Anti-Social Behaviour Orders | Analysis

Anti-Social Behaviour Orders | Analysis Our society gives us the right to live in a safe and secure community. But along with these rights, we have some responsibilities. We all have a responsibility towards our neighboursand we must treat them respectfully in the community. Also for the security and betterment of the society, the antisocialists should know that their behaviour will not be accepted and action will be taken against them if they continue with their behavior. Such behavior often includes aggression and hostility which often results in to physical or verbal abuse. They might refuse to follow the rules of a situation or disregard the power of a superior (Farrington Coid 2003). An ASBO (Anti Social Behavior Order) is specially designed for children 8-17 year olds whose existing behaviorshows signs of future offending activities. The community works together to stop this offending behavior through educational, diversionary activities and family support. The main aims of the community are to reduce the number of youngsters from entering the criminal system, to improve attendance of the identified groups at school and to minimize the factors that would help someone lead to an offensive behavior(Great Britain: National Audit Office 2006). The scale of the problem Of all the problems which most affect neighborhoods up and down the country, antisocial behavior has perhaps the maximum potential to affect the quality of community life. It has been very difficult to find accurate statistics on the nature and popularity of antisocial behaviour. There are some current methods such as self-report studies, victim surveys and data gathered through police, courts, fire service and other criminal justice agencies through which data on antisocial behaviour are gathered (McAtamney Morgan 2009). These sources of information are considered useful but they are restricted in their capability to provide a precise description of antisocial behavior. Such sources often involve incidents that are unrecorded since they are difficult to notice and do not get in contact with the courts.Further, it also depends upon the type of incident being examined. The more popular an incident is, the more people will fight against it. Also antisocial behaviours such as being rude and abusive are difficult to define and no agencies are responsible for collecting data on it. It is considered to be an important problem of the society since more and more people are getting involved in it. Such patterns are shown in early ages such as 13 to 14 years. At this age, antisocial acts include stealing something from someones house or getting involved in a fight with a classmate or been suspended from school. Such behaviors may lead to dangerous anti-social behaviors at a later age. Researches show that some of the antisocial acts are common such as cigarette use or skipping school and these acts might not have the possibility to lead to dangerous acts in the future (Melton Borough Council 2013). All of this is of course is not possible without the effective enforcement of ASBO by the court. People who are insistent on harassing the society should be punished accordingly. Those who continue to bring fear, distress and misery to local communities should not go unpunished. Sentences should reflect the seriousness of the crime and do so in a consistent manner. The police play an important role in this regard and could help improve quality of life of the community (Millie 2008). The rationale for making this a key concern after 1997: Now the question is, why was antisocial behavior made a key concern after 1997? As it is generally believed and also several studies have proved that if special attention is not given towards this matter it can lead to serious crimes. According to NACRO (2002), this theory is termed as contagion theory. This theory suggests that the presence of evil or destruction leads to more destruction or evil. Wilson and Kelling have termed this contagious effect as the broken window. As it is generally believed that a building with a broken window means that no one cares about the building so this will lead to more broken windows and this shows that breaking more windows does not really cost anything. Further, antisocial behavior can be costly for communities. It affects the stability of an areas market. It alsoaffects the success of local businesses and can be costly to repair. This repair can be in terms of financial and human resources. A proper record for the damages is not kept since there are limited sources for the collection of data. But acts such as neighbor nuisance, destruction of property and criminal damage can be estimated. Furthermore, antisocial behavior can affect the lives of the executors which would in return also affect their families. They can be excluded from school, expulsed from their homes and become involved with the criminal system (Spalding 2011) A discussion of the key initiatives undertaken to deal with this problem, starting with the 1997 Crime Disorder Act (ASBOs) and the subsequent development of this approach CR- ASBOs, dispersal orders, the Respect Agenda etc The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 was passed in December 1997 by both Houses; Commons and Lords and also received Royal Assent in 1998. A number of key issues were discussed in this Act, which include the introduction of Anti-Social Orders, Parenting Orders, Sex Offender Orders, increasing the Local Authority responsibilities for crime reduction etc. Here we will be discussing the main area of interest that isAnti-Social Behavior Orders (ASBOs)(UK Parliamanet Publications and records 2005). Anti-Social Behavior Orders: According to Part I of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the type of behavior that is generally thought of as being antisocial is raucous, irritating or intimidating behavior which often takes place in community areas.This kind of behavior can also pull out to sabotage and graffiti. Further this behavior includes dealing and buying drugs on the street, dumping rubbish and disposing of cars. Begging also comes under the anti-social umbrella. The Crime and Disorder Act was modified in to a civil remedy called the Anti-Social Behavior Orders or ASBOs in order to engage in with the government to tackle unacceptable activities that were impacting the quality of community life. According to the Act, any person who might have engaged in anti-social behavior is to be taken care of by the Magistrate or the Sheriff. As mentioned above, anti-social behavioris defined by the Actas a conduct which caused or was likely to cause alarm, harassment or distress to one or more persons not of the same ho usehold as him or herself and where an ASBO is seen as necessary to protect relevant persons from further anti-social acts by the defendant. An ASBO can include a ban from entering a specific area or talking to certain people according to different individuals it is made in respect for. Violation of an ASBO is considered a criminal offence and conviction may lead to a minimum of two, or a maximum of five years detention. Though most of the ASBOs are issued in respect of the types of behaviors pointed out earlier but there have been circumstances in where the ASBOs have been issued in more unusual situations. This has led to severe condemnation. For example, in February 2003, a 16-year-old boy was forbidden from showing his tattoos,in public anywhere in the country. In July 2003,an 87-year-old man received an order for being rude and sarcastic to his neighbors. He was the oldest recipient for an order. Further in December 2004, a man became the first farmer to become the recipient of an ASBO when he was ordered to keep his pigs and geese under control. This happened because the people living near his farm complained that his animals had escaped and caused damage to their properties (Clarke, 2003). It is an official implementation which carries the full force of legal execution. It was generally believed that ASBO is only used for adults but recently it has been discussed that it can be applied to any individual who is over the age of ten years. An ASBO needs a minimum time of two years to be placed and can be reviewed if your behavior has improved. It is only placed in an area where a certain anti-social behavior is reported. According to the UK government website young offenders can be fined up to 250-1000 pounds. You can also get a detention and training order (DTO) for up to 24 months whereas adults are fined up to 5000 pounds or five years