My Friends Tell Me I am Not an Atheist :: Personal Narrative essay about myself

My Friends Tell Me I am Not an Atheist    It's remarkable how many of my friends insist I am not an atheist. It seems pretty obvious to me that I don't believe any god exists, and that pretty much makes me an atheist. Nevertheless, here these people are, so insistent that I cannot possibly be an atheist. "You're too nice," they say, or "you really believe, you just don't know it" (how's that again?). Sometimes I hear something like "You believe in something, and that is really god" or "you are still looking, but you'll find Him" (he's invited to stop by my house at any time). When I have the time to converse with these people, however, it usually comes down to this: I'm really an agnostic, they say, because I am willing to admit that I don't know there isn't any god. It is apparently so important for people to believe that I'm "really just an agnostic" that I find this to be a haunting sign of the hold religion has on people. It is tragic that the mere thought of a good friend or relative being an actual, avowed atheist is s o horrible that it must be denied. Sometimes I have the chance to explain that I am an atheist not because I know there isn't a god, but because I don't believe there is. If someone insisted that their pet fish could talk, I really couldn't say I knew it didn't, especially if I could not go and see for myself, but it would still be fair for me to say that there are no talking fish. The relevance of this is that I do not believe god exists any more than I believe fish can talk. Certainly, I have not examined all species of fish, nor every single fish for that matter, nor could I ever accomplish such a feat, but the claim that they exist is so contrary to my own personal experience and reliable facts that I simply will not believe it unless very definitive proof is provided. Of course, if I visit someone's pet fish and it talks to me, I am still wiser to test the possibilities of trickery or insanity before believing it can really talk. But if I found many fish that talked, trustworthy people confirmed it, scientists pu blished carefully researched papers about them, and newspaper headlines read "INCREDIBLE DISCOVERY: TALKING FISH!" then it would be more than reasonable to believe they existed. My Friends Tell Me I am Not an Atheist :: Personal Narrative essay about myself My Friends Tell Me I am Not an Atheist    It's remarkable how many of my friends insist I am not an atheist. It seems pretty obvious to me that I don't believe any god exists, and that pretty much makes me an atheist. Nevertheless, here these people are, so insistent that I cannot possibly be an atheist. "You're too nice," they say, or "you really believe, you just don't know it" (how's that again?). Sometimes I hear something like "You believe in something, and that is really god" or "you are still looking, but you'll find Him" (he's invited to stop by my house at any time). When I have the time to converse with these people, however, it usually comes down to this: I'm really an agnostic, they say, because I am willing to admit that I don't know there isn't any god. It is apparently so important for people to believe that I'm "really just an agnostic" that I find this to be a haunting sign of the hold religion has on people. It is tragic that the mere thought of a good friend or relative being an actual, avowed atheist is s o horrible that it must be denied. Sometimes I have the chance to explain that I am an atheist not because I know there isn't a god, but because I don't believe there is. If someone insisted that their pet fish could talk, I really couldn't say I knew it didn't, especially if I could not go and see for myself, but it would still be fair for me to say that there are no talking fish. The relevance of this is that I do not believe god exists any more than I believe fish can talk. Certainly, I have not examined all species of fish, nor every single fish for that matter, nor could I ever accomplish such a feat, but the claim that they exist is so contrary to my own personal experience and reliable facts that I simply will not believe it unless very definitive proof is provided. Of course, if I visit someone's pet fish and it talks to me, I am still wiser to test the possibilities of trickery or insanity before believing it can really talk. But if I found many fish that talked, trustworthy people confirmed it, scientists pu blished carefully researched papers about them, and newspaper headlines read "INCREDIBLE DISCOVERY: TALKING FISH!" then it would be more than reasonable to believe they existed.

Concept Computers :: essays research papers fc

A Strategic and Financial Analysis of Concept Contents Page 1.0 – Introduction 2.0 – SWOT Analysis 2.1-Strengths 2.1.1-Established, Major Global Company 2.1.2-Workforce and Culture 2.1.3-Cash Reserves 2.2-Weaknesses 2.2.1-Post-Standardisation Decisions 2.3-Opportunities 2.3.1-Consultancy for Enterprise Solutions 2.4-Threats 2.4.1-Overseas Entrants 2.4.2-New CEO and Staff 2.5-Summary 3-PESTEL 3.1-PESTEL Framework Diagram 3.2-Political 3.3-Economical 3.4-Sociocultural 3.5-Technological 3.6-Summary 4-Porter’s Five Forces Framework 4.1-Threat of New Entrants 4.2-Threat of Substitutes 4.3-Bargaining Power of Buyers 4.4-Bargaining Power of Suppliers 4.5-Competitive Rivalry 4.6-Summary 5-Financial Analysis of Concept, 1999-2002 5.1-Calculations Sheet 5.2-Gross Profit Margin (GPM) 5.3-Expenses Ratio 5.4-Return on Total Assets (ROTA) 6-Bibliography 1.0-Introduction This report has been produced to give consultancy to Kent Andrews, CEO of the computing company Concept. I will use literature theory models to analyse Concept. Using this analysis Kent should be in a stronger position to reinstate Concept to market leadership in its industry. To closely study Concept strategically I will use the SWOT and PESTEL frameworks and Porter’s Five Forces model. I will use accounting calculations to assess Concept’s financial state and then comment on my findings. 2.0-SWOT Analysis Johnson et al (2005) state that a SWOT analysis â€Å"summarises the key issues from the business environment and the strategic capability of an organisation that are most likely to impact on strategy development†. 2.1-Strengths: I would describe the three strengths below as being Concept’s ‘Core Competences’ (Hamel, G and Prahalad, C. K.). I felt it unnecessary to elaborate on the competency theory additionally. I feel these strengths support the definition Johnson et al (2005) give Core Competences: â€Å"†¦activities that underpin competitive advantage and are difficult for competitors to imitate or obtain† 2.1.1-Established, Major Global Company Despite recently losing market leadership, Concept is still a prominent global player. It has reacted well to competition in the past 30 years and this experience and knowledge of the industry should aid its recovery to the industry’s forefront. Concept has established itself as a leading brand name, and governmental decisions to assign Concept’s operating system as the industry standard shows potential buyers the professionalism and expertise of the company. 2.1.2-Workforce and Culture Concept has a well structured and experienced workforce, complete with Product and Country managers. Key staff was poached from competitors at the end of the 1970s. This would suggest to me that firstly these employees may still be with Concept, indicating it has competent employees, and secondly, it cements the notion that Concept was, and still is, an attractive company to be involved with. The organisational culture and structure is described as being the base of its success. Concept has adapted to a changing climate on a few occasions throughout its long history, especially when reacting to customer needs, such as by manufacturing palm tops and developing enterprise software.

