CORPORTE GREED OF AMERICA Introduction(get rid of these) The actual flavors (NOT SURE “FLAVORS” IS THE WORD YOU WANT. I’M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT YOU MEAN BY IT.) associated with corporate and business greed are numerous, (DELETE “RIGHT”) from low wages, outsourced work, transfer pricing, lobbying by corporations, nexus between government and businesses, Offshore Tax (WHY CAPITALIZED?) havens and Tax (AGAIN, CAPITALIZED?) cuts by THE Bush administration. Everything amounts to exactly the same end result: extracting dollars from the pockets of middle class people in America, and placing it often straight into the pockets of the corporate and business people. Typically the millionaires who are in no way pleased, who are already been sufficient, and can do everything, nevertheless are unethical, to be able to stuff much more millions into their bank accounts. I THINK YOU NEED SOMETHING LIKE, “TYPICALLY, THE MILLIONAIRES, WHO ALREADY HAVE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO DO ANYTHING THEY WANT TO DO, NEVERTHELESS ACT IN A WAY THAT IS UNETHICAL IN ORDER TO STUFF MANY MORE MILLIONS INTO THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS.” Transfer Pricing and Corporate Greed: (get rid of these) Transfer pricing occurs any (TWO WORDS: any time) time 2 (WRITE OUT TWO) associated organizations – (NO SPACES HERE. Organizations—which can be a parent organization and its subsidiary, or maybe more subsidiaries managed by the common parent—deal with one another…) which can be, a parent organization and its subsidiary, or maybe more subsidiaries managed by the common parent -- deal with one another, (STOP HERE SO THE SENTENCE ISN’T A RUN-ON. THEN SAY, “TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE US-BASED SUBSITIARY ASSOCIATED WITH COCA-COLA PURCHASES SOMETHING FROM THE FRENCH-BASED SUBSIDIARY ASSOCIATED WITH COCA-COLA.” Once the organizations set up a cost for that deal, they may be doing transfer pricing. (I’M NO ECONOMIST, SO I DON’T FULLY UNDERSTAND TRANSFER PRICING FROM THESE SENTENCES. CAN YOU CLARIFY IT MORE WITH MORE OF A DEFINITION TO GO WITH YOUR EXAMPLE?) Transfer pricing is not really, by itself, unlawful or even always abusive. What exactly is unlawful or even abusive is actually transfer mispricing, also referred to as abusive transfer pricing or transfer pricing manipulation. (Transfer mispricing is really a type of a (HOW ABOUT “REALLY PART OF A FAR MORE COMMON TREND”?) far more common trend referred to as trade mispricing, (END SENTENCE HERE AND SAY, “TRADE MISPRICING CONSISTS OF TRADE AMONG UNCONNECTED…) consisting of trade among unconnected or even evidently not related firms -- a good example will be reinvoicing. ) CAN YOU EXPLAIN REINVOICING? Approximately around sixty % SPELL OUT PERCENT of worldwide trade occurs WITHIN, instead of among, multinationals: which is, over countrywide borders, however inside the very same Business group. (INSTEAD, I’D END THE SENTENCE AFTER MULTINATIONALS. THEN SAY SOMETHING LIKE, “THIS MEANS THAT TRADE IS HAPPENING WITHIN THE SAME BUSINESS GROUP.

1. CORPORTE GREED OF AMERICA
Introduction(get rid of these)
The actual flavors (NOT SURE “FLAVORS” IS THE WORD
YOU WANT. I’M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT YOU MEAN
BY IT.) associated with corporate and business greed are
numerous, (DELETE “RIGHT”) from low wages, outsourced
work, transfer pricing, lobbying by corporations, nexus between
government and businesses, Offshore Tax (WHY
CAPITALIZED?) havens and Tax (AGAIN, CAPITALIZED?)
cuts by THE Bush administration. Everything amounts to
exactly the same end result: extracting dollars from the pockets
of middle class people in America, and placing it often straight
into the pockets of the corporate and business people. Typically
the millionaires who are in no way pleased, who are already
been sufficient, and can do everything, nevertheless are
unethical, to be able to stuff much more millions into their bank
accounts. I THINK YOU NEED SOMETHING LIKE,
“TYPICALLY, THE MILLIONAIRES, WHO ALREADY HAVE

