Want and Marginal Places Free Essays

The Value of Marginal Places In the essay â€Å"In Praise of Margins† by Ian Frazier, Frazier mentions that the world is a place where adults tend to get caught up in. They do not realize that what they need is that place to breath. He says that marginal places and activities, when he was a kid, were a waste of time, but once he was older and saw his child have their marginal â€Å"moment† playing, in the steam instead of fishing, he realizes the importance as an adult. We will write a custom essay sample on Want and Marginal Places or any similar topic only for you Order Now He mentions that we all have a place as a child that we would like to go back and let go of all our responsibilities. Frazier uses the word margin, this word that Frazier uses, has a negative and positive tone and he explains the time spent in the woods. Frazier states that the definition of margin is a blank space around a body of type or border of a piece of ground. It’s adjective meaning has a negative tone to it; minimal for requirements, almost insufficient. As Frazier uses marginal to describe what he did in the woods as a child, he grew up to realize how important these â€Å"marginal† places had so much value. As a young boy Frazier, mentions â€Å"the woods† as places where he and his friends would play at all day. Exploring and possibly be lost in the hours of fun they would have ad most importantly, no worries. Exploring things as they go playing along the trees, maybe even being some sort of character or action hero from his time. As Frazier got a little bit older he one day realized that his time spent in the woods was becoming childish and foolish. He eventually stopped going to this place, that as a child was almost like a sanctuary or a place of acceptance to be him-self freely. When Frazier was in the seventh grade he came to asked himself â€Å"What are you doing? † or maybe â€Å"why we are here? † He notices that some of his friends started to not dress appropriately to climb trees and play because of the penny loafers the wore. I am sure this was for the girls they were trying to impress as they get older. As they had other things happening in life that bounded them from going in to the woods, and somehow forgot about it they really never decided to go back and play. But from my understanding, in high school they went back to the woods one day, where they had this sense of ‘’there is nothing here for us anymore† or â€Å"why did we waste our time here as kids†. I am sure high school, girls and school dances had the memories of â€Å"the woods† faded deep in their memory. They realized that they are all grown up and have no need to be there. Frazier must have thought of all the childish senseless things they did being in the woods for hours, just wasting time that they did not know of or care for because they were children. I mean they didn’t have responsibilities as children they didn’t have to work and take of others. I guess that was the good thing about marginal places. For Frazier, when we took his children to go fishing, they sort of did not want to go fishing and instead played in a ditch. Frazier did not have a heart to tell them to stop; instead he realized that this was a marginal place his children will one day grow up turned this ditch in into a marginal place. Just like when Frazier was a child and did not know this was a marginal place he sees that with his kids, and realizes the value of having a marginal getaway. In my opinion, I agree with Frazier’s ideas that â€Å"marginal† activities and places are valuable. Marginal places are also a way of making oneself a better person. It’s a place to think and relax from the worlds’ needs and wants. Of all the places in the world everybody has their own marginal area. Mine so happens to be at Fontainebleau State Park in Mandeville, Louisiana. As a child my parents would pack up the car and head over across the lake every Saturday if the weather permitted. This place had a pool, walking trail, barbeque pits and most importantly a beach, not a five star beach but to a 6 year old it was. I would walk along the shore where the water would meet the trees and I would pretend it was undiscovered land. I still go back to this day, monthly and it’s still the same feeling I get, a breath of fresh air. This is what Frazier wants people to know about having marginal places and doing activities, they are not bad places, everyone needs a break from the a world that moves at fast pace. In Conclusion Frazier wants people to know that having a bit of time to youself is okay. Everyone has an escape, whether if it is an old place as a kid, a cartoon you use to watch or even the music you use to listen to. Marginal does not have to be in a negative use. In some cases like Frazier it was a good thing, sort of almost like a re-evaluation of life and I am sure he doesn’t regret playing in the woods as a child at all. Ian Frazier looks to the woods as a safe and happy place. I am sure he wants us to remember the marginal place we had as children also. How to cite Want and Marginal Places, Essay examples

God And Doubts Essay Example For Students

God And Doubts Essay Mommy, Ive killed God. You wanted a scar; there it is, plain as day(no two-level, deep meanings attached). My scar isnt external, nor, do Isuppose, is it internal. Heck, I dont know what it is but all my life I knowits been my scar, my burden. I have a problem with Christianity. But I dontshow disrespect to those who choose to follow it (unless they try to imposetheir beliefs on me), and I dont force my thoughts on anyone (you are choosingto read this). You want sex, intoxication, violence, incest and death? Read theBible! Though, on second thought, maybe you should stick to Lost Souls byPoppy Z. Brite, its much better. I killed God when I was still little; no onemade me. Or maybe they did! Maybe the couple hours a week of religious educationfor ten years did, maybe it was the bible passages they told a room full ofsix-year-olds, because no matter how pretty the stories they told us were, Ialways knew they were just easy answers. Gods love is boundless, God forgivesall, and it doesnt matter if you dont love Jesus, because Jesus loves