Wal Mart Annual Report Analysis

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS Eduardo Castro-Wright Vice Chairman, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. M. Susan Chambers Executive Vice President, Global People Brian C. Cornell Executive Vice President, President and Chief Executive Officer, Sam’s Club 2 010 Financial Report 15 Five-Year Financial Summary 16 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 30 Consolidated Statements of Income 31 Consolidated Balance Sheets 32 Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity 33 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 34 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 52 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 3 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Thomas M. Schoewe Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 54 Management’s Report to Our Shareholders 55 Fiscal 2010 End-of-Year Store Count H. Lee Scott, Jr. Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directo rs 56 Corporate and Stock Information Leslie A. Dach Executive Vice President, Corporate Affairs and Government Relations Michael T. Duke President and Chief Executive Officer Rollin L. Ford Executive Vice President, Chief Information Officer Thomas D. Hyde Executive Vice President, Legal, Ethics, nd Corporate Secretary C. Douglas McMillon Executive Vice President, President and Chief Executive Officer, Walmart International S. Robson Walton Chairman of the Board of Directors Steven P. Whaley Senior Vice President and Controller 14 Walmart 2010 Annual Report 107077_L01_FIN_02. indd 14 4/6/10 12:10:45 AM 2010 FINANCIAL REVIEW Five-Year Financial Summary (Amounts in millions except per share and unit count data) As of and for the Fiscal Years Ended January 31, 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 (1) Operating Results Net sales Net sales increase Comparable store sales in the United States (2) Walmart U. S.Sam’s Club Gross pro? t margin Operating, selling, general and administrative expens es, as a percentage of net sales Operating income Income from continuing operations attributable to Walmart Per share of common stock: Income from continuing operations attributable to Walmart, diluted Dividends $405,046 1. 0% -0. 8% -0. 7% -1. 4% 24. 8% $401,087 7. 3% 3. 5% 3. 2% 4. 9% 24. 2% $373,821 8. 4% 1. 6% 1. 0% 4. 9% 24. 0% $344,759 11. 6% 2. 0% 1. 9% 2. 5% 23. 4% $308,945 9. 8% 3. 4% 3. 0% 5. 0% 23. 1% 19. 7% $ 23,950 14,414 19. 3% $ 22,798 13,254 19. 0% $ 21,952 12,863 18. 5% $ 20,497 12,189 18. 0% $ 18,693 1,386 3. 72 1. 09 $3. 35 0. 95 $3. 16 0. 88 $2. 92 0. 67 $2. 72 0. 60 $ 33,160 102,307 170,706 36,401 70,749 $ 34,511 95,653 163,429 34,549 65,285 $ 35,159 96,867 163,514 33,402 64,608 $ 33,667 88,287 151,587 30,735 61,573 $ 31,910 77,863 138,793 30,096 53,171 Unit Counts Walmart U. S. Segment International Segment Sam’s Club Segment 3,708 4,112 596 3,656 3,605 602 3,550 3,098 591 3,443 2,734 579 3,289 2,158 567 Total units 8,416 7,863 7,239 6,756 6,014 Financia l Position Inventories Property, equipment and capital lease assets, net Total assets Long-term debt, including obligations under capital leasesTotal Walmart shareholders’ equity $ (1) In connection with the company’s ? nance transformation project, we reviewed and adjusted the classi? cation of certain revenue and expense items within our Consolidated Statements of Income for ? nancial reporting purposes. Although the reclassi? cations impacted net sales, gross margin and operating, selling, general and administrative expenses, they did not impact operating income or income from continuing operations attributable to Walmart. The changes were effective February 1, 2009 and have been re? ected for ? scal years 2010, 2009 and 2008. 2) Comparable store and club sales include fuel. For ? scal 2006, we considered comparable sales to be sales at stores and clubs that were open as of February 1st of the prior ? scal year and which had not been converted, expanded or relocated since that date. Fiscal 2008 and ? scal 2007 comparable sales includes all stores and clubs that have been open for at least the previous 12 months. Additionally, for those ? scal years, stores and clubs that are relocated, expanded or converted are excluded from comparable sales for the ? rst 12 months following the relocation, expansion or conversion.Fiscal 2010 and 2009 comparable sales include sales from stores and clubs open for the previous 12 months, including remodels, relocations and expansions. Fiscal 2008 and prior ? scal years’ comparable sales do not re? ect reclassi? cations effective February 1, 2009, as noted above. Walmart 2010 Annual Report 15 107077_L01_FIN_02. indd 15 4/6/10 12:10:45 AM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Overview Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (â€Å"Walmart,† the â€Å"company† or â€Å"we†) operates retail stores in various formats around the world and is committed to saving people money so they can live better.We earn the trust of our customers every day by providing a broad assortment of quality merchandise and services at every day low prices (â€Å"EDLP†), while fostering a culture that rewards and embraces mutual respect, integrity and diversity. EDLP is our pricing philosophy under which we price items at a low price every day so that our customers trust that our prices will not change under frequent promotional activity. Our focus for Sam’s Club is to provide exceptional value on brand name merchandise at â€Å"members only† prices for both business and personal use.Internationally, we operate with similar philosophies. Our ? scal year ends on January 31 for our U. S. , Canada and Puerto Rico operations. Our ? scal year ends on December 31 for all other operations. We intend for this discussion to provide the reader with information that will assist in understanding our ? nancial statements, the changes in certain key items in those ? nancial statements from year to year, and the primary factors that accounted for those changes, as well as how certain accounting principles affect our ? nancial statements.We also discuss certain performance metrics that management uses to assess our performance. The discussion also provides information about the ? nancial results of the various segments of our business to provide a better understanding of how those segments and their results affect the ? nancial condition and results of operations of the company as a whole. This discussion should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements as of January 31, 2010, and the year then ended, and accompanying notes. Our operations comprise three business segments: Walmart U.S. , International and Sam’s Club. The Walmart U. S. segment includes the company’s mass merchant concept in the United States, operating under the â€Å"Walmart† or â€Å"Wal-Mart† brand, as well a s walmart. com. The International segment consists of the company’s operations outside of the 50 United States. The Sam’s Club segment includes the warehouse membership clubs in the United States, as well as samsclub. com. Sales By Segment Net sales in ? scal 2010 were a record $405. 0 billion, up 1. 0% from ? scal 2009. Sam’s Club 11. 5% International 24. 7%Throughout this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, we discuss segment operating income and comparable store sales. The company measures the results of its segments using, among other measures, each segment’s operating income which includes certain corporate overhead allocations. From time to time, we revise the measurement of each segment’s operating income, including any corporate overhead allocations, as dictated by the information regularly reviewed by our chief operating decision maker.When we do so, the segment operating income for each segment affected by the revisions is restated for all periods presented to maintain comparability. In connection with the company’s ? nance transformation project, we reviewed and adjusted the classi? cation of certain revenue and expense items within our Consolidated Statements of Income for ? nancial reporting purposes. The reclassi? cations did not impact operating income or consolidated net income attributable to Walmart. The changes were effective February 1, 2009 and have been re? ected in all periods presented.Comparable store sales is a measure which indicates the performance of our existing U. S. stores and clubs by measuring the growth in sales for such stores for a particular period over the corresponding period in the prior year. In ? scal 2008, our method of calculating comparable store sales included all stores and clubs that were open for at least the previous 12 months. Additionally, stores and clubs that were relocated, expanded