of imprisonment or both (Farrington Coid, 2003). Anti-Social Behavior Orders may be used in several situations that pertain to ongoing anti-social behavior. ASBOs are used when someone has been warned several times and even then, social behavior is not improved. However, in many cases, there are solutions which are less severe and less strict than ASBOs, which will be different according to each situation. However, these ordersmay not be equally suitable in every situation. For example, if you have been in disagreement with your neighbors over who owns the boundary between your houses, but your neighbor hasnt shown any anti-social behavior, an ASBO would not be the right way to deal with this problem and the court probably would not grant one anyway. CR-ASBOs A CR-ASBO is a Criminal Anti-Social Behavior Order. It is a social or civil order;the main reason for its existence is to protect the community from anti-social behavior. It can be obtained much quicker than an ASBO. But they are not taken in to court until the criminal court is concluded.A Crasbo order is issued when a conviction is made on criminal proceedings. The parties responsible for serving an order are the Criminal Courts(Millie 2008). These orders are received by individuals who are convicted of criminal offence or anti-social behavior. This order describes the anti-social behavior in the crime for which they are condemned for. For example a Crasbo was received by Fred Bloggs which was placed by the CPS. It forbids him from entering Waterside in Stratford. Another reason for the existence of Crasbo is to encourage local people to become enthusiastically involved in reporting crime and anti-social behavior which would in return help to put together and shelter the community(Millie 2008). The main difference between a CRASBO and an ASBO is that a Crasbo is receivedafter a criminal conviction is made. A Crasbo is unique to all cases. The convicted will have a set of prohibitions unique to his case to thwart anti-social behavior from re-occurring and to guard the society from such acts. A Crasbo could result in banning the individual from any of the following:(Millie 2008). * Committing any anti-social acts * Connecting with certain people * Leaving home after a certain time * Entering defined areas in the community * Entering specified buildings, shopping areas etc Just like an ASBO, the breach of a Crasbo is also considered a criminal offence. And the maximum punishment is 5 years of imprisonment for adults. Dispersal Orders Section 30 of the Anti-Social Behavior Order provides local authorities to tackle anti-social behavior committed by groups of people. Such orders are placed on certain areas at different times. The areas could be as small or as large as necessary, as long as there is evidence of anti-social behavior there. If an area is under a dispersal order the police are allowed to separate or move groups of two or more people from that area. The police have been given authority to do this if they have a reason to believe that the group has or might harass, intimidate, alarm or distress any member of the public(Spalding 2011). The groups asked to be dispersed by the police wont be allowed to reunite in that area in the next twenty four hours. If someone violates the order, it will be regarded as criminal offence and could result in a fine of up to  £5,000 or custody for up to three months. A senior police officer makes the decision about the order and this order can be placed on an area for up to six months. The validity period expires after six months but a new order can be put in place if there were enough reports regarding groups causing criminal behavior(Spalding 2011). Respect Agenda Tony Blair launched the Respect Agenda in United Kingdom in 2005. The basic aim of this agenda was to help central government, local agencies and citizens to work together in an effective manner to tackle the problems caused by anti-social behavior. Till now the most common recipients of the ASBOs are young people. These young people are often considered a nuisance to the community by bad behavior problems such as drinking, minor theft etc, due to which they are banned from certain areas for specific periods of time. A report by Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JSF) discusses three main reasons as to why these young people or even adults behave anti-socially. The first reason was a decline in moral standards and family values. Secondly, there are some families that have become disengaged from the society. Thirdly, that these young people were always considered as kids and not given a chance to act like grownups (Clarke 2003). Neighborhood management is a new form of neighborhood renewal strategies. It also addresses the problems of anti-social behavior. It also focuses on community involvement; which benefits the community, brings the individuals closer and values them. Various community programs are held in order to empower the residents and keep them participated in such community acts. Strengths The main mechanisms that have been deployed to tackle anti-social behavior include the following strengths(Clarke 2003): * Improvement in the quality of life of the community. * Gives values to the residents and in result they actively participate in preventing anti-social activities. * The Respect Agenda specifically focuses on the youth by funding youth clubs and college sports teams etc * Peoples aspiration and expectation levels are raised. Weaknesses Since the introduction of the ASBO, debate has bounded it for several reasons(Clarke 2003). * Little restriction by courts on what can be termed as anti-social behavior. * Often lawful behavior is criminalized. * The penalties are open ended. * Effect of ASBOs on children and young people. Conclusion The antisocial behavior continues to be performed on adolescents. This is in opportune. Firstly, the agencies should work in partnership with other public bodies and community groups to ensure safer and stronger communities. This can be done by taking positive actions focused at the diminution of crime and disorder and humanizing the quality of life for everyone. The young children should at least once be given warning letters or home visits when involved in anti-social acts because a lot of young people have been taken in to custody who do not deserve to be there. The Dispersal Order should ensure that the restrictions and powers of the Order are well publicized to everyone, including the young people and their parents. The Respect Agenda must not only be focused on young people but should look at a broader perspective. It should create a balance in the relationships that exist between young and old to create the respect element. It should be linked to broader policy making even at the local community level (Clarke 2003). The government published a paper regarding the abolishment of ASBOs and some other court orders. These would be replaced by CBO and CPI. CBO is Criminal Behavior Order and would focus on criminal conviction in stead of the CR-ASBO, whereas CPI is Crime Prevention Injunction responsible for other cases, where someone is not convicted. The white paper says that most of the feedback regarding this new system is positive, whereas some were concerned about the funding. This new system simplifies the much complex old system and is majorly accepted by the public.Both of these unlike ASBOs need to have optimistic necessities as well as exclusions. The breach of a CBO is a criminal offence followed by a maximum prison sentence of five years. However, breach of a CPI would result in ridicule of court for which the penalty can be either a heavy fine or two years in prison(McAtamney Morgan 2009). The government has also issued Designated Public Place Orders which pose a restriction on public drinking because of the nuisances that have been experienced earlier. This Order can limit to certain areas over specific time periods. The police will have the power to regulate the consumption of alcohol in a certain area. Previously the government made a large amount of information regarding the problems people faced in the anti-social behavior area. All this information was available online.In May 2008, the government produced an Anti-social behavior guide, which gave information on a range of remedies. Although this information is still available on the archived versions of the Home Office, yet it has not been updated.The present Government has recently issued a White Paper promising to replace 19 of the orders to just six (UK Parliamanet Publications and records 2005).