you. Isnt that nice? But wait a minute, then sin comes into it. If you sin, eventhough Gods love is infinite and he will forgive all, sorry sucker, youregoing to hell. Unbelievable? Here, let me explain. You may think Now thatsokay, God forgives me; Im going to heaven. Yeah right! Youre blocking thehitch thats always associated with something thats too good to be true; theBible says that all men are sinners. So whats a girl to do? It seems youregoing to be going to hell anyway. And who is going to end up in heaven if theserules kick in? Id much rather live in hell with my friends, thank you verymuch. It sounds like youd get some pretty weird little guys in heaven. I thinkIll leave them to it. On the flip side, we dont need to worry about going tohell; were all going to heaven! Yeah! Because of Jesus, who by the way was bothGod and Gods only son (and this guy invented mankind? He mustve been prettystoned the day Jesus appeared on the scene). Anyway, guess what? Jesus died forour sins! So n ow we can sin as much as we like and it doesnt matter. Now wasntthat just kind of him? And then you realize that since youre supposed to followeverything in the bible, you have to live both sides at the same time,complicated, huh? Im not even sure I want to go to heaven, because if the bibleis true then God just doesnt seem like a very nice guy. I doubt hed like metoo much. I read the Book of Job and the big man in the sky doesnt exactly comeoff looking too good in this one. It all starts one fine day when the Devil(lovely chap) starts pestering God to prove how faithful one of his followersis. God caves to Devils mind tricks and picks out a random guy who has alwaysbeen a well-behaved Christian. And so, God kills his family, ruins his crops,and plagues him with all sorts of diseases. How nice of God whose, mind you,love is boundless and infinite and you should follow his example. I dont knowabout you but Id rather not. Incase you hadnt noticed Im not your idealcandidate for entry i nto the kingdom heaven. Lets see: Ive had a drink,probably will have sex, taken drugs, swear occasionally, I dont love my enemies(or even my neighbors, for that matter), hate is one of my most frequently usedemotions, and I dont believe in God (now thats a major one!). But thats notthe worst of it because I happen to believe that love transcends gender. Goddoesnt like this, if youre gay, youre not going to heaven. So children repeatafter me; God is a homophobe. Ive not even scratched the surface yet, butsurely you can already see why Ive killed God. Maybe youve begun to understanda modicum of the torment I feel. The blasted torment that I have to carry as ascar on myself for the rest of my life.

Chivalry Essays - Warrior Code, Chivalry, Virtue,

Chivalry Chivalry is usually known as a moral system or an honor code. It originated in the 12th century when kings ruled the country, as a code to make peace. Now there is no king or queen monarchy, now there's that wonderful thing that we call the Government. If you were to ask me if chivalry existed today I'd have to say that there are some examples, but there sure aren't as many as there used to be. Back in the time when King Arthur ruled a lot of the people were loyal to their king and their country. Now our wonderful crime, racism, and hate conquer all systems. Some ways that you might be able to say that chivalry still is around is perhaps clubs, such as, basketball teams or baseball teams. The teams as well as the fans have great loyalty to their team. The fans will wait outside for days to get tickets for the big game. People pay to see fights on Pay-Per-View. And if you ever go to a Hawks game I'll guarantee you that their fans will "tell off" anyone that is saying anything bad about their beloved team! Another way that you could find chivalry today would be all the Unions. Chicago Unions have plenty of hard working men and women in all sorts of trades. They are very loyal and proud (most of them!) of their work that they have done. Then you get the people that just want their paycheck. Those are the types that really don't show much loyalty or contribute much to their job. Some ways that you could say that there is not really chivalry in today's society is the slowly disintegrating church. Not nearly as many people are becoming involved in the church now as in earlier centuries. If you look at the data there is a big decrease in Ministers, Priests, Nuns, and Deacons. I know this because my Dad is becoming ordained to be a Deacon in about a year. After he is done doing all of the steps, he will become a deacon in the Catholic Church. I think that some people don't care, but also I think that they just have too many things to do, and are too busy for the church. In my overall view of chivalry I would say that it depends how you define chivalry to say if it exists anymore. There are a lot of pros and a lot of cons, but it all depends on the person's beliefs. I think that chivalry exists today, but it's mostly up to the reader to define it as right or wrong. There is no right or wrong answer, it's your opinion. Chivalry Essays - Warrior Code, Chivalry, Virtue, Chivalry Chivalry is usually known as a moral system or an honor code. It originated in the 12th century when kings ruled the country, as a code to make peace. Now there is no king or queen monarchy, now there's that wonderful thing that we call the Government. If you were to ask me if chivalry existed today I'd have to say that there are some examples, but there sure aren't as many as there used to be. Back in the time when King Arthur ruled a lot of the people were loyal to their king and their country. Now our wonderful crime, racism, and hate conquer all systems. Some ways that you might be able to say that chivalry still is around is perhaps clubs, such as, basketball teams or baseball teams. The teams as well as the fans have great loyalty to their team. The fans will wait outside for days to get tickets for the big game. People pay to see fights on Pay-Per-View. And if you ever go to a Hawks game I'll guarantee you that their fans will "tell off" anyone that is saying anything bad about their beloved team! Another way that you could find chivalry today would be