 (Part 1 or 2), which must be witnessed by an independent person (i.e. someone who is not a Member and who is not associated with the Syndicate in any way). You also need to include your date of joining à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" this is relevant to Clause 2 of the Agreement because you will be participating in the Syndicate from the next Saturday draw following your date of joining. We have also included provisio ns to allow any Member to resign from the Syndicate. Again, for the avoidance of doubt, this must be done by entering your name and address and signature, to be witnessed by an independent person, into Schedule 1 Part 3, together with the date on which the entry is made. This will prevent any dispute over what instructions were given to the Syndicate Manager. Draws We have agreed that our syndicate will only play in the Saturday Lotto draw, and this is set out at Clause 1.1. Wherever the Agreement refers to à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"the Lotteryà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, this means the Saturday Lotto draw. At this time, our agreed stake is  £1.00 per Member and this is set out at Clause 1.4 and in Schedule 2. We have included this in a schedule so that we can easily amend the Agreement in future if we decide that each Member wants to put more into the syndicate à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" we have made any such amendment subject to a unanimous decision so that all Members must agree to such changes. We have agreed that the tickets we purchase will be Lucky Dip tickets à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" these are tickets purchased which allow the National Lottery to allocate completely random Lottery numbers (Clause 4.3). Subscriptions Clause 4 lays down quite strict requirements for à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"participatingà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ in the syndicate. Members are required to pay their stake to the Syndicate Manager by 13:00 on the Friday preceding each Lottery draw and if they do not comply with these provisions, they will not be construed as participating in the draw. Winnings Clause 3.1 places the responsibility of collecting any prize on the Syndicate Manager, [Name]. The Syndicate Manager must collect the prize and hold it à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"on trustà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢: this means that, although they have the money in their possession, it does not belong to them and they are holding it for the other Members until it can be paid over (Abrahams v Trustee of the Property of Abrahams (1999)). Clause 3.3 provides that any prize won will be shared between the Members of the Syndicate who have participated in the draw for that week. Clause 3.4 requires that the Syndicate Manager pay the prize to the Members entitled to it within seven days. This is important because large prizes could potentially accumulate a substantial amount of interest if paid into a bank account, which the Manager could benefit from and/or the Members could lose out on. If the prize is not paid within seven days, therefore, interest becomes due at a standard contract rate (Clause 3.5). The Syndicate Manager The Agreement provides for a Syndicate Manager who will run the syndicate à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" this will be [Name] as identified in Schedule 1 Part 3. The Syndicate Manager can also be a Member. Clause 7 sets out the responsibilities of the Syndicate Manager which include to collect subscriptions, purchase Lucky Dip tickets, check whether the tickets have won a prize, obtain any prizes and distribute them to the Members entitled. The Syndicate Manager also has to keep records of all contributions and prizes which can be inspected by any Member, and to keep the Agreement (particularly the Schedules) up to date. We have included a provision that the Syndicate Manager may not purchase any Lucky Dip tickets for their own personal use on the same day as purchasing tickets for the syndicate à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" this is to avoid any confusion as to whose tickets have won since all syndicate tickets will be purchased on the Friday before the relevant draw. We have also included a clau se that resolves the Syndicate Manager from any liability in respect of any failure to win a prize in the Lottery or any other financial loss or claim arising out of the Agreement, in the absence of any deliberate wrongdoing. Publicity We have included a clause which states that the Members do not agree to participate in publicity as a result of winning a prize under the Agreement. We appreciate that some Members may not object to publicity but we feel that since publicity is intrusive, we need to protect the present and future Members that wish to avoid such intrusion. Liability of [Workplace] The Agreement makes it clear that [Workplace] does not acquire any rights or obligations as a result of participation in the syndicate by its employees. Agreement for National Lottery syndicate This Agreement is made the day of between the persons listed in Schedule 1 to this agreement. Definitions In this agreement: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"the Lotteryà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ means the National Lottery prize draw which takes place on Saturday and is organised by Camelot Watford, Head Office and Regional Centre Camelot Group plc, of Tolpits Lane, Watford, Herts, WD18 9RN the Members means the persons who have included their name, address and witnessed signature and date of joining in Schedule 1 Part 1 or Part 2 to this agreement the Syndicate Manager means the person whose name and address is set out in Schedule 1 Part 4 or such person as is appointed his successor by the majority of the Members the Stake means the sum set out in Schedule 2 paid weekly, agreed to be subscribed by the Members which may be reviewed and amended from time to time by the Members by unanimous decision the Total Stake means the total number of stakes for each draw; à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Lucky Dip Ticketsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ means tickets purchased using the National Lottery Lucky Dip facility words importing any