Clarkson Lumber Case Study

CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY B RADY CLIFFORD †¢ DAN HORTON †¢ EMIL HYMAS Y †¢ RICH WILKINSON EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Clarkson Lumber Company, owned by Mr. Keith Clarkson, has been in business for 15 years and currently has 15 employees. Firms who have worked with Clarkson speak very highly of him, saying that he is conservative and his operating expenses are low. The company’s revenues are projected to continue to grow. Recently, Clarkson Lumber’s accounts payable and notes payable have increased significantly.The company has not been able to take advantage of trade discounts in recent years because of lack of funds and because of investments due to the company’s growth. While Clarkson Lumber has been increasingly profitable in recent years, the company has found the need for additional financing. Clarkson’s current bank will not provide more than $399,000 in financing without a personal guarantee. Clarkson is hoping to secure more financing in orde r to improve profitability by taking full advantage of trade discounts. The company is working with Northrup National Bank to possibly secure a larger loan; up to $750,000.Northrup’s credit department is currently investigating Clarkson Lumber to see if the firm qualifies for this additional financing. Our team has identified several key issues with Clarkson Lumber’s current financial situation. The company’s over-arching financial issue is cash flow. Clarkson is borrowing too much to make up for a cash flow shortage. Clarkson’s accounts receivable is increasing and the company is still using a 2% accounts payable discount, which is contributing to the lack of available cash. The cash flow that the company does have is being used inefficiently as the sources of cash comes from financing.Thus, Clarkson Lumber is growing at an unsustainable rate and is too reliant on short-term financing. Even if Clarkson receives the $750,000 from Northrup, the company wil l eventually be bankrupt if it does not curtail its growth rate. We recommend that the company utilize more long-term debt instead of short-term debt. Long-term financing will require smaller payments at lower interest rates, which will increase CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ PAGE 1 Clarkson’s cash flow. Clarkson may benefit from reducing inventory by increasing sales or reducing inventory growth.Another option would be to lower costs by negotiating cheaper prices with suppliers. Both options will increase the company’s cash flow. Finally, we recommend increasing accounts receivable turnover. With an increase in account receivable turnover, Clarkson will experience quicker collections and will not have to pay as much in finance charges, again leading to additional cash flow. ANALYSIS The approval process for the loan from Northrup National Bank, required that investigators be sent to research Mr. Clarkson and his company. The investigation p ointed out a few important financial aspects of the company that are worth mentioning.In 1994, Mr. Clarkson bought out the other company partner for $200,000. This amount was to be paid off in 1995 and 1996 using semi-annual payments at an interest rate of 11%. From 1993 to 1995, net sales volume for CLC has increased from 2. 9 million to just over 4. 5 million. After yield profits for the same years also increase from $60,000 in 1993 to $77,000 in 1995 (see Exhibit 1). The investigation also paid special attention the debt position and current ratio of CLC. It was reported that sales are expected to reach $5. 5 million in 1996 and could be more if the prices of lumber rise.Despite these profits, there was a shortage in cash which lead to an increase in borrowing. In order to stay within the borrowing limits set by Suburban Nation Bank, a lot of borrowing was being done through trade credits. In 1995 and 1996 this trade debt was rapidly increasing and was creating some concern. If t he market is struggling then trade credit is normally not recommended; however, for CLC the trade credit was a short fix for long term problem. Even with the growing trade debt, CLC still was comparable to the overall percentages of other lumber outlets (see Exhibit 3).It is also important to recognize specific ratios related to the company. The current ratio, which is helpful in understanding asset liquidity or inefficient use of cash flow, decreased from 2. 5 in 1993 to 1. 1 in 1995. High-profit companies have a current CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ PAGE 2 ratio of 2. 52. ROE for Clarkson Lumber remains relatively steady; it increased from 1993 to 1994 but decreased to 17. 1% in 1995. This ROE is only slightly lower than the ROE for high-profit companies which is at 22. 1%. After reviewing Clarkson Lumber’s financial situation, several key issues became apparent.First, the company is clearly growing at an unsustainable rate. Exhibit 3 (various s tatistical ratios), shows the average internal growth rate of the company at 6. 06% and the average sustainable growth rate at 15. 78%. However, over the three full years analyzed, the company has an average growth margin of 24. 5% and an average asset growth margin of 33. 69%. This continues in the forecasted 1996 year as the company is projected to increase revenue by roughly 21. 7%. At the company’s current level, it cannot continue to support its current growth rate going forward and will require more debt to finance this growth.Therefore, the company seems to be overly reliant on short term financing for its operations. As seen in Exhibit 5, the company projects to have $5. 5M, with most other accounts are based on the historical averages. Exhibit 5 also shows that Clarkson would need between $971K or $696K of external financing. Another issue found dealt with the company’s cash flow (see Exhibit 4). When the company generates net income, it is immediately engulfe d in two areas: the increase in accounts receivable, which increased from $306K to $411K to $606K from 1993 to 1995, and inventory, which also increased from $337K to $432K to $587K during those years.Due to these increases, and despite rising the liability accounts of notes payable from trade and accrued expenses, the company had negative cash flow from operations and needed external financing to purchase its fixed assets and pay down the debt they already had (again see Exhibit 4). Although having negative cash flows from operations is not necessarily bad in the short run, if this trend continues, it provides no long term benefit for the company. Thus, we found that the company cannot continue to allow its accounts receivable and inventory to increase at the same rate.CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ PAGE 3 The final issue we noticed was the accounts payable 2% discount. Clarkson was offered a discount if it pays off its payables to its suppliers within t en days. Even though there is value here, Mr. Clarkson said the company has taken few purchase discounts in recent years. Exhibit 3 attests to this as the company pays its suppliers on an average of 38 days. If the company used this discount on its financial projections, it would receive a purchase discount of $86K to add to its operating income.However, the trade-off is that Clarkson will have a significantly lower amount in accounts payable and will need financing to pay down these payables in order to obtain the discounts. If the company does not proceed with the discount, it will experience significantly lower net income, but will not need as much external financing. RECOMMENDATIONS One of our