To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
An influential model of democratic civil-military relations insists that civilian politicians and officials, accountable to the public, have “the right to be wrong” about the use of force: they, not senior military officers, decide when force will be used and set military strategy. While polls have routinely asked about Americans’ trust in the military, they have rarely probed deeply into Americans’ views of civil-military relations. We report and analyze the results of a June 2019 survey that yields two important, and troubling, findings. First, Americans do not accept the basic premises of democratic civil-military relations. They are extraordinarily deferential to the military’s judgment regarding when to use military force, and they are comfortable with high-ranking officers intervening in public debates over policy. Second, in this polarized age, Americans’ views of civil-military relations are not immune to partisanship. Consequently, with their man in the Oval Office in June 2019, Republicans—who, as political conservatives, might be expected to be more deferential to the military—were actually less so. And Democrats, similarly putting ideology aside, wanted the military to act as a check on a president they abhorred. The stakes are high: democracy is weakened when civilians relinquish their “right to be wrong.”
Velvetleaf, eastern black nightshade, wild mustard, common cocklebur, green foxtail, and yellow foxtail, grown for 4 weeks in nonaerated nutrient solution, developed satisfactorily compared to plants grown in soil. For experiments involving certain weed species grown in nutrient solution, aeration may be unnecessary.
This paper examines whether the dollar value of health benefits that consumers derive from organic food could account for the price premiums they pay. Price and sales data from realized transactions are inadequate to reveal consumer preferences for health benefits. Our exploratory alternative method estimates the value of health benefits to a hypothetical consumer who assesses risks as risk assessors do and values a unit reduction in all fatal risks equally, regardless of the source of any risk. Under these assumptions, our estimates of the value of health benefits derived from substituting an organic diet for a conventionally produced diet approach zero. For a common organic product, apple juice, we estimated the cost of reducing risks by buying the organic characteristic. The cost of averting each adverse health outcome is 27 to 461 times as large as the value of benefits. If the characteristics of our hypothetical consumer match those of the typical consumer, two inferences follow from our estimates of benefits and costs. First, the typical consumer is unlikely to purchase organic food for health reasons. Second, consumers who choose organic food could differ from typical consumers in several dimensions: perceptions of the level of risk from dietary intake of pesticides, perceptions of the nature of adverse health outcomes from pesticides, or in the importance attached to other attributes of organic food. Our analysis is exploratory partially because there are several behavioral assumptions implicit in the values we calculate. Also, we focus on risks that can be quantitatively estimated, measuring the probability of an adverse health outcome with readily accessible data. Currently, only cancer risks can be measured in terms of probabilities from readily accessible data.
These studies represent an attempt to determine Shakspere's debt to the voyagers in The Tempest. No article or book, to my knowledge, has set out to examine the subject as a whole; and my aim to supply such an article has forced me to review much material published heretofore. Broadly speaking, one-third of my studies contains material substantially as it has appeared elsewhere; one-third presents old material from a new point of view; and one-third presents material completely new. I wish to return the fullest possible acknowledgment to the excellent work of Morton Luce and Charles M. Gayley, on whose studies I have based my own.
Few poets typify Elizabethan patriotism so completely as Michael Drayton. His most ambitious poem, Polyolbion, is a fond effort to record the chorographic intricacies of his beloved isle. But he does more than that: he often transfers his interest from landscape to human beings. Thus in the Nineteenth Song he passes easily from rivers to men, paying his homage to those responsible for English prestige at sea. The rivers Orwell and Stour reach an agreement:
(156-162) And lastly they agree
That since the Britans hence their first discoveries made,
And that into the East they first were taught to trade,
Besides, of all the Roads, and Havens of the East,
This Harbour where they meet is reckoned for the best.
Our voyages by sea and brave discoveries known,
Their argument they make, and thus they sing their own.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.