or converted were exclud ed from comparable store sales for the ? rst 12 months following the relocation, expansion or conversion. During ? scal year 2008, the company reviewed its de? ition of comparable store sales for consistency with other retailers. As a result of that review, since February 1, 2008, Walmart’s de? nition of comparable store sales includes sales from stores and clubs open for the previous 12 months, including remodels, relocations and expansions. Changes in format continue to be excluded from comparable store sales when the conversion is accompanied by a relocation or expansion that results in a change in square footage of more than ? ve percent. Since the impact of this revision is inconsequential, the company will not restate comparable store sales results for previously reported years.Comparable store sales are also referred to as â€Å"same-store† sales by others within the retail industry. The method of calculating comparable store sales varies across the retail indus try. As a result, our calculation of comparable store sales is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies. In discussions of our consolidated results and the operating results of our International segment, we sometimes refer to the impact of changes in currency exchange rates. When we refer to changes in currency exchange rates or currency exchange rate ? ctuations, we are referring to the differences between the currency exchange rates we use to convert the International segment’s operating results from local currencies into U. S. dollars for reporting purposes. The impacts of currency exchange rate ? uctuations are typically calculated as the difference between current period activity translated using the current period’s currency exchange rates and the comparable prior year period’s currency exchange rates, respectively. We use this method for all countries where the functional currency is not U. S. denominated. Walmar t U. S. 63. 8% 16 Walmart 2010 Annual Report 107077_L01_FIN. ndd 16 4/6/10 8:25:50 PM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations The Retail Industry We operate in the highly competitive retail industry in both the United States and the countries we serve internationally. We face strong sales competition from other discount, department, drug, variety and specialty stores, warehouse clubs, and supermarkets, many of which are national, regional or international chains, as well as internet-based retailers and catalog businesses. We compete with a number of companies for prime retail site locations, as well as in attracting and retaining quality employees whom we call â€Å"associates†). We, along with other retail companies, are in? uenced by a number of factors including, but not limited to: general economic conditions, cost of goods, consumer disposable income, consumer debt levels and buying patterns, consumer credit availabili ty, interest rates, customer preferences, unemployment, labor costs, in? ation, de? ation, currency exchange ? uctuations, fuel and energy prices, weather patterns, climate change, catastrophic events, competitive pressures and insurance costs. Further information on risks to our company can be located in â€Å"Item 1A.Risk Factors† in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the ? scal year ended January 31, 2010. Company Performance Metrics The company’s performance metrics emphasize three priorities for improving shareholder value: growth, leverage and returns. The company’s priority of growth focuses on sales growth; the priority of leverage encompasses the company’s metric to increase our operating income at a faster rate than the growth in net sales by growing our operating, selling, general and administrative expenses (â€Å"operating expenses†) at a slower rate than the growth of our net sales; and the priority of returns focuses on how ef? ientl y the company employs our assets through return on investment (â€Å"ROI†) and how effectively the company manages working capital through free cash ? ow. Growth Net Sales Fiscal Years Ended January 31, (Dollar amounts in millions) 2009 2010 Percent increase Net sales Percent of total 2008 Percent increase Net sales Percent of total Net sales Percent of total Walmart U. S. International Sam’s Club $258,229 100,107 46,710 63. 8% 24. 7% 11. 5% 1. 1% 1. 3% -0. 4% $255,348 98,840 46,899 63. 7% 24. 6% 11. 7% 6. 9% 9. 1% 5. 8% $238,915 90,570 44,336 63. 9% 24. 2% 11. 9% Net Sales $405,046 00. 0% 1. 0% $401,087 100. 0% 7. 3% $373,821 100. 0% O ur net sales increased by 1. 0% and 7. 3% in ? scal 2010 and 2009, respectively, when compared to the previous ? scal year. Net sales in ? scal 2010 increased due to increased customer traf? c, continued global expansion activities and the acquisition of our Chilean subsidiary, Distribucion y Servicio (â€Å"D&S†) in January 2009 , offset primarily by a $9. 8 billion unfavorable currency exchange rate impact in our International segment and price de? ation in certain merchandise categories in our Walmart U. S. segment. Net sales in ? cal 2009 increased due to our global expansion activities and comparable store sales increases, offset by a $2. 3 billion unfavorable currency exchange rate impact. Despite the unfavorable impact of currency exchanges rates, the International segment’s net sales as a percentage of total company net sales increased in ? scal 2010 and 2009, respectively. Volatility in currency exchange rates may continue to impact the International segment’s net sales in the future. Comparable Store Sales Comparable store sales is a measure which indicates the performance of our existing U. S. tores by measuring the growth in sales for such stores for a particular period over the corresponding period in the prior year. Comparable store sales in the United States decreased 0. 8% in ? scal 2010 and increased 3. 5% in ? scal 2009. Although customer traf? c increased in ? scal 2010, comparable store sales in the United States were lower than ? scal 2009 due to de? ation in certain merchandise categories and lower fuel prices. Comparable store sales in the United States in ? scal 2009 were higher than ? scal 2008 due to an increase in customer traf? c, as well as an increase in average transaction size per customer.As we continue to add new stores in the United States, we do so with an understanding that additional stores may take sales away from existing units. We estimate the negative impact on comparable store sales as a result of opening new stores was approximately 0. 6% in ? scal 2010 and 1. 1% in ? scal 2009. With our planned slower new store growth, we expect the impact of new stores on comparable store sales to stabilize over time. Fiscal Years Ended January 31, 2010 2009 2008 Walmart U. S. Sam’s Club (1) -0. 7% -1. 4% 3. 2% 4. 9% 1. 0% 4. 9% Total U . S. -0. 8% 3. 5% 1. 6% (1) Sam’s Club comparable club sales include fuel.Fuel sales had a negative impact of 2. 1 percentage points in ? scal year 2010, and positive impact of 1. 2 and 0. 7 percentage points in ? scal years 2009 and 2008, respectively, on comparable club sales. Walmart 2010 Annual Report 17 107077_L01_FIN_02. indd 17 4/6/10 12:10:46 AM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Leverage Fiscal Years Ended January 31, (Dollar amounts in millions) 2009 2010 Operating income Percent of total Percent increase Operating income 2008 Percent of total Percent increase Operating income Percent of total Walmart U.S. International Sam’s Club Other $19,522 5,033 1,512 (2,117) 81. 5% 21. 0% 6. 3% -8. 8% 5. 2% 1. 9% -8. 1% -9. 9% $18,562 4,940 1,646 (2,350) 81. 4% 21. 7% 7. 2% -10. 3% 6. 8% 4. 6% -0. 1% 30. 3% $17,383 4,725 1,648 (1,804) 79. 2% 21. 5% 7. 5% -8. 2% Total operating income $23,950 100. 0% 5. 1% $22,798 100. 0% 3. 9% $21,952 100. 0% We believe growing operating income at a faster rate than net sales growth is a meaningful measure because it indicates how effectively we manage costs and leverage operating expenses. Our objective is to grow operating expenses at a slower rate than net sales. nd ending total assets of continuing operations plus accumulated depreciation and amortization less accounts payable and accrued liabilities for that period, plus a rent factor equal to the rent for the ? scal year multiplied by a factor of eight. Operating Expenses In ? scal 2010, operating expenses increased 2. 7% when compared to ? scal 2009, while net sales increased 1. 0% over the same period. Operating expenses grew at a faster rate than net sales due to higher health bene? t costs, restructuring charges and higher advertising expenses. In ? scal 2009, operating expenses increased 9. % compared to ? scal 2008 while net sales increased 7. 