preferred recommendations for the company would be to replace some, or all, of the short term debt with a long term note. If the company used the amount of the external financing, about $975K, at 6% for 10 years, Clarkson will pay $130K a year.At 15 years, the company will be paying $99K a year. Or the company could use half of the external financing amount, roughly $488K, at those same terms and pay $65K or $49K for ten years or fifteen years, respectively. These numbers indicate that by replacing short-term debt with long-term debt, Clarkson will be making smaller payments at a lower interest rate, freeing up additional cash flow. Another way Clarkson can increase their cash flow is by decreasing the accounts receivable period.In Exhibit 3, we can see that on average the company takes 39 days to collect from accounts receivable and the company has a cash cycle of 55 days, meaning there is a 55 day delay between paying for inventory and collecting the sale. Thus, we recommend that the company use a stricter policy for collections for its customers. For example, if Clarkson could require payments in 30 days, their cash cycle drops to 45 days. By decreasing the accounts receivable period, the company can collect cash more quickly and will pay less in finance CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ PAGE 4 harges. The cash collected from accounts receivable can then be used to manage accounts payable. Our next recommendation is based on Clarkson’s need to increase the amount of cash available, thus capitalizing on growth opportunities. From 1993-1995, the company’s need for increased financing despite profitability comes from Mr. Clarkson’s buyout of Holtz’s share of the company, as well as the increase in inventory and accounts receivable as explained above. It is important for Clarkson Lumber to have access to larger amounts of cash to support its growth in the short and long term.Clarkson’s current success is due to the ability to compete on price; thus a large growth opportunity exists if they can continue to use trade discounts. If the company can use trade discounts, they will receive a purchase discount of around $86K added to income. The trade-off comes from the company having significa ntly lower accounts payable. In the long run the company will clearly need the additional credit, shown by the internal growth rate of 6. 1% and a projected sales growth of 21. 7%.The company will also need to alter the equity/debt ratio due to the projected growth rate of sales in 1996 which is greater than their sustainable growth rate of 15. 8%. Clarkson Lumber will potentially start producing positive free cash flows, as long as their growth rate stabilizes at a more reasonable rate. Our recommendations are aimed at producing positive free cash flows sooner, and the increase in quantity discounts will lower the cost of goods of sold and offset the financial obligations. If the $750,000 line of credit is extended by Northrup Bank, then debt and interest expenses will increase.This creates even more of a necessity to apply the increase in available credit in such a way that will reduce costs. CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ PAGE 5 EXHIBIT 1 CLARKSON LUMB ER COMPANY INCOME STATEMENT 1993 NET SALES COGS: BEGINNING INVENTORY PURCHASES ENDING INVENTORY TOTAL COGS GROSS PROFIT OPERATING EXPENSES EBIT INTEREST EXPENSE NET INCOME BEFORE TAXES PROVISION FOR TAXES NET INCOME 1994 1995 1ST QTR 1996 $2,921 $3,477 $4,519 $1,062 $330 $2,209 $2,539 $337 $2,202 $337 $2,729 $3,066 $432 $2,634 $432 $3,579 $4,011 $587 $3,424 $587 $819 $1,406 $607 $799 $719 $622 $97 $23 $74 $14 $60 $843 $717 126 $42 $84 $16 $68 $1,095 $940 $155 $56 $99 $22 $77 $263 $244 $19 $13 $6 $1 $5 CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ APPENDIX EXHIBIT 2 CLARKSON LUMBER COMPANY BALANCE SHEET 1993 1994 1995 1ST QTR 1996 CASH ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, NET INVENTORY CURRENT ASSETS FIXED ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS $43 $306 $337 $686 $233 $919 $52 $411 $432 $895 $262 $1,157 $56 $606 $587 $1,249 $388 $1,637 $53 $583 $607 $1,243 $384 $1,627 NOTES PAYABLE, BANK NOTE PAYABLE TO HOLTZ (CPLTD) NOTES PAYABLE, TRADE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCRUED EXPENSES TERM LOAN, CURRENT PORTION CURRENT LIABILITIES TERM LOAN NOTE PAYABLE TO HOLTZ TOTAL LIABILITIESNET WORTH $0 $0 $0 $213 $42 $20 $275 $140 $0 $415 $504 $60 $100 $0 $340 $45 $20 $565 $120 $100 $785 $372 $390 $100 $127 $376 $75 $20 $1,088 $100 $0 $1,188 $449 $399 $100 $123 $364 $67 $20 $1,073 $100 $0 $1,173 $454 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH $919 $1,157 $1,637 $1,627 CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ APPENDIX EXHIBIT 3 1993 1994 1995 AVERAGE LOW PROFIT OUTLETS HIGH PROFIT OUTLETS COGS OPERATING EXPENSE CASH ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE INVENTORY FIXED ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS PURCHASES 75. 39% 21. 29% 1. 47% 10. 48% 11. 54% 7. 98% 31. 46% 75. 62% 75. 75% 20. 62% 1. 50% 11. 82% 12. 42% 7. 54% 33. 28% 78. 49% 5. 77% 20. 80% 1. 24% 13. 41% 12. 99% 8. 59% 36. 22% 79. 20% 75. 64% 20. 91% 1. 40% 11. 90% 12. 32% 8. 03% 33. 65% 77. 77% 76. 9% 22. 0% 1. 3% 13. 7% 12. 0% 12. 1% 39. 1% 75. 1% 20. 6% 1. 1% 12. 4% 11. 6% 9. 2% 34. 3% PERCENT OF TOTAL ASSETS: CURRENT LIABILITIES LONG-TERM LIABILITIES EQUITY 9. 41% 4. 79 % 17. 25% 16. 25% 6. 33% 10. 70% 24. 08% 2. 21% 9. 94% 16. 58% 4. 44% 12. 63% 52. 7% 34. 8% 12. 5% 29. 2% 16. 0% .54. 8 CURRENT RATIO RETURN ON SALES RETURN ON ASSETS RETURN ON EQUITY 2. 49 3. 32% 6. 53% 11. 90% 1. 58 3. 62% 5. 88% 18. 28% 1. 15 3. 43% 4. 70% 17. 15% 1. 74 3. 46% 5. 70% 15. 78% 1. 31 -0. 70% 1. 80% -14. 30% 2. 52 4. 30% 12. 20% 22. 10% 6. 85 53. 28 9. 70 37. 63 9. 53 38. 32 90. 91 52. 60 6. 72 54. 31 8. 89 41. 07 9. 56 38. 16 95. 38 57. 22 6. 79 53. 80 9. 29 39. 35 9. 55 38. 24 93. 15 54. 91 6. 24% 18. 28% 19. 03% 25. 90% 4. 94% 17. 15% 29. 97% 41. 49% 6. 06% 15. 78% 24. 50% 33. 69% PERCENT OF SALES: INVENTORY TURNOVER (AVG) INVENTORY PERIOD RECEIVABLES TURNOVER RECEIVABLES PERIOD PAYABLES TURNOVER PAYABLES PERIOD OPERATING CYCLE CASH CYCLE INTERNAL GROWTH RATE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH RATE ACTUAL GROWTH MARGIN ASSET GROWTH MARGIN 6. 98% 11. 90% CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ APPENDIXEXHIBIT 4 CASH FLOWS FOR CLARKSON 1994 1995 1993 T0 1995 $68 ($105) ($95) $127 $3 $77 ($195) ($155) $163 $30 $145 ($300) ($250) $290 $33 CASH FROM OPERATIONS ($2) ($80) ($82) SOURCE OF CASH: CASH FROM OPERATIONS CASH FROM BANK LOANS SOURCES OF CASH: ($2) 60 $58 ($80) 330 $250 ($82) 390 $308 $29 $20 $49 $126 $20 $100 $246 $155 $40 $100 $295 $9 $4 $13 CASH FROM OPERATIONS NET INCOME CHANGE IN A/R CHANGE IN INVENTORY CHANGE IN N/P – TRADE CHANGE IN ACCRUED EXP. USE OF CASH FIXED ASSETS CPLTD HOLTZ LOAN USE OF CASH CHANGE IN CASH CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ APPENDIX EXHIBIT 5CLARKSON LUMBER COMPANY FORECASTS PROJECTED INCOME STATEMENT WITH PURCHASE DISCOUNT PROJECTED INCOME STATEMENT WITHOUR PURCHASE DISCOUNT 1996 NET SALES COGS: BEGINNING INVENTORY PURCHASES* 1996 $5,500 ENDING INVENTORY TOTAL COGS** $587 $4,279 $4,866 $708 $4,158 GROSS PROFIT OPERATING EXPENSES*** EBIT PURCHASE DISCOUNT**** INTEREST EXPENSE***** NET INCOME BEFORE TAXES PROVISION FOR TAXES NET INCOME NET SALES COGS: BEGINNING INVENTORY PURCH ASES $1,342 $1,150 $192 $86 $93 $185 $55 $130 ENDING INVENTORY TOTAL COGS 1996 ASSETS CASH A/R, NET INVENTORY CURRENT ASSETS FIXED ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS 1996 LIABILITIESA/P (10 Days of Purchases) ACCRUED EXP. (1. 