all the Unions. Chicago Unions have plenty of hard working men and women in all sorts of trades. They are very loyal and proud (most of them!) of their work that they have done. Then you get the people that just want their paycheck. Those are the types that really don't show much loyalty or contribute much to their job. Some ways that you could say that there is not really chivalry in today's society is the slowly disintegrating church. Not nearly as many people are becoming involved in the church now as in earlier centuries. If you look at the data there is a big decrease in Ministers, Priests, Nuns, and Deacons. I know this because my Dad is becoming ordained to be a Deacon in about a year. After he is done doing all of the steps, he will become a deacon in the Catholic Church. I think that some people don't care, but also I think that they just have too many things to do, and are too busy for the church. In my overall view of chivalry I would say that it depends how you define chivalry to say if it exists anymore. There are a lot of pros and a lot of cons, but it all depends on the person's beliefs. I think that chivalry exists today, but it's mostly up to the reader to define it as right or wrong. There is no right or wrong answer, it's your opinion.

Problems facing the Bronx clinic Essay Example

Problems facing the Bronx clinic Essay Example Problems facing the Bronx clinic Paper Problems facing the Bronx clinic Paper There are various problems facing the clinic that ranges from the institution itself in terms of the policies and the management as well as the workers. Others are the patients who place the clinic at a confused state. Further more the government and other clinic stakeholders (Richard Perez F1). The patients are ignorant of the clinic policies especially the Medicaid care. Some of them do not understand the Medicaid system like Ms. Shuler who is experiencing great problems in health care more so in enrollment of the Medicaid. Other do not even bother to sign in for the Medicaid like Ms. Watson. Some patients never goes back for appointment. In addition to all these, they even sell their drugs Some of t5he patients are very ignorant such that they wait until they are seriously sick to go the clinics (Richard Perez F1). Again, the institution as well as the The whole of New York pays the workers low salaries thus are inclined to seek for jobs in health care institutions. As a matter of fact, New York is raked as the lowest state that pays doctors good salaries for treating patients on Medicaid. There is the embezzlement of funds thus making the running of institution challenging to meeting its cost. Some of the programs implemented by the clinic cost too much of the taxpayers money and further, they are victims of fraud and abuse thus wasting a lot of money. The management of the clinic is corrupt as well as its workers as seen in the fired worker who was demanding $75from a HIV patient. Enrollment on Medicaid is rather tedious and cumbersome to the poor patients who may be having little no no education to fill in the six paged document and further to pay four cosequtive stubs and other conditions. These are just but a few of the problems the clinic faces (Richard Perez F1). 2 The stake holders of the clinic The Bronx clinic has got several number of stakeholders. Some of them are the patients, doctors, the government, clinic workers and the insurance companies among many others (Richard Perez F1). The patients include;Crystal T. Schuler who was a single pregnant mother who who went for months without care, Ronald Shinnery the asthmatic with breathing difficulties, Ms Johnson who had been insured for two months without her knowledge (Richard Perez F1). The doctors as part of the stakeholders included Dr. Tomasz Howard who examined the fifth grade girl who was suffering from chronic problem,Anita Wilenkin,is the Morris Heghts chief operating officer, Susan Bilinghurst who is the clinic physician assistant., the clinics H.I.V programs administrator is called Ralph Belloise. The government is also a stakeholder in the clinic with Dennis P. Whalen being the executive deputy commissioner of the health state department and the deputy state commissioner of health is Kathryn Kuhmerker..Hugo Garcia is an employee of the clinic while at the same time,Mr. Garcia is a co-worker (Richard Perez F1). 3 Relationship in ideas between clinical performance and quality management and leadership. Performance of an institution whether private or public go hand in hand with proper quality management as well as good leadership. The same case applies to the clinical performance. For the clinic to perform at its best, there is the need to come up with better management strategies in addition to conducting   good leadership skills to enhance transparency. In assessing the Bronx clinic,the institution has hardly performed to the expectation of the society and even to its own expectation. Many of the patients hardly receive proper care at the right time. A good example is the fifth grader girl who was treated for her irregular heart beats after one and half years (Richard Perez F1). The clinic is performing below the expectation due to its poor policies. Some of the systems like Medicaid which is cumbersome to enroll especially by poor and uneducated patients. Further more they are expensive to both the taxpayer and the institution and are subjected to fraud. The leadership both within the clinic and the state also contributes significantly to the under achievement of the clinic. Due to lack of proper managerial skills in the clinic, they workers like doctors decline working in the institution. When Dr. Ortiz left the clinic, for another job almost the whole institution came to a stand still. The institution rather than calling its patients it writes letters which is a process that takes a lot of time. The workers of the clinic are corrupt and this is portrayed by the worker who was asking for money from a H.I.V patient. The state is failing the clinic when it is reluctant to update and consequently inform the insurance officials on time. It contribute to poor performance by the clinic when it fails to pay the doctors good salaries (Richard Perez F1).