2. MORE THAN SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO DO ANYTHING
THEY WANT TO DO, NEVERTHELESS ACT IN A WAY
THAT IS UNETHICAL IN ORDER TO STUFF MANY MORE
MILLIONS INTO THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS.”
Transfer Pricing and Corporate Greed: (get rid of these)
Transfer pricing occurs any (TWO WORDS: any time) time 2
(WRITE OUT TWO) associated organizations – (NO SPACES
HERE. Organizations—which can be a parent organization and
its subsidiary, or maybe more subsidiaries managed by the
common parent—deal with one another…) which can be, a
parent organization and its subsidiary, or maybe more
subsidiaries managed by the common parent -- deal with one
another, (STOP HERE SO THE SENTENCE ISN’T A RUN-ON.
THEN SAY, “TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE US-BASED
SUBSITIARY ASSOCIATED WITH COCA-COLA
PURCHASES SOMETHING FROM THE FRENCH-BASED
SUBSIDIARY ASSOCIATED WITH COCA-COLA.” Once the
organizations set up a cost for that deal, they may be doing
transfer pricing. (I’M NO ECONOMIST, SO I DON’T FULLY
UNDERSTAND TRANSFER PRICING FROM THESE
SENTENCES. CAN YOU CLARIFY IT MORE WITH MORE
OF A DEFINITION TO GO WITH YOUR EXAMPLE?)
Transfer pricing is not really, by itself, unlawful or even always
abusive. What exactly is unlawful or even abusive is actually
transfer mispricing, also referred to as abusive transfer pricing
or transfer pricing manipulation. (Transfer mispricing is really a
type of a (HOW ABOUT “REALLY PART OF A FAR MORE
COMMON TREND”?) far more common trend referred to as
trade mispricing, (END SENTENCE HERE AND SAY, “TRADE
MISPRICING CONSISTS OF TRADE AMONG
UNCONNECTED…) consisting of trade among unconnected or
even evidently not related firms -- a good example will be
reinvoicing. ) CAN YOU EXPLAIN REINVOICING?
Approximately around sixty % SPELL OUT PERCENT of
worldwide trade occurs WITHIN, instead of among,

3. multinationals: which is, over countrywide borders, however
inside the very same Business group. (INSTEAD, I’D END
THE SENTENCE AFTER MULTINATIONALS. THEN SAY
SOMETHING LIKE, “THIS MEANS THAT TRADE IS
HAPPENING WITHIN THE SAME BUSINESS GROUP BUT
OUTSIDE OF NATIONAL BORDERS”) Because of transfer
pricing by American corporations, the government every year
loses billions of dollars, ultimately affecting the common man.
HOW SO? DOES IT MEAN THE US DOESN’T GET TAX
REVENUE BECAUSE THE MULTINATIONALS TRADE
WITH THEIR PARTNERS IN OTHER COUNTRIES? I’D
CLARIFY THE REASONS.) Estimations differ regarding just
how much tax income is actually lashed (DO YOU MEAN
“LOST” INSTEAD OF LASHED?)by authorities because of
transfer mispricing. Global Financial Integrity within
Washington quotes the total amount in hundreds of billion
yearly. A Mar (SPELL OUT MARCH) 2009 Christian Aid
statement approximated about a trillion dollar loss in bilateral
trade mispricing in to the EUROPEAN UNION and the United
States only through non-EU nations from 2006 to 07. (2007
PUT THE WHOLE YEAR)
Bush Tax Cut’s pertinent PERTINENCE to corporate Greed:
The actual (I’D DELETE “ACTUAL”, UNLESS IT’S AN
ECONOMIC TERM THAT I’M UNFAMILIAR WITH AND
NEEDS TO BE THERE.) tax cuts first passed under President
Bush around 2001 and in the year 2003, made the actual tax
code much less (DO YOU MEAN MADE THE TAX RATES
MUCH LOWER? AS OPPOSED TO THE CODE? AS IT READS
NOW IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WERE FEWER RULES.)
intensifying (INTENSIFYING WHAT? I DON’T
UNDERSTAND THIS PART.) and provided a big hep (HELP)
for the highest-income people. Tax Plan Center estimations for
your years 2004 to 12 (WRITE OUT 2012) (the years for which
TPC offers information which are similar from year to year)
give to us a feeling of (CHANGE TO “SUGGEST”) the actual

