Category: Political Science

Many believe that the power of the U.S seems to be apparently declining, in particular, after the 2008 financial crisis. Should the U.S come back home or maintain the “Deep Engagement” policy?

Three discussion post of 250 words each using the sources provided. These are replies but can be about anything in the sources. 

It has been over 70 years since the atomic bomb was dropped, yet the decision still is potent and 
continues to be debated. Read the following prompt and write your essay:
“You realize, once the military have this, they will use it, no matter what you say,” said Albert
Einstein in a letter to FDR about the atomic bomb. For this essay, I would like you to consider
the following. What reasons support the dropping of the atomic bomb? Look at resources found
from the Harry Truman Library. What are the counterarguments? There has been a great deal
of revisionist history here (you might want to look at the controversy concerning the display of
the Enola Gay at the Smithsonian in 1995. Discuss both arguments thoroughly and figure out
what you think. The essay should be 2-3 pages long, with appropriate citations.
I would take a look at the city of Hiroshima’s web site for more information.

The thesis especially in the first chapters generally has a strong foundation but needs to be edited a lot to fulfill academic standards of a bachelor thesis in social sciences. 

The presentation Point presentation will need to include:
Name the case
Discuss the facts of the case
Discuss the history of the case (what laws or legal action was taken)
Discuss the issues or the facts of the case and legal questions the court must decide
Discuss if the court’s decision or holdings were for the plaintiff or the defendant and the reasons for the decision.
Discuss the concurring and dissenting opinions from the judge or if a jury trial, the jury
References slide with a minimum of 2 scholarly sources.
Important: In this assignment, you are expected to elaborate on the points you made in the prior assignment. This assignment will be graded on your strength to elaborate and explain the facts of the case, proper use of visual aids, good narration, presentation of the case, and how well you stick to the case. For example, using PowerPoint, you must include proper visuals relevant to the case. Do not copy-paste the outline into this and call it complete.

This is part two the rubric and instrusction are attached below.  I reside in the 11th district 
and Goveror Whitmer resides in the 7th district if you would like to use these two to focus 
on the assignment

I would like a literature review that consists of two parts: 1.
the balance between basic research and applied research, and 2. a discussion about the dispersal or concentration of public R&D investment. This review is crucial for my research, and I expect that both parts will be written in more than 1,200 words.
In my dissertation, I will quantitatively analyse the academic performance of publicly funded R&D projects and compare the results between basic research (blue-skies research) and applied research (mission-oriented research). I need your help to write a literature review of around 11 pages.
To be easier to understand, the methodology part is mainly based on Fortin 2013 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065263). I will apply the analysis to two types of funding programmes focusing on basic research and applied research, respectively. The lack of comparison between the two types is the research gap I found.
Here, I list resources that will probably be useful. 
1. the balance between basic research and applied research
– Aagaard et al.(2020) Concentration or dispersal of research funding?, https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article-abstract/1/1/117/15557
This is a systematic review so its references might be useful as well.
– Fortin (2013) Big Science vs. Little Science: How Scientific Impact Scales with Funding, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065263
– Duan (2022) How large of a grant size is appropriate? Evidence from the National Natural Science Foundation of China, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264070
– Ohniwa et al. (2023) The effectiveness of Japanese public funding to generate emerging topics in life science and medicine, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290077
Its introduction part would help find more related materials.
– Mongeon et al. (2016) Concentration of research funding leads to decreasing marginal returns, https://academic.oup.com/rev/article/25/4/396/2525343
2. a discussion about the dispersal or concentration of public R&D investment
– Bentley (2015) The relationship between basic and applied research in universities, 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9861-2
– Mazzucato (2016) From market fixing to market-creating: a new framework for innovation policy, https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1146124
– Mazzucato (2018) A problem-solving approach to fuel innovation-led growth, https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/knowledge-publications-tools-and-data/publications/all-publications/mission-oriented-research-innovation-eu-problem-solving-approach-fuel-innovation-led-growth_en
– Schot (2018) Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318301987
– Foray (2012) Public R&D and social challenges: What lessons from mission R&D programs?, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733312002193
– Hoibrook (2013) Blue skies, impacts, and peer review, https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/roars/article/view/2914
– Heinze (2008) How to sponsor ground-breaking research: A comparison of funding schemes, https://academic.oup.com/spp/article-abstract/35/5/302/1690595
– Wagner (2013) Evaluating transformative research programmes: A case study of the NSF Small Grants for Exploratory Research programme, https://academic.oup.com/rev/article/22/3/187/1523526

1. A 2000-word research proposal subject to be approved by the university. 
2. Using top publications for citation in Harvard format.
3. A PhD. research proposal needed to be completely and officially designed following the decorum of its standard 

This assignment consist of completeling different case studies below I have exampled what is required in each paragraph per case. There is also a list of all of the cases that must be done. 
1)A paragraph summarizing the facts that led up to the case 
2) A paragraph outlining the constitutional arguments presented by the plaintiff,
including major precedents used
3) A paragraph outlining the constitutional arguments presented by the defendant,
including major precedents used
4) A paragraph summarizing the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the case, providing how
constitutional interpretations were applied as well as precedents utilized.
cases 
Adarand Constructors v. Pena (1995)
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
Ricci v. DeStefano (2009)
Students for Fair Admissions v. UNC (2023)
Equality of Women
Minor v. Happersett (1875)
Reed v. Reed (1971)
Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp. (1971)
Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)
Craig v. Boren (1976)
Rostker v. Goldberg (1981)
Kirchberg. Feenstra (1981)
Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (1986)
U.S. v. Virginia (1996)
Reproductive Rights
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Harris v. McCrae (1980)
Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1983)

In your own words:
Toward the end of the Pacific War, the US dropped atomic bombs over the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing brutally more than 100,000 Japanese and Korean civilians (i.e. noncombatant ordinary citizens). Do you think that this use of nuclear weapons by the US can be justified or not? Why?