McDonalds Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

McDonalds - Essay Example People started being more dynamic, always on the road, changing customer taste and complex menus affected McDonalds’ ability to consistently deliver quality, service and value. Customers had to wait longer for special orders and they could notice changes in the standard originally set by McDonald. In response to these challenges, McDonald designed and implemented its new just-in-time kitchen system named ‘Made-for-You’. This kitchen is technically an overhaul of its previous kitchen designed to improve food quality, allows more menu items to be easily introduced and provide superior customer service. ‘Made-for-you’ mean whatever the customers have ordered is made just for them after they have ordered it. Nothing is prepared before the customer arrives. However, some components are prepared in advance. Its new system is based on five major criteria to succeed. First is service, which would take ninety seconds or less from ordering to delivery. Quality, which is second, is achieved by meeting high customer standards and food safety requirements. Third is food preparation, which should be easier to do right than wrong. Fourth are people. There should be increased job satisfaction, and finally profitability by reducing cost yet increasing customer satisfaction. New technology and extensive market research helped McDonalds developed a kitchen system that encompasses all of these operational and customer requirements. The company spent number of years exploring cooking technology, and holding technology where a component should be prepared in advance and kept in warming environment where it holds its temperature and moisture. McDonald’s ‘made-for-you’ kitchen system enables faster service to the customer. For example, when a customer places an order for a hamburger, it will show up on a screen and that would signal the crew to take a ban, put it through a special toaster up to 150 degree in eleven seconds. At that point, in time, the product is put on a rap various items added and finally meat is added from a special meat holding cabinet, and the product is rapped and presented to the customer. McDonald’s heated cabinet, called universal cabinet, was specifically designed for the made-for-you system. It enables them to handle all meat products for all of its sandwiches at temperatures that will be very much as if they have just come off the grills. In its new system, it also had a rapid speed toaster, which toast bans in only eleven seconds compared to twenty four seconds in the previous system. When an order is made, it is relayed to the kitchen and appears on the kitchen video monitor that is visible to the whole crew. Prior to the order, its computer system monitors customers’ traffic all the time in attempt to determine the flow orders. Computer can then detect times when business would increase and the types of food items ordered during these times. The computer then genera tes orders for the best selling items creating a buffer of items that are ordered in quick times this helps employees get a head during a rush. The computer also monitors employees output. Personal Opinion Changes in customers tastes and behaviors did bring challenges that initiated research carried out by McDonalds. These challenges might have brought negative impact to the business for sometime but in the end, it was an opportunity to conquer the world with new technologies. Several years of service gave it an edge over its competitors and through that it was

Big Lipped Parents Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Big Lipped Parents - Essay Example Placing plates on a girl’s lips causes physical injury. It leads to the sagging of the lips, hence damaging her physical appearance. This practice, therefore, should be perceived as a form of child abuse because it causes physical injury. Moreover, sagging of the lips causes emotional harm. When admitted to school, the girl may undergo a lot of emotional stress because her peers may segregate her. According to Kathleen, a practice that causes emotional harm to a child is usually considered a form of child abuse (62). Finally, logically speaking, planting plates on a girl’s lips does not make her attractive. Despite it being culturally accepted, it causes more harm than good to the child. Fontes asserts that the harm that culture causes, physical and emotional, makes it a form of child abuse (16). As their neighbor, I would talk to their daughter to talk to her parents. I would tell her to inform them of the emotional suffering that they would inflict on her. She should also emphasize the possibility that emotional suffering might affect her grades. As a result, she should tell them that she would prefer to stay at home rather than being demeaned at school. This might help change their stance if they care for their daughter (Fontes

The Washington And Post Washington Consensus

The Washington And Post Washington Consensus Abstract The present term paper is an attempt to explore and put forth the theoretical exposition of the two major development paradigms the market-oriented and the state-cum-market centric development models, plausibly portrayed in terms of what is often phrased as the Washington Consensus and the Post-Washington Consensus. These discourses must not be only analysed keeping in mind the benefits and costs of the implementing the policy prescriptions advocated by these two sets of development paradigms in different economies over the years, but at the same time its long-term effects on the individual economies, be at the centre or periphery, and the repercussion effects of any alteration in economic variables in one country on the other as a consequence of openness of economies, while pursuing the universal policies, granted for the fact that today we believe the world no less than a global village where the governance concept has modified radically over the last a few decades at the behest o f the key Bretton Woods institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The development discourse must also account for the individual capability and capacity of countries to absorb the economic policies in the development agenda of individual countries in question, as put