3% over the same period. Operating expenses grew at a faster rate than net sales in ? scal 2009 primarily due to higher utility costs, legal matters, higher health bene? t costs and increased corporate expenses. ROI is considered a non-GAAP ? nancial measure under the SEC’s rules. We consider return on assets (â€Å"ROA†) to be the ? nancial measure computed in accordance with GAAP that is the most directly comparable ? nancial measure to ROI as we calculate that ? nancial measure. ROI differs from ROA (which is income from continuing operations for the ? cal year divided by average total assets of continuing operations for the period) because ROI: adjusts operating income to exclude certain expense items and adds interest income; adjusts total assets from continuing operations for the impact of accumulated depreciation and amortization, accounts payable and accrued liabilities; and incorporates a factor of rent to arrive at total invested capital. Operating Income For ? scal 2010, we met our objective of growing operat ing income at a faster rate than net sales. Our operating income increased by 5. 1% when compared to ? cal 2009, while net sales increased by 1. 0% over the same period. Our Walmart U. S. and International segments met this objective. Our Sam’s Club segment fell short of this objective primarily due to a $174 million charge to restructure its operations, including the closure of 10 clubs. For ? scal 2009, we did not meet our objective because our operating income increased by 3. 9% when compared to ? scal 2008, while net sales increased by 7. 3% over the same period. The Walmart U. S. and Sam’s Club segments fell short of this objective due to increases in operating expenses.The International segment fell short of this objective due to accruals for certain legal matters and ? uctuations in currency exchange rates. Although ROI is a standard ? nancial metric, numerous methods exist for calculating a company’s ROI. As a result, the method used by management to cal culate ROI may differ from the methods other companies use to calculate their ROI. We urge you to understand the methods used by another company to calculate its ROI before comparing our ROI to that of such other company. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Operating Income (Amounts in millions) 24,000 Returns Return on Investment Management believes return on investment is a meaningful metric to share with investors because it helps investors assess how effectively Walmart is employing its assets. Trends in ROI can ? uctuate over time as management balances long-term potential strategic initiatives with any possible short-term impacts. ROI was 19. 3 percent for both ? scal years ended January 31, 2010 and 2009. $18,000 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. operating income increased 5. 1% in ? scal 2010, driven by a 5. 2% increase in Walmart U. S. $12,000 $ 6,000 We de? e ROI as adjusted operating income (operating income plus interest income, depreciation and amortization and rent expense) for the ? scal year divided by average invested capital during that period. We consider average invested capital to be the average of our beginning 0 08 09 10 Fiscal Years 18 Walmart 2010 Annual Report 107077_L01_FIN. indd 18 4/6/10 10:19:20 PM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations The calculation of ROI along with a reconciliation to the calculation of ROA, the most comparable GAAP ? nancial measurement, is as follows: For the Years Ended January 31, Dollar amounts in millions) 2010 2009 Numerator Operating income (1) + Interest income (1) + Depreciation and amortization (1) + Rent (1) $ 23,950 181 7,157 1,808 $ 22,798 284 6,739 1,751 = Adjusted operating income $ 33,096 $ 31,572 Denominator Average total assets of continuing operations (2) + Average accumulated depreciation and amortization (2) – Average accounts payable (2) – Average accrued liabilities (2) + Rent x 8 $166,900 38,359 29,650 18,423 14,464 $162,891 33,317 29,597 16,9 19 14,008 = Average invested capital $171,650 $163,700 CALCULATION OF RETURN ON INVESTMENT Return on investment (ROI) 19. 3% 19. 3%CALCULATION OF RETURN ON ASSETS Numerator Income from continuing operations (1) $ 14,927 $ 13,753 Denominator Average total assets of continuing operations (2) $166,900 $162,891 Return on assets (ROA) 8. 9% 8. 4% As of January 31, 2010 Certain Balance Sheet Data (1) Total assets of continuing operations Accumulated depreciation and amortization Accounts payable Accrued liabilities 2009 2008 $170,566 41,210 30,451 18,734 $163,234 35,508 28,849 18,112 $162,547 31,125 30,344 15,725 (1) Based on continuing operations only and therefore excludes the impact of closing 23 stores and the divesture of other properties of The Seiyu, Ltd. now Walmart Japan) pursuant to a restructuring program adopted during the third quarter of ? scal 2009. All of these activities have been disclosed as discontinued operations. Total assets as of January 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 in the table above exclude assets of discontinued operations that are re? ected in the Consolidated Balance Sheets of $140 million, $195 million and $967 million, respectively. (2) The average is based on the addition of the account balance at the end of the current period to the account balance at the end of the prior period and dividing by 2. Walmart 2010 Annual Report 19 107077_L01_FIN_02. indd 19 /6/10 12:10:47 AM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Free Cash Flow We de? ne free cash ? ow as net cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations in a period minus payments for property and equipment made in that period. We generated positive free cash ? ow of $14. 1 billion, $11. 6 billion and $5. 7 billion for the years ended January 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The increase in our free cash ? ow is primarily the result of improved operating results and inventory management. The following table sets fort h a reconciliation of free cash ? w, a nonGAAP ? nancial measure, to net cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations, a GAAP measure, which we believe to be the GAAP ? nancial measure most directly comparable to free cash ? ow, as well as information regarding net cash used in investing activities and net cash used in ? nancing activities. Fiscal Years Ended January 31, (Amounts in millions) Free cash ? ow is considered a non-GAAP ? nancial measure under the SEC’s rules. Management believes, however, that free cash ? ow, which measures our ability to generate additional cash from our business operations, is an important ? ancial measure for use in evaluating the company’s ? nancial performance. Free cash ? ow should be considered in addition to, rather than as a substitute for, income from continuing operations as a measure of our performance and net cash provided by operating activities as a measure of our liquidity. Additionally, our de? nition of free cash ? ow is limited, in that it does not represent residual cash ? ows available for discretionary expenditures due to the fact that the measure does not deduct the payments required for debt service and other contractual obligations or payments made for business acquisitions.Therefore, we believe it is important to view free cash ? ow as a measure that provides supplemental information to our entire statement of cash ? ows. Although other companies report their free cash ? ow, numerous methods may exist for calculating a company’s free cash ? ow. As a result, the method used by our management to calculate free cash ? ow may differ from the methods other companies use to calculate their free cash ? ow. We urge you to understand the methods used by another company to calculate its free cash ? ow before comparing our free cash ? ow to that of such other company.We generated positive free cash flow of $14. 1 billion, $11. 6 billion and $5. 7 billion for the years ended Jan uary 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The increase in our free cash flow is primarily the result of improved operating results and inventory management. Net cash provided by operating activities Payments for property and equipment Free cash ? ow Net cash used in investing activities Net cash used in ?nancing activities 2010 $26,249 (12,184) $ 14,065 2009 2008 $ 23,147 $ 20,642 (11,499) (14,937) $ 11,648 $ 5,705 $(11,620) $(10,742) $(15,670) $(14,191) $ (9,918) $ (7,422)Results of Operations The following discussion of our Results of Operations is based on our continuing operations and excludes any results or discussion of our discontinued operations. Unusual or infrequent items that impacted our income from continuing operations during the ? scal years ended 2010, 2009 and 2008 were as follows: †¢ In ? scal 2010, the company announced several organizational changes, including the closure of 10 Sam’s Clubs, designed to strengthen and streamline our operations. As a result, we recorded $260 million in pre-tax restructuring charges. †¢ In ? cal 2010, we recorded $372 million in net tax bene? ts primarily from the repatriation of certain non-U. S. earnings that increased U. S. foreign tax credits. †¢ In ? scal 2009, the company settled 63 wage-and-hour class action lawsuits. As a result of the settlement, the company recorded a pre-tax charge of approximately $382 million during the fourth quarter of ? scal 2009. †¢ In ? scal 2008, we reduced our accrued liabilities for our general liability and worker’s compensation claims. As a result, operating expenses were reduced by a pre-tax amount of $298 million. 