5% of Sales) CPLTD BANK NOTE PAYABLE (PLUG) CURRENT LIABILITIES LT DEBT TOTAL LIABILITIES NET WORTH TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH $1,342 $1,150 $192 $93 $99 $41 $58 PROJECTED BALANCE SHEET PROJECTED BALANCE SHEET $77 $655 708 $1,440 $411 $1,851 $587 $4,279 $4,866 $708 $4,158 GROSS PROFIT OPERATING EXPENSES EBIT INTEREST EXPENSE NET INCOME BEFORE TAXES PROVISION FOR TAXES NET INCOME * Purchases based on average percentage of Sales (77. 8%) ** Total COGS based on average percentage of Sales (75. 6%) *** Operating Costs based on average percentage of Sales (20. 1%) **** 2% Discount on Purchases of $4,277 ***** 11% on the LOC and 10% on Term Loan ASSETS CASH (1. 4% of Sales) A/R NET (11. 9% of Sales) INVENTORY CURRENT ASSETS FIXED ASSETS* TOTAL ASSETS $5,500 $117 $83 $20 $972 $ 1,192 80 $1,272 $579 $1,851 0. 075 77 655 708 1440 411 1851 LIABILITIES A/P ACCRUED EXP. CPLTD BANK NOTE PAYABLE (PLUG) CURRENT LIABILITIES LT DEBT TOTAL LIABILITIES NET WORTH $465 83 20 $696 $1,264 80 $1,344 $507 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH $1,851 * I used the average total assets of sales percentage and backed into Fixed Assets CLARKSON LUMBER CASE STUDY – FINAN 6022-002 †¢ APPENDIX

The Period of New Society

With the declaration of Martial Law, President Marcos popularized the New Society which he claimed was envisioned to carry out a meaningful social change. In order to create a positive image in the public consciousness as well as in the local and foreign media that he was serious in effecting these changes, he initiated the following: 1. Dismissal from office of civil servants who were found guilty of corruption and abuse of authority; 2. Punishment of drug pushers; 3. Setting curfew to solve worsening criminality rate; 4. Popularization of â€Å"Isang Bansa, Isang Diwa† philosophy to instill nationalism among Filipinos; and 5. Training of citizens to be disciplined and law-abiding. Meanwhile, in order to entertain and relieve the people from alarming social and political problems, his government initiates the following: 1. Establishment of theme parks such as the Coconut palace in Pasay, Palace in the Sky in Tagaytay and National Arts Centre in Makiling, Laguna; and cultural institutions such as Cultural Centre of the Philippines, Folk Arts Centre and Film Centre. 2. Sponsorship of cultural shows; . Popularization of indigenous culture; 4. Manipulation of the contents of the newspapers and textbooks on his favour; 5. Bribery of media commentators in order to sugar-coat the programs of his administration; and 6. Publication and popularization of literature about his political philosophy such as â€Å"democratic revolution† and â€Å"revolution from the center†. Ferdinard Marcos with Secretary of State George Shultz, 1982. Amidst the rising wave of lawlessness and the threat of a Communist insurgency, Marcos declared martial law on September 21, 1972, by virtue of Proclamation No. 081. Marcos, ruling by decree, curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties, closed down Congress and media establishments, and ordered the arrest of opposition leaders and militant activists, including his staunchest critics, senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jovito Salonga and Jose Diokno. [25] The declaration of martial law was initially well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing. [26] Crime rates plunged dramatically after a curfew was implemented. [27] Many political o pponents were forced to go into exile. A constitutional convention, which had been called for in 1970 to replace the Commonwealth era 1935 Constitution, continued the work of framing a new constitution after the declaration of martial law. The new constitution went into effect in early 1973, changing the form of government from presidential to parliamentary and allowing Marcos to stay in power beyond 1973. Marcos claimed that martial law was the prelude to creating his Bagong Lipunan, a â€Å"New Society† based on new social and political values. [28] The economy during the 1970s was robust, with budgetary and trade surpluses. The Gross National Product rose from P55 billion in 1972 to P193 billion in 1980. Tourism rose, contributing to the economy's growth. However, Marcos, his cronies and his wife, Imelda, willfully engaged in rampant corruption. [29] After putting in force amendments to the constitution, legislative action, and securing his sweeping powers and with the Batasan under his control, President Marcos lifted martial law on January 17, 1981. However, the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus continued in the autonomous regions of Western Mindanao and Central Mindanao. The opposition dubbed the lifting of martial law as a mere â€Å"face lifting† as a precondition to the visit of Pope John Paul II. [30] Marcos had a vision of a Bagong Lipunan (New Society) similar to Indonesian president Suharto's â€Å"New Order administration†. He used the years of martial law to implement this vision. According to Marcos's book, â€Å"Notes on the New Society,† it was a movement urging the poor and the privileged to work as one for the common goals of society and to achieve the liberation of the Filipino people through self-realization. Marcos confiscated businesses owned by the oligarchy. More often than not, they were taken over by Marcos's family members and close personal friends, who used them as fronts to launder proceeds from institutionalized graft and corruption in the different national governmental agencies as â€Å"crony capitalism,† Marcos' friends using them for personal benefit. With genuinely nationalistic motives, crony capitalism was intended to redistribute monopolies traditionally owned by Chinese and Mestizo oligarchs to Filipino businessmen though in practice, it led to graft and corruption via bribery, racketeering, and embezzlement. Marcos also silenced the free press, making the state press the only legal one. He also seized privately owned lands and distributed them to farmers. By waging an ideological war against the oligarchy, Marcos gained the support of the masses though he was to create a new one in its place. Marcos, now free from day-to-day governance which was left mostly to Enrile using his power to settle scores against old rivals, such as the Lopezes, who were always opposed to the Marcos administration. Leading opponents such as Senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jose Diokno, Jovito Salonga and many others were imprisoned for months or years. This practice considerably alienated the support of the old social and economic elite and the media, who criticized the Marcos administration endlessly. The declaration of martial law was initially very well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing though the rest of the world was surprised at how the Filipinos accepted Marcos's self-imposed dictatorship. Soon after Marcos declared martial law, one American official described the Philippines as a country composed â€Å"of 40 million cowards and one son of a bitch†; otherwise, he reasoned, they should have risen against the destroyer of their freedom. 