4. cumulative RESULTS of these types of tax cuts. The particular
Bush tax cuts aimed spectacular tax advantages AT high-income
corporates throughout the last 9 (SPELL OUT NINE) years. It is
estimated that ending Bush tax cuts would save $829 billion for
the government every year.
Corporations using Tax Havens to avoid Taxes , a form of
Corporate Greed(get rid of these)
Tax havens tend to be countries that provide beneficial tax
treatment to resources placed in their borders, frequently
providing CORPORATIONS WITH NEAR-ZERO OR
ABSOLUTELY NO TAX COSTS. IN ADDITION, THESE TAX
HAVEN COUNTRIES USUALLY DON’T ASK QUESTIONS
OF CORPORATIONS. absolutely no or even near-zero tax costs
along with not many queries questioned. (I’D REPLACE THIS
WITH SOMETHING LIKE MY SUGGESTION ABOVE.) The
British Virgin Islands, Bermuda, micro-state of Jersey, off the
coastline of Britain and Dubai are only some of the nations
which host business agencies and trusts developed by the actual
planet's rich and strong to help protect their cash taxes within
their home-country. Among the list of 4, 000 U. S. individuals
indexed by the particular data, a minimum of 30(SPELL OUT
THIRTY) tend to be Americans charged in legal cases or even
legal instances associated with scams, money laundering or
some other severe financial wrong doings.
Businesses and Government Nexus to help corporations make
Money:
A number of our own legislators remain as instances
(EXAMPLES INSTEAD OF “INSTANCES”) of exactly how
greed is actually wrecking the nation. Their greed trickles into
our own community. The bills THAT these people PASS IN
CONGRESS QUITE OFTEN PROVIDE PROFIT TO THE
CONGRESSPEOPLE AND THE LOBBYISTS, AS OPPOSED

5. TO THE INDIVIDUALS WHO VOTED FOR THEM. Therefore,
these types of self-serving representatives are just dedicated to
their selves (THEMSELVES, INSTEAD OF “THEIR SELVES”)
and that is how they are going to get forward within modern day
world (AHEAD IN THE WORLD INSTEAD OF “FORWARD
WITHIN MODERN DAY WORLD). This particular self-
centered AND greedy method of authority and also regulating
makes a kind of butterfly effect which damages work
opportunities, human relationships, AND legislation COMMA
as well as our own capability to perform what exactly is ideal
for the people.
Tax Breaks Helping Corporations save money:(get rid of these)
Corporate and business Tax Breaks CostS THE U. S. Federal
government $180 Billion each year. The actual annual expense
of business tax breaks, such as one which helps reduce changing
profits overseas and from the U. S. taxman's access, offers a lot
(INSTEAD OF “OFFERS A LOT” SAY “HAS MORE THAN
DOUBLED”)more than doubled to 180 billion dollars since
1987, based on a study published on Monday. PUBLISHED
WHERE? Business tax deferment, the actual everlasting
postponement regarding U. S. taxes upon profits held overseas,
comprises almost 25 % of this amount, based on the Federal
government Accountability Office statement released on Apr 15,
which happens to be the actual timeline for people to file their
own tax returns. These days, many people in America tend to be
spending their own government taxes to contribute their
particular reasonable share towards the expense of our own
national security and of essential general public solutions,
however a lot of business America continues to be not really
carrying out the same, I’D REWORD THIS SOMETHING LIKE
THIS: THESE DAYS, AMERICAN CITIZENS, THROUGH
THEIR INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAXES, CONTRIBUTE THEIR
REASONABLE SHARE TOWARD THE EXPENSES OF OUR
NATIONAL SECURITY AND ESSENTIAL GENERAL
PUBLIC SOLUTIONS. HOWEVER, MANY AMERICAN

6. BUSINESSES CONTINUE TO AVOID THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTRIBUTE TO TAX REVENUES.
Lobbying and Corporate Greed:
The entire impact is the fact that United states companies, WHO
WERE AT one time suspicious of government, careful of
ASSOCIATING THEMSELVES with national politics, and
reactive within their techniques, have recently turned out to be
progressively self-confident, positive, and intense within their
lobbying attempts, and companies are progressively viewing
THE federal government plan (DELETE “PLAN”) as not
only(DELETE ONLY) a risk,but additionally (DELETE
ADDITIONALLY) AS a tool. MANY more businesses are
DISCOVERING that Washington is important for their
companIES and people who do tend to be adhering close to (I’M
SORRY—I DON’T UNDERSTAND THIS PART.) are growing
their own political capabilities. Consequently, business
lobbying action will probably still (DELETE STILL) increase in
the near future, along with big companies actively playing a
progressively IMPORTANT FUNCTION WITHIN THE
CREATION OF NATIONAL POLICIES
During the last 30 THIRTY years, and especially during the last
10 TEN years, there was a substantial growth of personal
rendering within Washington, DC. In 2009, politically dynamic
businesses claimed 3. 47 billion dollars upon direct lobbying
costs, upward from $1. 44 billion dollars documented only 10
TEN years earlier 1,?? (WHAT’S THAT 1 FOR?) START A
NEW SENTENCE. “ALSO, IN REGARD TO MONETARY
INFLATION…” , nearly 7 SEVEN occasions the particular
approximated $200 million upon lobbying costs THIS IS ALSO
UNCLEAR TO ME. I’D REWORD IT. in 1983. Roughly
fourteen thousand businesses are actually indexed in the
particular Washington Representatives directory site, two times
the exact approximation of 7, 000 outlined businesses in 81.
1981? SPELL OUT ENTIRE YEAR.