forth by these institutions. Naturally enough, the failure of the sound theoretical programs would invite criticisms, at least because it has worked unevenly in almost every country trying to employ these policies and unfortunately there are no dearth of evidences from all corners of the globe to prove that the universal policy design uniformly for all countries, in order to bring about meaningful economic development globally has actually failed or at least been partly successful. The overall idea is to make an insight into the Washington Consensus and the Post-Washington Consensus and evaluating to what extent any scrutiny for these policies could be hence put forward. Introduction The economic development discourse of nations had been under constant influence of the economic ideology prevailing in particular nations at any point in time. The economic history of nations itself suggests that how we have witnessed the changing development paradigms have evolved after the Second World War in 1944-45, primarily seen as the deliberate developmental assistance to the war-affected nations. The focus used to be mainly the need to correct market failure through command and control mechanism through various state-oriented developmental strategies and economic programmes like the import substitution industrialisation policy for the promotion of indigenous industries for better comparative advantage in production and exchange, financial repression etc. But the decade of 70s precisely late 70s, apparently proved the defects and malfunctioning of the centrally planned economies. The two major oil shocks, first in 1973 and the next in 1979 put the greatest challenge before th e policy makers and development economists, which completely destabilised the global economy along with many other politico-economic developments around the world. This would be clear in the following excerpts. The 1980s were a hell of a decade. They began with the reverberations of the second OPEC oil shock. They ended with the fall of the Berlin wall. In between, we had the Reagan-Thatcher-Kohl economic policy era in North America and Europe, the Volcker interest rate shock, the Latin American debt crisis, collapse in Africa, the start of rapid growth in China and in India, and on and on. Oh, and by the way, in 1989 John Williamson coined the term Washington Consensus (Williamson, 1990:3) It became a questionable affair to challenge the efficacy of how far government policies can actually benefit or harm the economic environment. This tendency of statist model inevitably led to emergence of an alternative theory of development fundamentally rests on the assumptions of the neo-classical model of a free-market enterprise economy. The Washington Consensus per se is primarily affiliated to this school of economic thought, which states for the minimal role of the state in carrying out economic activity. That is governments should limit their interferences in the economy, only to maintain macroeconomic stability and to secure law and order and provision of public goods. In other words, the Washington Consensus is the market-centered strategy designed to counter the ill-effects of excessive state intervention in the economy, under the aegis of World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which claimed to provide a universal mechanism for the efficient allocation of economic resources and promoter of economic growth world wide. However, the validity of Washington Consensus was under strict scrutiny for not fulfilling its much hyped economic policies and soon criticised for its failure. At this preliminary level, it is important to introduce the other parallel but pole opposite of Washington Consensus, that is, the emergence of the Post-Washington Consensus in mid-1990s, which advocates for a mixed-blend of interventionist and market strategy for better economic development of nations, granted a few conditions of the Washington Consensus like the trade liberalization to be continued along with deliberate state intervention in the economic affairs. The Pros and Cons of the Washington Consensus The Washington Consensus, sometimes synonymously used as the set of neo-liberal economic policies or a universal policy package was originally designed by the key Bretton Woods institutions like World Bank and IMF, to restore economic growth and to correct the balance of payments crises or the debt crises and hyper-inflation kind of situation facing the Latin American countries, such as Argentina and Mexico. The term Washington Consensus was coined and formulated by John Williamson in 1989 at the Peterson Institute of International Economics in the US. According to Nobel Laureate in Economics in the year 2001, Joseph E. Stiglitz, The Washington Consensus policies, however, were based on a simple model of market economy, the competitive equilibrium model, in which Adam Smiths invisible hand works, and works perfectly. Because in this model, there is no need for the government that is, free, unfettered, liberal markets work perfectly the Washington Consensus policies are sometimes referred to as neo-liberal based on market fundamentalism, a resuscitation of the laissez-faire policies that were popular in some circles in the nineteenth century (Stiglitz, 2002: 74). This neo-liberal orthodoxy prevailed over the entire global economy from the beginning of the late 1970s to the mid of 1990s irrespective of the nature and extent of economic growth parameters in different countries. The set of policy prescription was purely of market-oriented model of economic growth. This policy package eventually effectuated in what is better known as the Structural Adjustment Policy (SAP) of the World Bank and the IMF to help countries get rid of debt-crises aftermath of the oil shock of 1979 from the sharp decrease in the primary commodities prices and increasing interest rates, the World Bank and the IMF put forward conditionalities in order to receive credits or financial assistance from these institutions basically to the governments of the developing countries. Therefore, stable macroeconomic policies, outward orientation, and free-market capitalism became the central instruments of the Washington Consensus. In other words, the three big ideas underlying these reforms as