gender include every gender; words importing the singular number include the plural number and vice versa; the clause headings do not form part of this agreement and shall not be taken into account in its construction or interpretation. Agreement By entering into this agreement, the Members are agreeing to join together to participate in the Lottery, commencing with the next prize draw after the date of their joining. Obligation to share winnings In the event that a prize is won in the Lottery as a result of purchasing tickets using the Total Stake, the Syndicate Manager shall arrange collection of that prize and shall hold it on trust for each of the other Members who are participating in the Lottery for that week For the avoidance of doubt, Members participating in the Lottery for that week are those Members that have complied with the provisions of Clause 4.1 exactly. The proceeds of the prize will be shared equally between the Members participating in the Lottery for that week and those Members only will be entitled to an equal share of the prize Each share of the prize shall be paid to the Member entitled within 7 days of receipt by the Syndicate Manager If a share is not paid to the Member entitled to it within 7 days of receipt by the Syndicate Manager, that Member shall also be entitled to receive interest at the rate of 4% above the base lending rate of Barclays Bank plc from time to time in force. For the avoidance of doubt, a prize won in the Lottery by a Member otherwise than by means of the purchase of Lucky Dip tickets with the Total Stake by the Syndicate Manager on behalf of the Members under this Agreement, shall not be subject to the obligation to share contained in this clause. Subscription Each Member will pay the Stake, as set out in Schedule 2, to the Syndicate Manager by 13:00 on the Friday preceding each Lottery draw If a Member does not comply exactly with the provisions of Clause 4.1, they will not be construed as participating in the preceding Lottery draw On receipt of the Total Stake, the Syndicate Manager shall purchase Lucky Dip tickets to the value of the Total Stake Any prize won as a result of the purchase of tickets in accordance with Clause 4.3 shall be shared in accordance with Clause 3 above Publicity The Members do not agree to participate in publicity as a result of winning a prize under this Agreement Resignation Any Member may resign by entering their name and address and signature, witnessed by an independent person, into Schedule 1 Part 3, together with the date of resignation which must be the date on which the resignation is made Any resignation in accordance with Clause 6.1 will have immediate effect Once a Member has resigned in accordance with Clause 6.1 any entitlement to a share in any prize won thereafter shall cease. Responsibilities of the Syndicate Manager The Syndicate Manager shall: collect subscriptions from the Members participating in the draw for that week in accordance with Clause 4 purchase Lucky Dip tickets at an authorised sales point of the Lottery in time for inclusion in each weekly draw using the full amount of the Total Stake for that week, and retain and keep safe those tickets issued to him check whether the purchased tickets have won a prize obtain any prize won in the Lottery as a result of the purchase of Lucky Dip tickets using the Total Stake for that week distribute any prize won to the Members entitled in accordance with Clause 3 keep records of all contributions made and prizes won, and make this record available to any Member for inspection on request keep this Agreement safe and the Schedules updated at all times and provide each Member with a photocopy of the Agreement and updated Schedules as soon as practicable on request The Syndicate Manager may not purchase any lucky dip tickets for his own personal use on the same day as purchasing tickets for the syndicate No Liability of Syndicate Manager In the absence of wilful neglect or default the Syndicate Manager shall not be liable to any Member in respect of any failure to win a prize in the Lottery or any other financial loss or claim arising out of this agreement. No obligation of [Workplace] [Workplace] shall incur no liability nor attain any rights as a result of participation in the Lottery by employees of [Workplace] SCHEDULE 1 Original Members (names, addresses and witnessed signatures of original Members) Subsequent Members (names, addresses and witnessed signatures of persons joining later, with dates of joining) Former Members (names of Members who have resigned, with dates of termination of membership) The Syndicate Manager (name, address and signature of the Organiser and of any successor Organiser) SCHEDULE 2 Amount of the Stake (e.g. à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“ £1.00à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ) SCHEDULE 3 Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents: Gambling (Gaming, Betting, Lotteries and National Lottery) (Volume 17(1)) (2003 Reissue) (A) Commentary E. National Lottery Syndicates 190. Lottery syndicates Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents: Gambling (Gaming, Betting, Lotteries and National Lottery) (Volume 17(1)) (2003 Reissue) (B) Forms and Precedents A: Lottery Syndicates 160 Agreement for National Lottery syndicate for employees Halsburys Laws of England: Inherance Taxation 2. Main Charging Provisions (1) Main Charges and Definitions 408. Meaning of chargeable transfer National Lottery Website: https://www.nationallottery.gov.uk Simons Direct Tax Service Binder 8 HMRC practice Part H3 HMRC Statements of Practice Division H3.4 IR Statements issued before 18 July 1978à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬ full texts E. Statements relating to inheritance tax E14 Pools etc syndicates Stone, R (2005) The Modern Law of Contract (6th Edition) Cavendish Publishing Limited Abrahams v Trustee of the Property of Abrahams (1999) BPIR 637 Balfour v Balfour (1919) 2 KB 571 British Bank Foreign Trade Ltd v Novinex Ltd [1949] 1 KB 623, [1949] 1 All ER 155, CA Burton v Great Northern Rly Co (1854) 9 Exch 507 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256 CA Hoddinott v Hoddinott (1949) 2 KB 406, CA Partridge v Crittenden (1968) 2 All ER 421 Simpkins v Pays (1955) 3 All ER 10 Taylor v Laird (1856) 1 H N 266; 25 LJ Ex 329 The Satanita [1897] AC 59, HL