20 Walmart 2010 Annual Report 07077_L01_FIN. indd 20 4/7/10 12:14:15 AM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Consolidated Results of Operations Fiscal Year Net Sales (1) % Change from Prior Fiscal Year 2010 2009 2008 $405,046 401,087 373,821 1. 0% 7. 3% 8. 4% Operating Income (1) Operating Income as a Percentage of Net Sales Comp Sales Unit Counts Square Footage (2) $23,950 22,798 21,952 5. 9% 5. 7% 5. 9% -0. 8% 3. 5% 1. 6% 8,416 7,863 7,239 952,204 918,008 867,448 (1) Amounts in millions (2) Amounts in thousands Our consolidated net sales increased by 1. 0% and 7. 3% in ? cal 2010 and 2009, respectively, when compared to the previous ? scal year. Net sales in ? scal 2010 increased due to increased customer traf? c, continued global expansion activities and the acquisition of D&S in January 2009, offset primarily by a $9. 8 billion unfavorable currency exchange rate impact in our International segment and price de? ation in certain merchandise categories in our Walmart U. S. segment. Net sales in ? scal 2009 increased due to our global store expansion activities, comparable store sales increases, offset by a $2. 3 billion unfavorable currency exchange rate impact.Volatility in currency exchange rates may continue to impact the International segme nt’s net sales in the future. Our gross pro? t, as a percentage of net sales, (our â€Å"gross pro? t margin†) was 24. 8%, 24. 2% and 24. 0% in ? scal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our Walmart U. S. and International segment sales yield higher gross pro? t margins than our Sam’s Club segment. In ? scal 2010, gross pro? t margin increased primarily due to the continued focus on enhanced merchandising strategies and better inventory management in our Walmart U. S. and Sam’s Club segments. The gross pro? margin increase in ? scal 2009 compared to ? scal 2008 was primarily due to lower inventory shrinkage and less markdown activity as a result of more effective merchandising in the Walmart U. S. segment. Operating expenses, as a percentage of net sales, were 19. 7%, 19. 3% and 19. 0% for ? scal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. In ? scal 2010, operating expenses increased primarily due to higher health bene? t costs, a pre-tax charge of $260 million rel ating to the restructuring of U. S. operations and higher advertising expenses. In ? scal 2009, operating expenses increased rimarily due to higher utility costs, a pre-tax charge of approximately $382 million resulting from the settlement of 63 wage-and-hour class action lawsuits, higher health bene? t costs and increased corporate expenses compared to ? scal 2008. Our effective income tax rate was 32. 4% for ? scal year 2010 and 34. 2% for ? scal years 2009 and 2008. The ? scal 2010 effective tax rate decreased compared to ? scal 2009 due to $372 million in net tax bene? ts that primarily resulted from the repatriation of certain non-U. S. earnings that increased our utilization of U. S. foreign tax credits.As a result of the factors discussed above, we reported $14. 9 billion, $13. 8 billion and $13. 3 billion of income from continuing operations for the ? scal years ended January 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Walmart U. S. Segment Fiscal Year Net Sales (1) % Change from Prior Fiscal Year 2010 2009 2008 $258,229 255,348 238,915 1. 1% 6. 9% 5. 6% Operating Income (1) Operating Income as a Percentage of Net Sales Comp Sales Unit Counts Square Footage (2) $19,522 18,562 17,383 7. 6% 7. 3% 7. 3% -0. 7% 3. 2% 1. 0% 3,708 3,656 3,550 602,908 589,299 566,629 (1) Amounts in millions (2) Amounts in thousands The segment net sales growth in ? cal 2010 resulted from an increase in customer traf? c and strength in our grocery and health and wellness categories, as well as our continued expansion activities. In ? scal 2009, the segment net sales growth resulted from a comparable store sales increase of 3. 2%, in addition to our expansion activities. Strength in the grocery, health and wellness and entertainment categories, as well as strong seasonal sales throughout the year also contributed to the ? scal 2009 net sales increase. The segment net sales growth in fiscal 2010 resulted from an increase in customer traffic and strength in our grocery and health and ellness categories, as well as our continued expansion activities. Walmart 2010 Annual Report 21 107077_L01_FIN. indd 107077_L01_FIN. indd 21 4/6/10 8:25:51 PM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Comparable store sales were lower in ? scal 2010, despite increased customer traf? c, due to a decrease in average transaction size per customer driven by price de? ation in certain merchandise categories. Comparable store sales were higher in ? scal 2009 due to an increase in customer traf? c, as well as an increase in average transaction size per customer. In ? scal 2010, gross pro? margin increased 0. 7 percentage points compared to the prior year due to more effective merchandising, better inventory management and lower inventory shrinkage. In ? scal 2009, gross pro? t margin increased 0. 4 percentage points compared to the prior year primarily due to decreased markdown activity and lower inventory shrinkage. The improvements in b oth years were attributable to merchandising initiatives that have improved space allocation, enhanced our price leadership and increased supply chain ef? ciencies. Segment operating expenses, as a percentage of segment net sales, increased by 0. 4 percentage points in ? cal 2010 compared to ? scal 2009 due to lower segment net sales increases compared to the prior year, higher health bene? t costs, higher advertising expenses and a pre-tax charge of $73 million relating to the restructuring of Walmart U. S. operations. Segment operating expenses, as a percentage of segment net sales, increased 0. 4 percentage points in ? scal 2009 compared to the prior year due to hurricane-related expenses, higher bonus payments for store associates, higher utility costs and an increase in health bene? t costs. International Segment Net Sales (1) 2010 2009 2008 Operating Income (1) Operating Income a s a Percentage f Net Sales Unit Counts Square Footage (2 ) $100,107 98,840 90,570 Fiscal Year % Ch ange from Prior Fiscal Year 1. 3% 9. 1% 17. 8% $5,033 4,940 4,725 5. 0% 5. 0% 5. 2% 4,112 3,605 3,098 269,894 248,803 222,583 (1) Amounts in millions (2) Amounts in thousands At January 31, 2010, our International segment was comprised of our wholly-owned subsidiaries operating in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Puerto Rico and the United Kingdom, our majority-owned subsidiaries operating in ? ve countries in Central America, and in Chile and Mexico, our joint ventures in India and China and our other controlled subsidiaries in China.The ? scal 2010 increase in the International segment’s net sales primarily resulted from our expansion activities and the inclusion of the results of D&S, acquired in January 2009, offset by the unfavorable impact of changes in currency exchange rates of $9. 8 billion. For additional information regarding our acquisitions, refer to Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The ? scal 2009 increase in the International segment’s n et sales was primarily due to net sales growth from existing units and our international expansion program, offset by the unfavorable impact of changes in currency exchange rates of $2. billion. The fiscal 2010 increase in the International segment’s net sales primarily resulted from our expansion activities and the inclusion of the results of D&S, acquired in January 2009, offset by the unfavorable impact of changes in currency exchange rates of $9. 8 billion. In ? scal 2010, the International segment’s gross pro? t margin increased 0. 