7. Conclusion:
Unions are already basically banned from the nation, AND our
own millionaire political figures traced to Washington ARE
assured A government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, AND for
the wealthy. THROUGH OUR SYSTEM OF capitalism, business
IN America has completely appreciated the net income by any
means or strategy, which simply leaves ethics as well as middle
class employees in ruins. Most of these hard working people in
America, who are actually protesting corporate and business
greed, are absolutely correct. They are the real patriots who
obviously observe that our own present course, WHILE good for
the rich, is actually resulting in damage TO THE HARD-
WORKING MAJORITY AND TO OUR NATION AS A
WHOLE.
References:
· We are not broke, 2012. Retrieved from youtube.com
· Ennings, Marianne (August 2006). "Innovation Like No
Other". The Seven Signs of Ethical Collapse
American Dilemmas
Submission One Guidelines
Submission One:
· Describes the social problem you have chosen
· Five to six typed pages long (MUST be at least a full five

8. pages)
· Includes a Works Cited list, including at least ten sources.
[Note: this is in addition to your minimum five pages of text].
· Must be written in appropriate format and style according to
the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
Introduction: Review introductions in the course writing
guidelines. Your first sentence should both engage your
audience and introduce your main topic (usually the social
problem, but in some cases, the controversy). As noted in the
Handbook, be sure to stay neutral; don’t choose an introductory
anecdote or description that favors one side of our controversy.
The rest of the introduction establishes the fact that there is a
social problem and that it is controversial. NOTE: IF YOUR
STAKEHOLDERS DISAGREE ON WHAT THE PROBLEM
ACTUALLY IS, IDENTIFY BOTH PERCEIVED PROBLEM
HERE. The last sentence asks your thesis question, being sure
to make it an actual proposal that some actual stakeholders have
suggested (or the current policy), including the appropriate
policy-making body with power to enact the change, and being
sure the question is as specific as possible.
Organization: After your introduction, each paragraph should
make a single main point, and each of those points should be
necessary to prove your thesis. Further, those paragraphs
should be arranged in a logical sequence. Suggestions to
strengthen organization:
1. Outline your papers before writing. This will help make you
a better writer by requiring you clarify your main ideas, stay
focused, and sequence your ideas properly.
2. Be sure each paragraph has a clear topic sentence. This is a
“mini thesis” for each paragraph that indicates to your reader
what the main purpose of that paragraph will be. The typical

9. position for a topic sentence is at the beginning of the
paragraph; if you’re very confident of your writing and
organizational skills, and if there’s a compelling reason to
position your topic sentence elsewhere, that’s fine.
Content: After the introduction paragraph, submission one must
include:
· Identify the social problems of concern to each side. (This is
body paragraph 1 OR 1 and 2, if your stakeholders disagree on
what the social problem is.) This section clearly explains that
there is a problem, why it is a problem and what the scope of
that problem is (in other words, how severe and widespread it
is, and for whom). This paragraph (or two, if necessary) will
use solid research and numerical evidence to demonstrate how
widespread the problem is, but you can also include anecdotes,
examples, and/or quotes to communicate the human impact of
the problem in addition. However, you MUST quantify the
scope with data. As noted above, if your stakeholders disagree
on what the social problem is, describe both perceived problems
and discuss both of their scopes here.
· Stakeholders. (Generally 1 paragraph.) Briefly describe the
general stakeholders in your controversy and identify at least
two specific stakeholders for each side. Be sure to choose
REPRESENTATIVE groups, i.e. groups that are typical of
groups and people on that side. This means that you must have
FULLY researched more stakeholders than just those you write
about; otherwise, you won’t know which ones are
representative. Be aware that this is a brief introduction; you
will discuss your stakeholders more fully in submission two.
· History and background. (Generally 2-4 paragraphs.) Discuss
the history and background of the PROBLEM(S),
CONTROVERSY, and the RELEVANT POLICIES, giving a
chronological overview of major events and the context in
which they occur. Readers should learn not only what happened,