Williamson asserts are: The macroeconomic discipline, a market economy, and openness to the world. The first three reforms are, so far as I am aware, widely accepted among economists (Williamson, 2000: 251). Williamson also provided a more specific list of ten policy areas or tenets of that could be used to characterize the consensus as listed below: (1) fiscal discipline, (2) redirection of public expenditure toward the areas of education, health, and infrastructure, (3) tax reform, (4) interest-rate liberalization, (5) competitive exchange rates, (6) trade liberalization, (7) liberalization of inflows of foreign direct investment, (8) privatization, (9) deregulation, and (10) secure property rights (Williamson 1990). We can say that all these reforms fundamentally rest on the premises of the neo-classical paradigm that supports the laizzez-faire doctrine as panacea for all economic problems in a capitalist economy. Therefore, the whole concern was through following these policy package, the markets could be freely allowed to take its own course in order to set the prices right, which comes from the essence of free trade as a major component of the Washington Consensus. The widespread and often excessive state intervention was being seen as the making the economy weak and therefore it was contended that imperfect markets are better than imperfect states. Giving the logical corollary to prove this point, Lal (1983: 63-64) at different occasions asserted that The cost of government failures arising from the rent-seeking and price distortions associated with excessive protectionism would always outweigh market failures associated mostly with imperfect competition an under-provision of public goods. The Washington Consensus was thus increasingly based on the understanding that imperfect markets are always superior to imperfect states. Some scholars like Colclough and Manor (2000: 263) summarised the resurgence of the neo-liberal thinking in development discourse in following words. The emerging neoliberal orthodoxy advocated a new development model based on the primacy of individualism, market liberalism, outward-orientation, and state contraction. The organising principle of neo-liberal political economy was the notion of a minimal state, whose primary functions were to secure law and order, ensure macroeconomic stability and provide the necessary physical infrastructure. Further, according to Colclough and Manor (2000: 263) Trade liberalisation and state contraction were necessary tools to curb the excessive powers enjoyed by politicians and bureaucrats, a process which was regarded as crucial for rapid and equitable economic growth. Originally the policy reforms as envisaged in the Washington Consensus was designed and intended to cover all the Latin American countries, later it was applied to almost all countries and was intentionally penetrated into the economic policy agenda of Third World Countries. Regarding the supremacy of the Washington Consensus on all the earlier prevalent economic thoughts, different opinions came into the picture. Say for instance, much before the arrival of such an economic ideological discourse, economists like J. M. Keynes (1936), who is considered to be a pioneer of the welfare state, believed that a policy of fiscal discipline would neither avoid the current account crisis, nor it can lead to a fully employed economy where all the factors of production and economic resources are optimally employed. So J. M. Keynes basically challenged the classical axioms for the smooth functioning of the economy. Since the classical axioms are not very close to the real world phenomena of perfe ctly competitive markets, the essence of the Washington Consensus way of looking at the economy could be better described in the words of Keynes in the following lines: It happens not to be those of the economic society in which we actually live; with the result that its teaching is misleading and disastrous if we attempt to apply it to the facts of experience (Keynes, 1936:30). Infact, it is felt that the last of the ten policy reforms, that is, securing property rights for efficient production in the economy however, cannot be refuted easily. If the state is capable to ensure that the production ownership should go in the hands of those who value it more, who has also the capability to augment resources, further there is no harm in transferring property rights to develop right entrepreneurship in the economy. What is important here is to note that the Washington Consensus was treated like a shock therapy for the countries suffering from debt-crises of any sporadic shock like the one oil shock of 1979, because it was assumed that trade liberalisation and privatisation will take care of the economic disturbances affecting the normal working of the economic system. However, the experiences of the last 20 years or so have shown that the reforms envisioned through the Washington Consensus have actually led to disaster in many countries. This understanding of the neo-liberal orthodoxy could be better explained in the following lines of John Williamson. I wrote a background paper in which I listed 10 policy reforms that I argued almost everyone in Washington thought were needed in Latin America as of that date. I labeled this reform agenda the Washington Consensus, never dreaming that I was coining a term that would become a war cry in ideological debates for more than a decade. Indeed, I thought the ideas I was laying out were consensual, which is why I gave them the label I did (Williamson, 1990). The evidences we have clearly indicate that Washington Consensus as a universal policy package became a soft target of severe criticisms in recent years primarily from the countries at the periphery. The consistent episodes of criticisms labeled against the Washington Consensus pave the way for the future insights in the economic development discourse. Whats wrong with the Washington Consensus A wide range of criticisms had been put forward as a result of the practical problems faced by the countries pursuing the reforms as recommended by the Washington Consensus since the year of its introduction. One of the criticisms which is generally labelled against the Washington Consensus is regarding the fundamental