2 percentage points compared to the prior year. The increase was primarily driven by currency exchange rate ? uctuations and the inclusion of D&S. In ? scal 2009, the International segment’s gross pro? t margin decreased 0. percentage points compared to the prior year. The decrease was primarily driven by growth in lower margin fuel sales in the United Kingdom and the transition to EDLP as a strategy in Japan. Segment operating e xpenses, as a percentage of segment net sales, increased 0. 3 percentage points in ? scal 2010 compared to the prior year primarily as a result of the inclusion of D&S, acquired in January 2009. Segment operating expenses, as a percentage of segment net sales, in ? scal 2009 were consistent with ? scal 2008. In ? scal 2010, currency exchange rate changes unfavorably impacted operating income by $540 million.In ? scal 2009, currency exchange rate changes unfavorably impacted operating income by $266 million. Volatility in currency exchange rates may continue to impact the International segment’s operating results in the future. 22 Walmart 2010 Annual Report 107077_L01_FIN. indd 107077_L01_FIN. indd 22 4/6/10 8:25:51 PM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Sam’s Club Segment Fiscal Year Net Sales (1) % Change from Prior Fiscal Year Operating Income (1) Operating Income a s a Percentage of Net Sales Comp Sales Unit C ounts Square Footage (2 ) $46,710 46,899 44,336 0. 4% 5. 8% 6. 6% $1,512 1,646 1,648 3. 2% 3. 5% 3. 7% -1. 4% 4. 9% 4. 9% 596 602 591 79,401 79,906 78,236 2010 2009 2008 (1) Amounts in millions (2) Amounts in thousands The decrease in net sales for the Sam’s Club segment in ? scal 2010 primarily resulted from lower fuel prices compared to the previous ? scal year. In ? scal 2009, the segment net sales growth resulted from a comparable club sales increase, including fuel, of 4. 9% and continued club expansion activities. Membership and other income, as a percentage of segment net sales, decreased slightly for ? scal 2010 when compared to ? scal 2009.Membership and other income, as a percentage of segment net sales, decreased slightly for ? scal 2009 when compared to ? scal 2008. Liquidity and Capital Resources Comparable club sales decreased during ? scal 2010 due to the negative impact of 2. 1 percentage points from lower fuel prices when compared to the previous ? scal year, partially offset by sales increases in fresh food, consumables and certain health and wellness categories. In ? scal 2009, comparable club sales increased due to growth in food, pharmacy, electronics and certain consumables categories, as well as an increase in both member traf? and average transaction size per member. Fuel sales had a positive impact of 1. 2 percentage points in ? scal 2009 on comparable club sales. Gross pro? t margin increased 0. 6 percentage points during ? scal 2010 compared to the prior year due to continued strength in sales of consumable, fresh food and other food-related categories. Gross pro? t margin increased 0. 1 percentage points during ? scal 2009 compared to the prior year due to strong sales in fresh food and other food-related categories, consumable categories and the positive impact of a higher fuel gross pro? t rate.Segment operating expenses, as a percentage of segment net sales, increased 0. 8 percentage points in ? scal 2010 compared to the p rior year due primarily to a pre-tax charge of $174 million related to the restructuring of Sam’s Club operations, including the closure of 10 clubs. Segment operating expenses, as a percentage of segment net sales, increased 0. 2 percentage points in ? scal 2009 compared to the prior year. In ? scal 2009, operating expense increases were impacted by higher utility and health bene? t costs and hurricane-related expenses. Cash flows provided by operating activities upply us with a significant source of liquidity. We use these cash flows, supplemented with long-term debt and short-term borrowings, to fund our operations and global expansion activities. Generally, some or all of the remaining free cash flow funds the dividends on our common stock and share repurchases. Cash ? ows provided by operating activities supply us with a signi? cant source of liquidity. We use these cash ? ows, supplemented with long-term debt and short-term borrowings, to fund our operations and global expansion activities. Generally, some or all of the remaining free cash ? w funds the dividends on our common stock and share repurchases. Fiscal Years Ended January 31, (Amounts in millions) 2010 Net cash provided by operating activities Payments for property and equipment Free cash ? ow 2009 2008 $ 26,249 $ 23,147 $ 20,642 (12,184) (11,499) (14,937) $ 14,065 $ 11,648 $ 5,705 Net cash used in investing activities Net cash used in ?nancing activities $(11,620) $(10,742) $(15,670) $(14,191) $ (9,918) $ (7,422) Cash ? ow provided by operating activities was $26. 2 billion, $23. 1 billion and $20. 6 billion for the years ended January 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The increases in cash ? ws provided by operating activities for each ? scal year were primarily attributable to an increase in income from continuing operations and improved working capital management. Working Capital Current liabilities exceeded current assets at January 31, 2010, by $7. 2 billion, an increase of $7 89 million from January 31, 2009. Our ratio of current assets to current liabilities was 0. 9 at January 31, 2010 and 2009. We generally have a working capital de? cit due to our ef? cient use of cash in funding operations and in providing returns to shareholders in the form of stock repurchases and payment of dividends.Walmart 2010 Annual Report 23 107077_L01_FIN. indd 107077_L01_FIN. indd 23 4/7/10 1:06:36 AM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Capital Resources During ? scal 2010, we issued $5. 5 billion of long-term debt. The net proceeds from the issuance of such long-term debt were used for general corporate purposes. During ? scal 2009, we issued $6. 6 billion of long-term debt. Those net proceeds were used to repay outstanding commercial paper indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes. Management believes that cash ? ws from continuing operations and proceeds from the issuance of short-term borrowings will be suf? cient to ? nance seasonal buildups in merchandise inventories and meet other cash requirements. If our operating cash ? ows are not suf? cient to pay dividends and to fund our capital expenditures, we anticipate funding any shortfall in these expenditures with a combination of short-term borrowings and long-term debt. We plan to re? nance existing long-term debt as it matures and may desire to obtain additional long-term ? nancing for other corporate purposes. We anticipate no dif? culty in obtaining long-term ? ancing in view of our credit ratings and favorable experiences in the debt market in the recent past. The following table details the ratings of the credit rating agencies that rated our outstanding indebtedness at January 31, 2010. The rating agency ratings are not recommendations to buy, sell or hold our commercial paper or debt securities. Each rating may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization and should be evaluated independently of any other rating. Global Expansion Activities Cash paid for property and equipment was $12. 2 billion, $11. 5 billion and $14. billion during the ? scal years ended January 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. These expenditures primarily relate to new store growth, as well as remodeling costs for existing stores. We expect to incur capital expenditures of approximately $13. 0 billion to $15. 0 billion in ? scal 2011. We plan to ? nance this expansion and any acquisitions of other operations that we may make during ? scal 2011 primarily from cash ? ows from operations. Fiscal 2011 capital expenditures will include the addition of the following new, relocated and expanded units in the U. S. : Fiscal Year 2011 Projected Unit Growth Walmart U.S. Segment Sam’s Club Segment 145-160 5-10 150-170 Total U. S. Additionally, the International segment expects to add more than 600 units during ? scal year 2011. The following represents an allocation of our capital expe nditures: Rating Agency Commercial Paper Standard & Poor’s Moody’s Investors Service Fitch Ratings DBRS Limited Long-term Debt A-1+ P-1 F1+ R-1(middle) AA Aa2 AA AA To monitor our credit ratings and our capacity for long-term ? nancing, we consider various qualitative and quantitative factors. We monitor the ratio of our debt to our total capitalization as support for our long-term ? nancing decisions.At January 31, 2010 and January 31, 2009, the ratio of our debt to total capitalization was 36. 9% and 39. 