Category: Law : Business Law

Hi, I’ve attached the files on how to write the AE note, Syllogism, and Critical Evaluation. I’ve also attached the example file for the guideline that shows how the final paper has to be.
One reading article for writing the paper is “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits” which I attached below.
This paper is an argumentative essay that should not include any article summary. No summary, please.
Use citation from “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits” article only. No outside sources.
All notes should be in 12pt font Times New Roman with 1-inch margins.
Argument Evaluation (AE) Note Instructions
Each AE note involves two parts:
Part 1: Syllogism: Present the primary argument of one of the assigned readings as a numbered syllogism. Some articles might have more than one argument; if so, present what you take to be the author’s strongest argument. Be sure to present the argument charitably.
Hint 1:Would the author agree that the view you have presented is his or her view?
Hint 2: Is the wording in your arguments exactly parallel throughout, or have you switched up the terminology?
Example of the part 1 Syllogism:
1. The best sneaker brand has a reasonable price and is long-lasting.
2. Nike’s sneakers are reasonably priced and long-lasting.
3. Nike is the best sneaker brand. [1, 2]
or
1ST ARGUMENT:
1. Those who disobey the laws of the government are disobeying their par
2. Those who are disobeying their parents are doing wrong
3. So: Those who disobey the laws of the government are doing wrong. [1,2]
If you see the example and the files explaining the first part, The number after the sentence shows the validity of previous sentences. It does not need to be each sentence is valid for every next sentence. 1st and 2nd sentences can be valid on the 3rd sentence.
Part 2: Critical Evaluation: Provide a one-page (double spaced) critique of the argument you provided in Part 1. This might involve first explicitly stating which premise you will attack and then proceeding to the critique. You might also offer considerations for why the argument has unseemly or implausible implications. Feel free to use examples or thought experiments to make your point. This note should not merely involve a restating of the argument (or a summary). Assume your audience has read the paper you are writing about and is interested in your original reflections and critique.
Hint 1: Could the author’s view consistently be held with the point you’re making? If they could accept your point, but still consistently hold their view without contradiction or tweaking their view, you haven’t actually criticized their view!)
Hint2: This isn’t a diary entry about how the author made you feel, whether they angered you, or even whether you like or dislike their view. Your focus should be on articulating compelling reasons for why some component of the author’s argument is not well justified.

Read the attached case summary of Sandridge Energy Inc, v Barfield (see below attachment for a summary of the original case Barfield v SandRidge Energy Inc)
Write a 3-5 paragraph/one page reflection on the case to include the following:
A brief summary of the case including:
background information on the case
complaint that was brought to the court
arguments that were made on both sides
final decision of the court
Offer a detailed explanation of YOUR opinion of the final judgement to include:
whether you agree or disagree and why
what you learned about non-compete clauses in practice
How much responsibility does a business owner have to ensure the safety of customers? What sort of practices can a business owner put into place to ensure they are providing their best effort to avoid the occurrence of injuries on their property and when interacting with their products?

In chapter 8 of the textbook, the case of Harris v Forklift Systems, INC in which Harris accused the company’s president created a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Do you agree with the lower courts’ statements that the behavior, though offensive, did not lead to any harm? Why?
Do you agree with the SCOTUS decision that the existence or lack of harm does not determine whether the behavior violates Title VII? Why?
Give three reasons as to why it is important as a business to have a workplace environment that is free from harassment?
Respond to at least two classmates to receive full credit
*If you use outside sources to support your arguments, please be sure to appropriately cite them to avoid plagiarism

Please Help With Discussion Questions And Include APA Citations for each discussion question. Thank You.
1. Farmer Freddie owns an Alpaca Farm in western part of New Jersey. The Freddie Family Farm raises Alpaca primarily to make fiber from their coats, but also opens the farm for tours and Alpaca cuddles. The farm  is so successful that Freddie is seeking to add to the herd.  To achieve this, Freddie attended an Alpaca auction and acquired two young male alpacas around 9 months of age for breeding purposes from Alpaca’s R Us. When selecting the two animals he would ultimately acquire, Farmer Freddie told Alpacas-R Us of his need for Alpacas suitable for breeding. Freddie named one of the animals Herdsire and the other Macho. Does this transaction fall under the UCC? Why or why not? What warranties, if any,apply to this transaction?
2. After a sales contract is formed, it is up to the buyer to pay for their purchase. Payments usually occur in one of three ways, cash, credit, or a substitute for cash. It is the substitute for cash that requires negotiable instruments. Why is it important to have the option of a substitute for cash as payment in a contract? In what ways is a negotiable instrument a substitute for cash? In what ways is cash a superior form of payment? In what ways is cash a superior form of payment? In what ways is a negotiable instrument a superior form of payment?

see the attached – please d1 one page discussion 2 one page.
Please do not use any other resource only the one attached please indicated page numbers

Opposing Biden’s Agenda
More than ten years after the struggle to pass the popular health care reform bill proposed by the Obama administration, the economic-political power of large corporations was in plain sight behind the difficulties two popular pieces of legislation faced in the U.S. Senate. Koch Industries was opposed to the voting rights bill. A number of major corporations were also against raising corporate taxes envisioned in the infrastructure bill. The provisions of the voting rights bill were supported by 60% to 80% of the public (therefore a cross-section of both Democrats and Republicans). The infrastructure bill had the support of 58% of the population and would have resulted in many good-paying jobs that would have created consumer demands, boosting business’ bottom line and enhancing business legitimacy in the eyes of the public.
For most of 2021, Senator Joseph Manchin III (D-W. Virginia) had opposed Biden’s legislation containing green infrastructure spending in addition to the voting rights bill. He is from a coal-producing state which can explain some of his reluctance. Yet, in the long run “going green” will help his voters given the rapid decline of coal. But the Senator may have had personal financial reasons as well. He is a large investor in fossil fuel stocks, having created two coal companies in the 1980s which are now run by his son. Koch Industries who are heavily invested in fossil fuel also lobbied Manchin heavily which can explain in part his opposition to that piece of popular legislation.
The “Inflation Reduction Act,” signed into law in August of 2022 was a watered-down version of Build Back Better legislation, providing less than one-third of BBB’s original proposed funding and included major concessions to two Democratic Senators, Joe Manchin, and Kyrsten Sinema.
In the House, the Democrats who tanked their party’s 2021 proposal to allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices, Scott Peters and Kurt Schrader, together had received $1.7 million in contributions from Big Pharma.
Questions:
1. Should corporations have the right to influence the formulation of public policy?
2. Is it possible for corporations to exercise political influence over policymaking without infringing on public interests?
3. Why corporations would oppose legislation that expands the economy or protect the ability of people to exercise their basic democratic right, an unhindered ability to vote in elections?
Sources:
https://www.vox.com/2021/5/3/22406391/hr1-poll-for-the-people-actLinks to an external site.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/inside-the-koch-backed-effort-to-block-the-largest-election-reform-bill-in-half-a-centuryLinks to an external site.