The Effects of the Atomic Bomb :: essays research papers

The Atomic Bomb: Effects on Hiroshima and Mankind   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The nuclear bomb was the most devastating weapon ever created by man. It was developed between 1942 and 1945 during the second World War. The project to build the worlds first atomic weapon was called The Manhattan Project. The nuclear bomb was based on the idea of splitting an atom to create energy, this is called fission. Three bombs were created, â€Å"Trinity†, â€Å"Little Boy†, and â€Å"Fat Man†. â€Å"Trinity† was dropped on a test site in New Mexico on July 16, 1945, proving the theories, engineering and mathematics of the bomb to be correct. Shortly after that, not more than 2 months, the U.S. performed the first actual nuclear attack in the history of war. The bomb â€Å"Little Boy† was dropped on the town of Hiroshima, instantly killing thousands. â€Å"Fat Man† was dropped shortly after on the town of Nagasaki. After the bombing almost all scientist involved with the creation of the bomb regretted its construc tion and spoke out against the abolishment of nuclear weapons.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Manhattan Project was led by American physicists J. Robert Oppenheimer and directed by General Leslie Graves. The project employed over 130,000 people and the total cost by the end of production was nearly 2 billion dollars, 20 billion dollars in today’s currency. Oppenheimer’s early education was at the Ethnical Culture School in New York. He took classes in math and science and many languages such as Greek, Latin, French, and German. He learned Dutch in only six weeks to give a speech in the Netherlands. He was also interested in classic and eastern philosophy.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In 1939 rumor came to the U.S. that Germans had split the atom. The threat of the Nazis developing a nuclear weapon prompted President Roosevelt to establish The Manhattan Project. Oppenheimer set up a research lab in Los Alamos, New Mexico and brought the best minds in physics to work on the problem of creating a nuclear weapon. Although most the research and development was done in Los Alamos, there were over 30 other research locations throughout the project. After watching the first nuclear bomb test Oppenheimer was quoted as saying simply â€Å"It works.†.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Now that the atomic bomb was proven to work the next question was where to drop it. Specialists in many fields were called on by the U.S. Army to help them decide on the best target for the atomic bomb. They considered many things while selecting the target such as the range the aircraft had to carry the bomb, the morale effect on the enemy, military importance of the target, and the geography of the target.

Circular Flow of Income

Q1. The circular flow of income is to show flows of goods and services and factors of production between firms and households. It used to measure the level of income and output in the economy . Households provide resources which aid the production process of business firms. Resources such as labour, land and capital are used by the business firms in return for payment this generates a flow of income to the households in the form of wages, rent, interest and profit . Firms in return make using the factors of productions goods and services which are sold to the households.Households give back payment for the goods and services these are expenditures. Expenditure of households becomes income for firms. The firms then spend this income on factors of production such as labour, capital and raw materials, â€Å"transferring† their income to the production factor owners. The production factor owners then spend this income on goods and services provided by the business firms which lead s to a circular flow of income. Q2. The income and spending of the circular flow of income are not equal this is because of injections and withdraws from the economy.Injections provide finance into the economy whilst withdrawals is money taken out of the economy. If withdrawals are bigger than injections the country would be facing a deficit and negative economic growth. If withdrawals are less than injections then a country would be facing a budget surplus and economic growth. Injections *Investment (I) *Government spending (G) *Foreign money /Exports (X) Investment (I) is defined as spending that results in an increase the economy's capital stock .Successful investments result in a increase in the economy's capacity to produce goods and services increasing profit. Examples include spending on construction and property the values of which appreciate over time due to inflation. The average, household spends less each year than they receive in income. The portion of household income that is not used to buy goods and services or to pay taxes is Savings (S). The most familiar form of saving is the use of part of a households income to make deposits in bank accounts or to buy shares or bonds, rather than to buy goods and services.The government withdrawals money, collecting revenue through taxes (T) which is provided by households and firms to the government. Taxes such as income tax that is tax on wages or corporation tax that is the tax on business profits are withdrawn out of the current income reducing the expenditure on current goods and services. Taxes are then injected back in as government spending (G) they are used to provide services such education, NHS and to provide welfare payments to the community such as jobseekers allowance, housing benefit and disability living allowance.International trade plays an increasingly important role in shaping the performance of the British economy, the UK is seen as one of the world leaders in terms of the volume of im ports/ exports of commodities and services. The value of exports (X) sold overseas will be injected into the circular flow, one of the UK’s largest exports is pharmaceuticals. Spending by UK consumers and businesses on imported (I) products represent a leakage from the flow, over 60% of imports into Britain are finished manufactured goods, while just under 3% are basic materials such as tobacco for cigarettes.