31] Crime rates plunged dramatically after dusk curfews were implemented and the country would enjoy economic prosperity throughout the 1970s in the midst of growing dissent to his strong-willed rule toward the end of martial law. Political opponents were given the opportunity of compliance or forced to go into exile. As a result, thousands migrated to o ther countries, like the U. S. and Canada. Public dissent on the streets was not tolerated and leaders of such protests were promptly arrested, detained, tortured, or never heard from again. Communist leaders, as well as sympathizers, were forced to flee from the cities to the countrysides, where they multiplied. Lim Seng, a feared drug lord, was arrested and executed in Luneta in 1972. As martial law dragged on for the next nine years, human rights violations went unchecked, and graft and corruption by the military and the administration became widespread, as made manifest by the Rolex 12. Over the years, Marcos's hand was strengthened by the support of the armed forces, whose size he tripled to 230,000 troops, after declaring martial law in 1972. The forces included some first-rate units as well as thousands of unruly and ill equipped personnel of the civilian home defense forces and other paramilitary organizations. Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile, Chief of Staff of the Philippine Constabulary Fidel Ramos, and Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Fabian Ver were the chief administrators of martial law from 1972 to 1981, and the three remained President Marcos's closest advisers until he was ousted in 1986. Enrile and Ramos would later abandon Marcos's ‘sinking ship' and seek protection behind the 1986 People Power Revolution. The Catholic hierarchy and Manila's middle class were crucial to the success of the massive crusade. [edit] Prime Minister (1972-1981) Ferdinard Marcos with Secretary of State George Shultz, 1982. Amidst the rising wave of lawlessness and the threat of a Communist insurgency, Marcos declared martial law on September 21, 1972, by virtue of Proclamation No. 1081. Marcos, ruling by decree, curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties, closed down Congress and media establishments, and ordered the arrest of opposition leaders and militant activists, including his staunchest critics, senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jovito Salonga and Jose Diokno. [25] The declaration of martial law was initially well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing. [26] Crime rates plunged dramatically after a curfew was implemented. [27] Many political opponents were forced to go into exile. A constitutional convention, which had been called for in 1970 to replace the Commonwealth era 1935 Constitution, continued the work of framing a new constitution after the declaration of martial law. The new constitution went into effect in early 1973, changing the form of government from presidential to parliamentary and allowing Marcos to stay in power beyond 1973. Marcos claimed that martial law was the prelude to creating his Bagong Lipunan, a â€Å"New Society† based on new social and political values. [28] The economy during the 1970s was robust, with budgetary and trade surpluses. The Gross National Product rose from P55 billion in 1972 to P193 billion in 1980. Tourism rose, contributing to the economy's growth. However, Marcos, his cronies and his wife, Imelda, willfully engaged in rampant corruption. [29] After putting in force amendments to the constitution, legislative action, and securing his sweeping powers and with the Batasan under his control, President Marcos lifted martial law on January 17, 1981. However, the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus continued in the autonomous regions of Western Mindanao and Central Mindanao. The opposition dubbed the lifting of martial law as a mere â€Å"face lifting† as a precondition to the visit of Pope John Paul II. [30] Marcos had a vision of a Bagong Lipunan (New Society) similar to Indonesian president Suharto's â€Å"New Order administration†. He used the years of martial law to implement this vision. According to Marcos's book, â€Å"Notes on the New Society,† it was a movement urging the poor and the privileged to work as one for the common goals of society and to achieve the liberation of the Filipino people through self-realization. Marcos confiscated businesses owned by the oligarchy. More often than not, they were taken over by Marcos's family members and close personal friends, who used them as fronts to launder proceeds from institutionalized graft and corruption in the different national governmental agencies as â€Å"crony capitalism,† Marcos' friends using them for personal benefit. With genuinely nationalistic motives, crony capitalism was intended to redistribute monopolies traditionally owned by Chinese and Mestizo oligarchs to Filipino businessmen though in practice, it led to graft and corruption via bribery, racketeering, and embezzlement. Marcos also silenced the free press, making the state press the only legal one. He also seized privately owned lands and distributed them to farmers. By waging an ideological war against the oligarchy, Marcos gained the support of the masses though he was to create a new one in its place. Marcos, now free from day-to-day governance which was left mostly to Enrile using his power to settle scores against old rivals, such as the Lopezes, who were always opposed to the Marcos administration. Leading opponents such as Senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jose Diokno, Jovito Salonga and many others were imprisoned for months or years. This practice considerably alienated the support of the old social and economic elite and the media, who criticized the Marcos administration endlessly. The declaration of martial law was initially very well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing though the rest of the world was surprised at how the Filipinos accepted Marcos's self-imposed dictatorship. Soon after Marcos declared martial law, one American official described the Philippines as a country composed â€Å"of 40 million cowards and one son of a bitch†; otherwise, he reasoned, they should have risen against the destroyer of their freedom. 31] Crime rates plunged dramatically after dusk curfews were implemented and the country would enjoy economic prosperity throughout the 1970s in the midst of growing dissent to his strong-willed rule toward the end of martial law. Political opponents were given the opportunity of compliance or forced to go into exile. As a result, thousands migrated to o ther countries, like the U. S. and Canada. Public dissent on the streets was not tolerated and leaders of such protests were promptly arrested, detained, tortured, or never heard from again. Communist leaders, as well as sympathizers, were forced to flee from the cities to the countrysides, where they multiplied. Lim Seng, a feared drug lord, was arrested and executed in Luneta in 1972. As martial law dragged on for the next nine years, human rights violations went unchecked, and graft and corruption by the military and the administration became widespread, as made manifest by the Rolex 12. Over the years, Marcos's hand was strengthened by the support of the armed forces, whose size he tripled to 230,000 troops, after declaring martial law in 1972. The forces included some first-rate units as well as thousands of unruly and ill equipped personnel of the civilian home defense forces and other paramilitary organizations. Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile, Chief of Staff of the Philippine Constabulary Fidel Ramos, and Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Fabian Ver were the chief administrators of martial law from 1972 to 1981, and the three remained President Marcos's closest advisers until he was ousted in 1986. Enrile and Ramos would later abandon Marcos's ‘sinking ship' and seek protection behind the 1986 People Power Revolution. The Catholic hierarchy and Manila's middle class were crucial to the success of the massive crusade. [edit] Prime Minister (1972-1981) Ferdinard Marcos with Secretary of State George Shultz, 1982. Amidst the rising wave of lawlessness and the threat of a Communist insurgency, Marcos declared martial law on September 21, 1972, by virtue of Proclamation No. 1081. Marcos, ruling by decree, curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties, closed down Congress and media establishments, and ordered the arrest of opposition leaders and militant activists, including his staunchest critics, senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jovito Salonga and Jose Diokno. [25] The declaration of martial law was initially well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing. [26] Crime rates plunged dramatically after a curfew was implemented. [27] Many political opponents were forced to go into exile. A constitutional convention, which had been called for in 1970 to replace the Commonwealth era 1935 Constitution, continued the work of framing a new constitution after the declaration of martial law. The new constitution went into effect in early 1973, changing the form of government from presidential to parliamentary and allowing Marcos to stay in power beyond 1973. Marcos claimed that martial law was the prelude to creating his Bagong Lipunan, a â€Å"New Society† based on new social and political values. [28] The economy during the 1970s was robust, with budgetary and trade surpluses. The Gross National Product rose from P55 billion in 1972 to P193 billion in 1980. Tourism rose, contributing to the economy's growth. However, Marcos, his cronies and his wife, Imelda, willfully engaged in rampant corruption. [29] After putting in force amendments to the constitution, legislative action, and securing his sweeping powers and with the Batasan under his control, President Marcos lifted martial law on January 17, 1981. However, the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus continued in the autonomous regions of Western Mindanao and Central Mindanao. The opposition dubbed the lifting of martial law as a mere â€Å"face lifting† as a precondition to the visit of Pope John Paul II. [30] Marcos had a vision of a Bagong Lipunan (New Society) similar to Indonesian president Suharto's â€Å"New Order administration†. He used the years of martial law to implement this vision. According to Marcos's book, â€Å"Notes on the New Society,† it was a movement urging the poor and the privileged to work as one for the common goals of society and to achieve the liberation of the Filipino people through self-realization. Marcos confiscated businesses owned by the oligarchy. More often than not, they were taken over by Marcos's family members and close personal friends, who used them as fronts to launder proceeds from institutionalized graft and corruption in the different national governmental agencies as â€Å"crony capitalism,† Marcos' friends using them for personal benefit. With genuinely nationalistic motives, crony capitalism was intended to redistribute monopolies traditionally owned by Chinese and Mestizo oligarchs to Filipino businessmen though in practice, it led to graft and corruption via bribery, racketeering, and embezzlement. Marcos also silenced the free press, making the state press the only legal one. He also seized privately owned lands and distributed them to farmers. By waging an ideological war against the oligarchy, Marcos gained the support of the masses though he was to create a new one in its place. Marcos, now free from day-to-day governance which was left mostly to Enrile using his power to settle scores against old rivals, such as the Lopezes, who were always opposed to the Marcos administration. Leading opponents such as Senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jose Diokno, Jovito Salonga and many others were imprisoned for months or years. This practice considerably alienated the support of the old social and economic elite and the media, who criticized the Marcos administration endlessly. The declaration of martial law was initially very well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing though the rest of the world was surprised at how the Filipinos accepted Marcos's self-imposed dictatorship. Soon after Marcos declared martial law, one American official described the Philippines as a country composed â€Å"of 40 million cowards and one son of a bitch†; otherwise, he reasoned, they should have risen against the destroyer of their freedom. 31] Crime rates plunged dramatically after dusk curfews were implemented and the country would enjoy economic prosperity throughout the 1970s in the midst of growing dissent to his strong-willed rule toward the end of martial law. Political opponents were given the opportunity of compliance or forced to go into exile. As a result, thousands migrated to o ther countries, like the U. S. and Canada. Public dissent on the streets was not tolerated and leaders of such protests were promptly arrested, detained, tortured, or never heard from again. Communist leaders, as well as sympathizers, were forced to flee from the cities to the countrysides, where they multiplied. Lim Seng, a feared drug lord, was arrested and executed in Luneta in 1972. As martial law dragged on for the next nine years, human rights violations went unchecked, and graft and corruption by the military and the administration became widespread, as made manifest by the Rolex 12. Over the years, Marcos's hand was strengthened by the support of the armed forces, whose size he tripled to 230,000 troops, after declaring martial law in 1972. The forces included some first-rate units as well as thousands of unruly and ill equipped personnel of the civilian home defense forces and other paramilitary organizations. Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile, Chief of Staff of the Philippine Constabulary Fidel Ramos, and Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Fabian Ver were the chief administrators of martial law from 1972 to 1981, and the three remained President Marcos's closest advisers until he was ousted in 1986. Enrile and Ramos would later abandon Marcos's ‘sinking ship' and seek protection behind the 1986 People Power Revolution. The Catholic hierarchy and Manila's middle class were crucial to the success of the massive crusade. Ferdinard Marcos with Secretary of State George Shultz, 1982. Amidst the rising wave of lawlessness and the threat of a Communist insurgency, Marcos declared martial law on September 21, 1972, by virtue of Proclamation No. 1081. Marcos, ruling by decree, curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties, closed down Congress and media establishments, and ordered the arrest of opposition leaders and militant activists, including his staunchest critics, senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. Jovito Salonga and Jose Diokno. [25] The declaration of martial law was initially well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing. [26] Crime rates plunged dramatically after a curfew was implemented. [27] Many political opponents were forced to go into exile. A constitutional convention, which had been called for in 1970 to replace the Commonwealth era 1935 Constitution, continued th e work of framing a new constitution after the declaration of martial law. The new constitution went into effect in early 1973, changing the form of government from presidential to parliamentary and allowing Marcos to stay in power beyond 1973. Marcos claimed that martial law was the prelude to creating his Bagong Lipunan, a â€Å"New Society† based on new social and political values. [28] The economy during the 1970s was