10. but why it happened then. Be judicious, though; give us a clear
history of how and why this situation came about, but don’t
artificially expand your paper with ancient origins, unnecessary
details, etc.
· Present-day policies. (Generally 1-2 paragraphs.) Describe
relevant laws, policies, and social programs, as well as
PROPOSED policies. This includes a clear, thorough
description of the current policy as well as other tried or
proposed policies (and what kinds of stakeholders have
proposed them). When answering the handbook question "How
are these things working?" [NOTE: the new handbook includes
this question in History, but it makes more sense here] be sure
to ATTRIBUTE answers to the appropriate sides of the
controversy. In other words, don't write "The War on Drugs is
not working." Write, "According to critics, the War on Drugs is
not working." (Then cite sources!)
Evidence: All arguments require evidence. For this paper, you
will need evidence to describe your social problem AS WELL
AS to describe the stakeholders’ perspectives on it. Cite all
quotation sources, as well as the source of all ideas that are not
common knowledge. Note on credible sources: not everything
you read (especially on the internet!) is credible. Introduce
experts for credibility (“According to Professor Brainiac, the
2003 Nobel prizewinner in economics, …”), but don’t introduce
journalists or non-experts; you can just cite those
parenthetically. Don’t waste space by naming articles, study
names, or journal titles in your text unless there is an unusually
compelling reason for doing so.
Grammar, spelling, and punctuation: Use them. Use them
correctly. Consult a style book when in doubt, ALWAYS
PROOFREAD YOUR WORK, and don’t ever rely solely on
spell check or grammar check.
Style: Style is not “decoration” for your paper. Good, clear
style improves a paper’s readability. Conversely, awkward

11. syntax or arcane language hinders readability. Your job as a
writer is to make your ideas accessible to your reader. To that
end:
1. Use clear, straightforward language. Circuitous sentences are
not the mark of a sophisticated mind, but rather of an
unorganized or pompous one. Avoid wordiness at all costs.
Wordy sentence: When the subject of consumer culture is
discussed, there are effectively two perspectives of the matter;
one perspective is that of the people doing the consuming, and
the other is comprised of entities producing commodities.
Better sentence: There are two perspectives of consumer
culture: the consumer’s and the producer’s.
2. Use active verbs. Passive both slow comprehension and
don’t clarify who did what.
Passive: Consumption was promoted by advertising.
Active verbs clearly and directly state your points.
Active: Advertising promoted consumption.
Also, avoid overuse of linking verbs (“there is,” “there are,”
etc. Any form of “to be.”) There’s usually a more dynamic
way to phrase a point.
3. Use transitions between paragraphs and between different
ideas within paragraphs. They’re like traffic signs for your
reader, since they indicate which way you’re going next. They
are crucial in helping your reader follow your ideas. They can
indicate that you’re departing in a different direction (however,
nevertheless, on the other hand), or that you’re adding more
information of a similar nature (likewise, similarly, in
addition). If you feel as if you have trouble with the “flow” of

12. your papers, you’re probably not using transitions well.
FOUR ESSENTIAL NOTES:
1. Review instructionscarefully. Review this document, the
grading rubric, the course writing guidelines (also on
Blackboard) and the Dilemmas Handbook carefully in order to
successfully complete submission 1. Use the outline on pp. 39-
47 in the Handbook as a guide.
2. Ignore the Handbook examples. While the Handbook
instructions are essential, you should NOT follow the sample
passages in the Handbook. They are misleading.
3. Attribute all controversial beliefs, opinions, and perspectives
to the appropriate side. NEVER just state these things--it will
look as if YOU believe them, and it's not time for you to let us
know what you believe yet. It may feel repetitive to keep
writing "according to," "in the opinion of," etc., but you do
want to do it anyway.
4. THERE ISNO ROOM FOR "FLUFF" IN THIS PAPER. Many
of you have filled required pages by long, detailed, wordy
descriptions in other assignments. That will not work at all
here. To complete this paper assignment adequately--to provide
all of the information that the assignment requires--WILL
TAKE THE ENTIRE PAGE REQUIREMENTS. You CANNOT
detail the submission 1 material in less than 5 or 6 pages. Write
clearly and straightforwardly--make each point fully but
concisely with no fluff--or you cannot possibly be addressing
all the requirements.
GRADING RUBRIC
Submission One
COMPONENT

13. NOTES
POSSIBLE
EARNED
Introduction
5
[Content:]
--
Social Problems: (definition/scope of problem[s])
10
Stakeholders
5
History
10
Current policies & alternatives
15
Logic/clarity/neutrality
10
Use of supporting evidence
10
Organization

14. 10
MLA form/works cited page
10
Grammar, spelling, punctuation
10
Writing style
5
100