3%, respectively. For the purpose of this calculation, debt is de? ned as the sum of short-term borrowings, long-term debt due within one year, obligations under capital leases due in one year, long-term debt and long-term obligations under capital leases. Total capitalization is de? ned as debt plus total Walmart shareholders’ equity. Our ratio of debt to our total capitalization decreased in ? scal 2010 primarily due to a decrease in short-term borrowings. W e expect to incur capital expenditures of approximately $13. 0 billion to $15. billion in fiscal 2011. We plan to finance this expansion and any acquisitions of other operations that we may make during fiscal 2011 primarily from cash flows from operations. Allocation of Capital Expenditures Projected Capital Expenditures New stores, including expansions and relocations Remodels Information systems, distribution and other Total U. S. International Total Capital Expenditures Actual Fiscal Year 2011 Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 2010 2009 31% 15% 29% 17% 34% 10% 21% 23% 20% 67% 69% 64% 33% 31% 36% 100% 100% 100% Common Stock Dividends We paid dividends of $1. 09 per share in ? scal 2010, representing a 15% increase over ? cal 2009. The ? scal 2009 dividend of $0. 95 per share represented an 8% increase over ? scal 2008. We have increased our dividend every year since the ? rst dividend was declared in March 1974. On March 4, 2010, the company’s Board of Directors approved an increase in the annual dividend for ? scal 2011 to $1. 21 per share, an increase of 11% over the dividends paid in ? scal 2010. The annual dividend will be paid in four quarterly installments on April 5, 2010, June 1, 2010, September 7, 2010 and January 3, 2011 to holders of record on March 12, May 14, August 13 and December 10, 2010, respectively. 4 Walmart 2010 Annual Report 107077_L01_FIN. indd 107077_L01_FIN. indd 24 4/6/10 8:25:52 PM Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Company Share Repurchase Program From time to time, we have repurchased shares of our common stock under a $15. 0 billion share repurchase program authorized by our Board of Directors on June 4, 2009 and announced on June 5, 2009, which replaced and terminated a $15. 0 billion share repurchase program approved by our Board of Directors on May 31, 2007 and announced on June 1, 2007.As was the case with the replaced share repurchase program, the new program has no exp iration date or other restrictions limiting the period over which we can make our share repurchases, and will expire only when and if we have repurchased $15. 0 billion of our shares under the program or we terminate or replace the program. Any repurchased shares are constructively retired and returned to unissued status. We spent $7. 3 billion, $3. 5 billion and $7. 7 billion in share repurchases during ? scal year 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.We consider several factors in determining when to execute the share repurchases, including among other things, our current cash needs, our capacity for leverage, our cost of borrowings and the market price of our common stock. As of January 31, 2010, the program had approximately $9. 2 billion remaining authorization for share repurchases. Contractual Obligations and Other Commercial Commitments The following table sets forth certain information concerning our obligations and commitments to make contractual future payments, such as debt and lease agreements, and contingent commitments:Payments Due During Fiscal Years Ending January 31, (Amounts in millions) Recorded contractual obligations: Long-term debt Short-term borrowings Capital lease obligations Unrecorded contractual obligations: Non-cancelable operating leases Interest on long-term debt Trade letters of credit Purchase obligations Total commercial commitments Additionally, the company has approximately $11. 2 billion in undrawn lines of credit and standby letters of credit which, if drawn upon, would be included in the liabilities section of the Consolidated Balance Sheets.Purchase obligations include legally binding contracts such as ? rm commitments for inventory and utility purchases, as well as commitments to make capital expenditures, software acquisition/license commitments and legally binding service contracts. Purchase orders for the purchase of inventory and other services are not included in the table above. Purchase orders represent authorizati ons to purchase rather than binding agreements. For the purposes of this table, contractual obligations for purchase of goods or services are de? ned as agreements that are enforceable and legally binding and that specify all signi? ant terms, including: ? xed or minimum quantities to be purchased; ? xed, minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate timing of the transaction. Our purchase orders are based on our current inventory needs and are ful? lled by our suppliers within short time periods. We also enter into contracts for outsourced services; however, the obligations under these contracts are not signi? cant and the contracts generally contain clauses allowing for cancellation without signi? cant penalty. Total 2011 2012-2013 2014-2015 Thereafter $37,281 523 5,584 $ 4,050

Deborah Tannen’s Theory Essay

In contemporary society biological factors are no longer the sole components that distinguish men and women. Rather anything from clothing or hairstyles to make-up or accessories can indicate specific messages about an individual. According to Deborah Tannen, women are more frequently considered marked beings in our society while men have fewer clothing or style options and are therefore free to remain unmarked. Although Tannen argues that it is possible for men to remain purely â€Å"unmarked† her assertions do not hold up well in a changing world. Because the term â€Å"marked† is a social construction, it is not possible to remain completely unmarked, as styles and trends repeatedly change with different ages, generations, and geographic locations. In her study Tannen reveals that among four women and eight men present during a business meeting the women had several more features to observe compared to one another. However, Tannen’s conclusions seem partially invalid for her findings are based on only one particular event. In a business-like environment, it is more likely to find conservatively dressed men with less notable markings than women. Even though women may not only be identified based on their apparent style but also how they choose to present themselves. (i.e. Baggy clothes vs. tight clothes, make-up vs. no makeup). In general, Tannen’s findings appear questionable mainly because her approach when defining a â€Å"marked† individual seems limiting. For example, Tannen would call a man wearing a shirt a marked individual. However, it is quite common for men in Scotland to wear skirts. Without ever considering these geographic differences, Tannen makes bold assumptions based on her own biases. When speculating a specific sub-culture such as the generational â€Å"rave†/dance culture, Tannen’s argument holds no validity. Clearly both men and women in this culture wear similar styles of clothing and accessories that are in essence, uni-sex. While piercings and jewelry might â€Å"mark† a man in society such stylistic choices are considered quite common and acceptable among â€Å"ravers†. Similarly women who wear baggy clothes and baseball caps are not â€Å"marked† as less feminine than those who wear tighter clothes and make-up within this sub-culture are. According to Tannen, â€Å"each of the women at the conference had to make decisions about hair, clothing, make-up and accessories and each decision carried meaning†¦. men can choose style that are marked but they don’t have to, and in this group none did.† (231-2). Although Tannen makes the distinction between the style of men and women at a business conference, she fails to mention that their age and field of work influences what should be â€Å"marked vs. unmarked† and what styles appear appropriate vs. inappropriately. Clearly, Tannen states that all four women are marked yet some are considered more severely marked and judged than others are. Specifically, the women with the long, blond, hair, dressed in tight clothing and heels were more severely marked in Tannen’s eyes. However, Tannen never mentions that in another profession, such as the entertainment or fashion industry, the women style might be considerable less marked than an individual dressed more simple and conservatively. In conclusion, the assumptions that Tannen makes in her article infer that men in society can remain unmarked. Although men are objectified and sexualized less than women this does not mean that they are not in the public eye. Tannen’s view on today’s â€Å"marked† society is based truly on her opinion. She omits geographical, generational and age differences when making her conclusion.