robust, with budgetary and trade surpluses. The Gross National Product rose from P55 billion in 1972 to P193 billion in 1980. Tourism rose, contributing to the economy's growth. However, Marcos, his cronies and his wife, Imelda, willfully engaged in rampant corruption. [29] After putting in force amendments to the constitution, legislative action, and securing his sweeping powers and with the Batasan under his control, President Marcos lifted martial law on January 17, 1981. However, the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus continued in the autonomous regions of Western Mindanao and Central Mindanao. The opposition dubbed the lifting of martial law as a mere â€Å"face lifting† as a precondition to the visit of Pope John Paul II. 30] Marcos had a vision of a Bagong Lipunan (New Society) similar to Indonesian president Suharto's â€Å"New Order administration†. He used the years of martial law to implement this vision. According to Marcos's book, â€Å"Notes on the New Society,† it was a movement urging the poor and the privileged to work as one for the common goals of society and to achieve the liberation of the Filip ino people through self-realization. Marcos confiscated businesses owned by the oligarchy. More often than not, they were taken over by Marcos's family members and close personal friends, who used them as fronts to launder proceeds from institutionalized graft and corruption in the different national governmental agencies as â€Å"crony capitalism,† Marcos' friends using them for personal benefit. With genuinely nationalistic motives, crony capitalism was intended to redistribute monopolies traditionally owned by Chinese and Mestizo oligarchs to Filipino businessmen though in practice, it led to graft and corruption via bribery, racketeering, and embezzlement. Marcos also silenced the free press, making the state press the only legal one. He also seized privately owned lands and distributed them to farmers. By waging an ideological war against the oligarchy, Marcos gained the support of the masses though he was to create a new one in its place. Marcos, now free from day-to-day governance which was left mostly to Enrile using his power to settle scores against old rivals, such as the Lopezes, who were always opposed to the Marcos administration. Leading opponents such as Senators Benigno Aquino, Jr. , Jose Diokno, Jovito Salonga and many others were imprisoned for months or years. This practice considerably alienated the support of the old social and economic elite and the media, who criticized the Marcos administration endlessly. The declaration of martial law was initially very well received, given the social turmoil the Philippines was experiencing though the rest of the world was surprised at how the Filipinos accepted Marcos's self-imposed dictatorship. Soon after Marcos declared martial law, one American official described the Philippines as a country composed â€Å"of 40 million cowards and one son of a bitch†; otherwise, he reasoned, they should have risen against the destroyer of their freedom. [31] Crime rates plunged dramatically after dusk curfews were implemented and the country would enjoy economic prosperity throughout the 1970s in the midst of growing dissent to his strong-willed rule toward the end of martial law. Political opponents were given the opportunity of compliance or forced to go into exile. As a result, thousands migrated to other countries, like the U. S. and Canada. Public dissent on the streets was not tolerated and leaders of such protests were promptly arrested, detained, tortured, or never heard from again. Communist leaders, as well as sympathizers, were forced to flee from the cities to the countrysides, where they multiplied. Lim Seng, a feared drug lord, was arrested and executed in Luneta in 1972. As martial law dragged on for the next nine years, human rights violations went unchecked, and graft and corruption by the military and the administration became widespread, as made manifest by the Rolex 12. Over the years, Marcos's hand was strengthened by the support of the armed forces, whose size he tripled to 230,000 troops, after declaring martial law in 1972. The forces included some first-rate units as well as thousands of unruly and ill equipped personnel of the civilian home defense forces and other paramilitary organizations. Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile, Chief of Staff of the Philippine Constabulary Fidel Ramos, and Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Fabian Ver were the chief administrators of martial law from 1972 to 1981, and the three remained President Marcos's closest advisers until he was ousted in 1986. Enrile and Ramos would later abandon Marcos's ‘sinking ship' and seek protection behind the 1986 People Power Revolution. The Catholic hierarchy and Manila's middle class were crucial to the success of the massive crusade. [edit] Prime Minister (1972-1981)

We make our own destiny Free Essay Example, 1000 words

Ishmael Beah, how he shaped his destiny Ishmael Beah’s autobiography Ishmael Beah was born on 23 November 1980 in Sierra Leone, a West African State. His native country was one which new civil war all too well as it broke out in 1991. He became a boy soldier when he lost his father and his two brothers to the war at the age of thirteen. Fortunately, UNICEF came to his aid at the age of thirteen as they put an end to his involvement in the war. They put him in a reformation centre in the nation’s capital Freetown. He successfully completed his reformation process in 1996 after which he represented his country as a delegate to attend a UN conference on the effects of civil war and unrest. Contrary to the expectation of many, Ishmael went back to his country to speak on his life experience as a child soldier to encourage others not to choose the same path. It is true that we make our own destiny and that what life throws at people can be a stepping stone to successful. We will write a custom essay sample on We make our own destiny or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now This paper will base its focus on this argument by considering his life and times as portrayed in his book, the battles that he faced that made him inspirational to many. Additionally, it will show how he took charge of his life therefore shaping his destiny. It will also examine the fact that individuals are in charge of their destiny and that fate and Karma are in significant in one’s life. Battle with drug addiction and the choices he made As a boy soldier, Beah witnessed violence first hand by knowing to handle a gun and deplore a human being of his life (Beah 1). His watching of his brother die right before his eyes also made him become ruthless and thirsty for revenge. The number of deaths captured in his head for the two years he was a soldier remained permanently embedded in his mind, which made him emotionally scarred. He saw the plight of the children whom he trained with, the nature of the training curricula was not favorable for the young as it was physically draining. Many children could not endure the suffering therefore lost their lives because they were not productive to the army. Child soldiers at that time were easy to manipulate and therefore were easy to brainwash unlike male adults (Finley 45). They also provided cheap labor to the army, as they did not know their rights. This proved effective, as the only thing they had to learn was how to cock a gun and firing it. Deep down, Ishmael knew that he was destined for greatness as when opportunity to better his life presented itself he took it and ran away with.