assumptions of the neo-classical model of free market ideology. In this connection, Stiglitz (2002:73-74) maintains that: Behind the free market ideology there is a model, often attributed to Adam Smith, which argues that market forces the profit motive drives the economy to efficient outcomes as if by an invisible hand. It turns out that these conditions are highly restrictive. Ironically occurring precisely during the period of relentless pursuit of the Washington Consensus have shown that whenever information is imperfect and markets incomplete, which is to say always, and especially in developing countries, then the invisible hand works most imperfectly. Significantly, there are desirable government interventions which, in principle, can improve upon the efficiency of the market. So in this way the basic premises on which the Washington Consensus rests itself became questionable in the academia. Furthermore, Stiglitz (2002: 74) went on to criticise the theoretical validity of the neo-classical model in his following words: Even if Adam Smiths invisible hand theory were relevant for advanced industrialised countries, the required conditions are not satisfied in developing countries. The market system requires clearly established property rights and the courts to enforce them; but these often these are absent in developing countries. The market system requires competition and perfect information. But competition is limited and information is far from perfect and well-functioning competitive markets cannot be established overnight. The theory says that an efficient market economy requires that all of the assumption be satisfied. In some cases, reforms in one area, without accompanying reforms in others may actually make matters worse. This is issue of sequencing. Ideology ignores this matters; it says simply move as quickly to a market economy as you can. But economic theory and history show how disastrous it can be to ignore sequencing. Apart from the theoretical loopholes in overall framework of the Washington Consensus, many other empirical evidences can be put forth for its failures. These are listed below: The fundamental claim of the Washington Consensus that full-scale liberalisation, at all costs, is associated with superior economic performance was doubtful. For instance, it has been maintained that the highly successful story of the Newly Industrialised Countries (NICs) in East Asia such as Japan and Taiwan better known as the East Asian miracle, gave a reason for the resurgence of the neo-liberal policies. These NICs, no doubt, performed appreciably not only in making rapid and high economic growth but also progressed in terms of key social indicators paved a strong supporting pillar for the neo-liberal paradigm constituting the Washington Consensus. Many believed that these NICs are very close to the norms of the free-market economy. However, this story is partly true. What is significant at this point is to know that the institutions pertaining to industrialization and export growth were performing robustly well and these were the factors which were at the heart of success of t hese countries. Onis (1998: 197-216) has tried to give the valid argument in following words: Strong growth and diversification of industrial output and exports could not be accounted for simply for the logic of the free market: interventionist strategies and an active industrial policy, dictated by considerations relating to longer-term competitiveness and dynamic comparative advantage, constituted the central elements contributing their success. If we see the world economic growth rate, it had infact strikingly lowered, and become more unstable during the neo-liberal era. Not only this, the degree of inequality in the global economy appeared to have increased during this period of neo-liberal economic restricting (UNCTAD 1997). Even the gap between the developed and the developing countries had widened and there had been increased divergence within the Third World. For example, as compare to the hyper-growth in Asian NICs, the Latin American countries in 1980s and sub-Saharan Africa lagged far behind over the same period of time (Rock, 1993: 1787-1801). Moreover, excluding China, there is an increase of poor people and the poverty rate had declined from 28.5 percent to 25 percent (Fischer, 2003:8). According to Stiglitz (2002:76), There is a more fundamental criticism of the IMF/Washington Consensus approach: It does not take acknowledge that development requires a transformation of society. Even it completely ignored the fairness concept. A few more instances could be put forward to support the argument that the collapse of Washington Consensus was inevitable such as the success of Argentina in the first few years of accepting the policies and later how its economy collapsed. The case of Turkey is another example where the Washington Consensus policies totally failed. Exposure of many middle income countries to the vagaries of financial globalization actually proved costly for them because opening of their capital accounts before taking into account the macroeconomic stability fell in the trap of the World Bank and the IMF. These high volatile capital flows and frequent financial crises, because of unregulated financial markets led to repercussion effect of one country could be easily felt in another, which we have thoroughly witnessed in the Asian Crisis of 1997 and the Russian Crisis of 1998, which had myriad socio-economic-politico impacts on different economies. Last but not the least in the series of criticisms that had been labelled against the popular programmes of the Washington Consensus is of course a paradoxical situation when the Washington Consensus talks about minimising the bureaucratic inefficiency, rent-seeking, and other forms corruption and pervasive state failure, it had come to our observation that it had actually happened the other way round these all social and economic evils had actually aggravated during the neo-liberal regime. Keeping these issues in mind, during the mid-1990s there emerged a new and thought provoking policy focus of the key Bretton Woods institutions away from the hard-core neo-liberalism to a new synthesis of states and markets as emerging Post- Washington Consensus. The