Managing Financial Resources and Decisions Essay - 3

Managing Financial Resources and Decisions - Essay Example These sources can be broadly classified into short term and long term sources of finance. Long term sources of finance, as the name indicates, are required over longer periods of time (any duration that is above 1 year) whereas short term source of finance that are required within a period of one year. There are three main long term sources of finance for JS and co, namely, share capital, debentures and long term loans. An equity share represents a share of the company’s assets and a share of earnings after the claims are met. Equity shareholders are the owners of the business and have a right in the company for the percentage of shares owned by them (Samuels et al, 2000). Also, the risk is borne by the shareholders who invest in the company. JS and co can issue new shares in order to raise some surplus finance. Debentures are bonds issued to the investors in exchange for finance lent to the company. JS and co can borrow money in the form of debentures from the public, by agreeing to repay the sum by some future date. Also, Js and co has to pay an interest to the creditors (debenture bond holders) before paying out dividends to the shareholders. Hence, in this case, debentures have a little risk attached to them compared to the shareholders, from the company’s perspective (Samuels et al, 2000). Long term loans from banks and other sources are the easiest ways to raise a large amount of capital. Obtaining higher amounts of long term loans will be easier for JS and co, as the business is well established and is making profits. However, the interest payable might be high (as it is spread over a long period of time). Hence a high interest cover should be available for the company, in order to ensure interest payments in times of a financial crisis. Increasing the long term liabilities will increase the gearing ratio (Burke and Wilks, 2007). This coupled with sustaining a high interest cover

The School Nurse Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The School Nurse - Essay Example However, in today's world the school nurse position is not given the resources necessary to accomplish this goal and the role has become so unmanageable and the task so encompassing it may be placing education and students at risk. The number of students taking Ritalin has doubled since 1990 and now exceeds 3 million students (Goldberg, 1). The over worked nurses must medicate these students to insure the proper dose to the correct student. The pervasiveness of lunchtime medication has become so involved and lines of children outside nurses' offices so prevalent, that in Boston, schools are now facing a challenging dilemma; Who should have responsibility for the medicating According to Carey Goldberg, reporter for the New York Times, "...school officials have proposed that individual nurses be given permission to delegate the distribution of their ''meds'' to handpicked, supervised staff members". Many nurses who advocate the addition of higher paid nurses as a solution rather than reducing their roles have discredited the plan as unsafe. However, school officials see it as a reasonable cost cutting measure in this New World of psychoactive drugs. Untrained personnel handing out sensitive and dangerous drugs a re certainly placing the students at an increased risk. School nurses are called upon to walk obese students, insert catheters, and administer diabetic insulin. These are disciplines that call on the highest order of medical training. Food poisoning, infectious diseases, sexually transmitted diseases, and injuries from student violence complicate these situations. The nurse is required to perform the duties of a general practitioner while having the training of a nurse and the attendant pay scale. Still, school systems balk at the possibility of adding more nurses to the staff due to cost considerations. While the National Association of School Nurses recommends that a school system have one nurse per 750 students, the national average is one nurse per 1350 students (Vail). Attending to the students medical needs should be a priority to assure that the system is promoting adequate and fair education, but staffing at a 50% level can not guarantee success of the health of the student body. Obesity is running rampant through the school corridors and nutrition and healthy food have come into the spotlight. Once again, the school nurse is called on to make recommendations and plans to provide a healthy diet and reduce the problem of overweight children. Nutrition is a special discipline and often runs counter to the school's agenda of providing vending machines and a junk food cafeteria. There is more profit in a McDonald's station than there is in a healthy dietary offering. The American Medical Association advocates a proactive approach based on food types and amounts that are to be offered through school lunches ("Expert Committee Recommendations", 8). Dedicated school nurses can not be expected to protect the health of children in the existing political and economical climate of many school boards. They are not trained as nutritionists and do nor serve the political function of being socially

Island project Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Island project - Essay Example Local government: First of all, the local government in the island nation shall be based on certain elements related to governance, like county system (type), municipal charter (form), mayor council (management), and election (leadership). Chandler (2001) states that, â€Å"A local authority, however, not only must demonstrate it uses resources efficiently but also it must have as its mission the concern to care for the economic, social and environmental well-being of their community† (p.154). To be specific, the public administration within the scenario of the island nation will be based on local form of governance. I would like to introduce county type local government because it is one of the examples for decentralized governance. The island nation will be divided into different counties, based on population. Besides, municipal charter will be the form of governance because the same will be within the jurisdiction of the proposed type of local/ decentralized government. Thi s will help the inhabitants to gain certain rights and to enjoy certain privileges within the local government. ... dership positions will be established through general elections because this is important to incorporate democratic ideas to the context of the proposed island nation. To be specific, the people will cast their votes to the candidates, strictly based on their political values. Eligible candidates will be invited to form the government, strictly based on democratic ideas. Judicial system: The judicial system in the proposed island nation will be based on judicial hierarchy. To be specific, there will be a supreme authority that controls the judicial system. But this supreme authority can be arraigned by the members, representing the lower courts. Besides, there will be a law making body elected by the citizens, apart from the government. This will keep judiciary safe from political manipulation or influence. Malleson (2007) states that, â€Å"Governments are now expected to introduce policy changes which affect the legal system on an ongoing basis† (p.2). The elected judges can not act beyond their limits because people elected them and they are answerable for their decisions. There will be lower courts in the counties and these courts will be independent within the counties. So, this decentralized model of judicial system will help the people to approach the court with ease. Besides, the judges cannot go beyond their limits because they can be kept aside by the people. On the other side, law making will not be vested upon the judicial system because it will be vested upon a different body elected by the people. Any citizen can seek help from the court because there main aim of this innovative judicial system is to solve more problems with less time. To be specific, less serious crimes will be dealt by the lower courts. This will help the people to save their valuable