Sherbert v. Verner Arguments, Impact, Sherbert Test

In Sherbert v. Verner (1963), the Supreme Court ruled that a state must have a compelling interest and demonstrate that a law is narrowly tailored in order to restrict an individuals right to free exercise under the First Amendment. The Courts analysis became known as the Sherbert Test. Fast Facts: Sherbert v. Verner (1963) Case Argued: April 24, 1963Decision Issued: June 17, 1963Petitioner: Adell Sherbert, a member of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church and a textile-mill operatorRespondent: Verner et al., Members of the South Carolina Employment Security Commission, et al.Key Question: Did the state of South Carolina violate Adell Sherbert’s First Amendment and 14th Amendment rights when it denied her unemployment benefits?Majority Decision: Justices Warren, Black, Douglas, Clark, Brennan, Stewart, GoldbergDissenting: Justices Harlan, WhiteRuling: The Supreme Court found that South Carolina’s Unemployment Compensation Act was unconstitutional because it indirectly burdened Sherbert’s ability to exercise her religious freedoms. Facts of the Case Adell Sherbert was both a member of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church and a textile-mill operator. Her religion and workplace came into conflict when her employer asked her to work on Saturday, a religious day of rest. Sherbert refused and was fired. After having difficulty finding another job that did not require work on Saturdays, Sherbert applied for unemployment benefits through the South Carolina Unemployment Compensation Act. Eligibility for these benefits was based on two prongs: The person is able to work and available for work.The person has not rejected available and suitable work. The Employment Security Commission found that Sherbert did not qualify for the benefits because she had proved she was not â€Å"available† by rejecting jobs that required her to work on Saturdays. Sherbert appealed the decision on the basis that denying her benefits violated her freedoms to practice her religion. The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court. Constitutional Issues Did the state violate Sherbert’s First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights when it denied unemployment benefits? Arguments Attorneys on behalf of Sherbert argued that the unemployment law infringed upon her First Amendment right to freedom of exercise. Under South Carolina’s Unemployment Compensation Act, Sherbert could not receive unemployment benefits if she refused to work on Saturdays, a religious day of rest. Denying benefits unreasonably burdened Sherbert, according to her attorneys. Attorneys on behalf of the State of South Carolina argued that the language of the Unemployment Compensation Act did not discriminate against Sherbert. The Act did not directly prevent Sherbert from receiving benefits because she was a Seventh Day Adventist. Instead, the Act barred Sherbert from receiving benefits because she was not available to work. The state had an interest in ensuring that those receiving unemployment benefits were open and willing to work when a job was made available to them. Majority Opinion Justice William Brennan delivered the majority opinion. In a 7-2 decision, the Court found that South Carolina’s Unemployment Compensation Act was unconstitutional because it indirectly burdened Sherbert’s ability to exercise her religious freedoms. Justice Brennan wrote: â€Å"The ruling forces her to choose between following the precepts of her religion and forfeiting benefits, on the one hand, and abandoning one of the precepts of her religion in order to accept work, on the other hand. Governmental imposition of such a choice puts the same kind of burden upon the free exercise of religion as would a fine imposed against appellant for her Saturday worship.† Through this opinion, the Court created the Sherbert Test to determine whether government acts infringe upon religious freedoms. The Sherbert test has three prongs: The Court must decide whether the act burdens the individual’s religious freedoms. A burden can be anything from withholding benefits to imposing penalties for religious practice.The government may still â€Å"burden† an individual’s right to free exercise of religion if:The government can show a compelling interest to justify the intrusionThe government must also show that it cannot achieve this interest without burdening the individual’s freedoms. Any government intrusion on an individual’s first amendment freedoms must be narrowly tailored. Together, compelling interest and narrowly tailored are key requirements for strict scrutiny, a type of judicial analysis applied to cases where a law may be infringing on individual freedoms. Dissenting Opinion Justice Harlan and Justice White dissented, arguing that the state is required to act with neutrality when legislating. The South Carolina Unemployment Compensation Act was neutral in that it offered equal opportunity to access unemployment benefits. According to the Justices, it is within the state’s interest to provide unemployment benefits to help people looking for work. It is also within the state’s interest to restrict benefits from people if they refuse to take available jobs. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Harlan wrote that it would be unfair to allow Sherbert to access unemployment benefits when she is unavailable for work due to religious reasons if the state prevents others from accessing the same benefits for non-religious reasons. The state would show preferential treatment to people who practice certain religions. This violated the concept of neutrality that states should strive to achieve. Impact Sherbert v. Verner established the Sherbert Test as a judicial tool for analyzing state burdens on religious freedoms. In Employment Division v. Smith (1990), the Supreme Court limited the scope of the test. Under that decision, the Court ruled that the test could not be applied to laws that were generally applicable, but might incidentally hinder religious freedoms. Instead, the test should be used when a law discriminates against religions or is enforced in a discriminatory way. The Supreme Court still applies the Sherbert test in the latter. For example, the Supreme Court used the Sherbert test to analyze policies in the case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014). Sources Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963).Employment Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. ___ (2014).