Post-Washington Consensus: Is it inevitable? The Post-Washington Consensus goes further in detailing the nature of the failures of the Washington consensus (Stiglitz, 1998:17). Joseph E. Stiglitz who is supposed to provide the intellectual backbone to the emerging Post-Washington Consensus maintains that there was lack of understanding between the policies put forth by Washington Consensus and the contextual framework of developing countries. In the following words, Stiglitz tries to state his position: There was a failure in understanding economic structures within developing countries, in focusing on too narrow a set of objectives, and on too limited a set of instruments. For instance, markets by themselves do not produce efficient outcomes when technology is changing or when there is learning about markets; such dynamic processes are at the heart of development; and there are important externalities in such dynamic processes, giving rise to an important role for government. The successful East Asian countries recognized this role; the Washington consensus policies did not (Stiglitz, 1998:17-18). Stiglitz and Greenwald (2003) further believe that the Post-Washington Consensus recognizes that There is a role for a market; the question is to what extent the neoliberals recognize that there is a role for the state, beyond the minimal role of enforcing contracts and property rights. There is no theoretical underpinning to believe that in early stages of development, markets by themselves will lead to efficient outcomes. Moreover, the Asian crisis of 1997 proved to be an important turning point for the rethinking about the Washington Consensus for the reason that for the first time in its history, the IMF was confronted with serious criticisms from all over. It was criticised not only for failing to predict the crisis but also to make the situation worse aftermath the crisis. To describe it more clearly in words of Stanley Fischer, The Asian Crisis was also important in terms in producing a serious rift between the two Bretton Woods institutions again for the first time for many decades. Following the rethinking process that has occurred, the IMF now tends to pay far more attention to regulatory reforms, notably in the context of the banking and financial system, and recognises far more than on the past the importance of strong institutions and good governance (Fischer, 2002:385). Stiglitz (2002:155) further added that the IMF until the Asian Crisis used to be crititicised by the countries at the periphery or the Third World countries, but now the criticisms were also put forward by the countries at the centre or the developed countries. He maintains that: With the onset of the Asian Crisis, the IMF especially became the object of serious criticism from the centre within the key Bretton Woods institutions themselves (Stiglitz, 2002:155-156). One of the key ingredients of the Post-Washington Consensus is the recognition that states have a great role to play in the economic development process. However, the Post-Washington Consensus favours the market liberalisation, the twin concepts of states and markets are considered as of complementing rather than substituting in nature. Greater role for the state institutions has been prescribed for better and efficient working of the economy. There is a clear indication about the regulation of financial markets in order to avoid any uncertainty arising out global flows of capital between countries. And the most important, it is thought that certain areas like human development, equality and to alleviate poverty, states can replace the market failures in accomplishing these issues. The question remains how to improve the state efficiency or to avoid state failure. In this regard, Stiglitz (2001:17) highlights that: The effectiveness of states can be improved by using market-like mechanisms. An interesting symmetry is established by noting that states are important for the effective functioning of markets but also that markets or market-like mechanisms are important for the effective functioning of states. Conclusion While analyzing the whole set of ideas and instruments put forward by each of these different line of thinking about the development discourse it is certain that the policies advocated by them may work in some countries and may not in others. What is important is the debate over the sufficiency conditions put forth for the pervasive development of countries primarily the Third World countries. So far nothing appreciable has been achieved since the introduction of either Washington or the Post-Washington Consensus in developing countries. What is apparent here is the fact that all policies whether its neo-liberal or structuralist in from and nature has not benefitted much from the development assistance programmes initiated by the World Bank and the IMF Post-Second World War period. While the role of the state cannot be undermined in economic progress of any country, it is also important to scrutinise its position and capability in the global scenario marked by excessive dominance of the global governance agenda before it. The irresistible wave of globalisation to a large extent undermines the possible intervention in formulating policies at least at the domestic levels for the countries. The concern in the developing countries is how to bring growth with equity. The balanced approach of the Post-Washington Consensus between states and markets along with reforming the governing institutions is far more impressible strategy than that of believing the automatic working of the economy exposed to liberalisation of markets and openness of economy. At least the gains and losses can be mutually appropriated between these two institutions of markets and states. Relying heavily on the free trade and the consequent trickle-down effect to happen automatically has become a far fetched dream for majority of the countries in the larger paradigm of global governance with varied socio, economic and political implications. What is sure is the trade-off between states and markets would to a large extent provide a new outlook for the development discourse for individual countries presuming institutions of governance are at their best of their capacity, capability and efficiency fronts.