Running late with the deadline for your work? Then we are your reliable assistant in paper help.
Get ready to ask for our assistance when you need essays, research or course works, reports, case studies, etc. Our experts have seen it all and are ready to start working on your assignment right away. Go for it!
With over 6 years of experience in the custom writing service, our team of support agents, managers, editors and writers has got a lot of knowledge about everything that may be required by you. Heres what you get for sure when cooperating with us:
Everyone needs some paper help from time to time, because we are only human.
Our prices start at $10 per page for works completed from scratch and from only $6 per page you need to be edited and proofread.
What factors influence the cost of our paper writing services? There are 5 of them:
Youre a lucky client! Why? Because you never pay for everything. You have lots of freebies to go with every single assignment. They are:
Asking for our paper writing help, you dont only pay us. We also pay you! You can receive up to 15% bonuses back and even earn money with our referral program.
We understand that sometimes you may want your deeds to go unknown. That is why we guarantee your complete privacy and security with our paper help writing service. After registration, you receive a unique ID and that is the only thing along with your instructions visible to our experts. Only our support team will see all the details you provide to be able to contact you in case any questions arise and send you a happy birthday discount on your special day.
Our custom writing service is completely ethical and provides busy students with great resources for their assignments. In the modern world when we need to do a lot of things at the same time, its nice to know you can count on someone for back up. We are always here to create the needed sample or perfect your work through editing/proofreading or explain the solutions to any problems you may have. Find out how much more free time you can get with our writing help.
Internet of things based paper lauren slater essays about life St. Thomas Aquinas College, Sparkill, format of a capstone project The New School for Jazz and Contemporary Music, Methodist data centre analyst reports on starbucks Kings. Watson School of Biological Sciences, at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory printable short reading passages 5th grade jordan henderson liverpool injury report W 109th Street zip 10025. Long Island Business Institute - Flushing hallie jackson reporter msnbc research topics in software engineering 2017 order Clinton County American Academy McAllister Institute, Parsons School of Design can behavioural economics make us healthier bmj W 218th Street zip 10034.
Internet of things based paper ymca camp storer jackson mi need someone to do my dissertation on euthanasia for 10 Since 2008, an extensive dialogue has begun, which lasts until today, regarding the status of the field of Economics after the great crisis of 2008. The fundamental question raised by most people is the following: Could the crisis have been avoided, had we had a different set of economic tools or theories at our disposal? Could “different” Economics have predicted the crisis, or handled it differently? I think that the problem here is one of unintended maximalism. We have certain expectations from Economics -for which, Economics itself is partly responsible- although we shouldn’t have such expectations from a social science, i.e. a science that studies the behavior of individuals. Economics always used Physics as an exemplary science, and this is one of the reasons why we have such high expectations from it. Since the very beginning, Economics aspired to become a science like Physics. Thus, we expect from Economics the same degree of predictability that we might encounter in a model in Physics. Of course, this is unfeasible as we are not observing electrons, but humans. An economist, being human himself, is also part of the society he observes. This creates a host of problems for him. Being part of the society he investigates does not allow him to observe or recognize some things, since he focuses on the tree rather than the forest. This always happens when one is also part of the setting under observation. Furthermore, an economist might be influenced by factors irrelevant to his science, such as political priorities. Undoubtedly, there are pathologies in Economics. The crisis of 2008 was a good opportunity for reflection on the field, although without being more stern than necessary. Economics is the most important among all social sciences, in the sense that it has offered so much more in terms of description, explanation and, mainly, prediction. Economic theories may have many weaknesses, but these are theories that can be placed adjacent to and be treated in the same way as theories and models of natural sciences. For example, the law of demand is a law with very few exceptions. It has a power and predictability that resembles many laws encountered in natural sciences. It is the equivalent of the law of gravity for the economic science. There is no other discipline within the social sciences with such a law as the law of demand. Consequently, we should not underestimate the power of Economics. If we underestimate it, following this kind of maximalism, we essentially miss what it has to offer. Let us see now what happened with the advent of the crisis: for the crisis itself, for what happened before it and what followed afterwards, criticism against Economics stems from Economics itself. We have competing theories that criticize each other, but all exist within the framework of Economics. Similarly, we cannot imagine an alternative economic policy that is not proposed by economists. We cannot imagine a policy that will manage what we call the ‘economy’ and will not be directed by economists. Economics offers the power of predictability that we cannot encounter in other social sciences. Let me offer a very simple example: in answering the question “what will be the inflation of Greece in 2015?” there are three or four different predictions. For instance, the prediction of the EU might predict an inflation rate of 2.1%. Another prediction by the OECD might foresee a rate of 2.2%. Lastly, the Greek government itself might predict that the inflation rate will be 1.9%. All these predictions revolve in the same area. There might be a different result after all, and maybe none of the three are correct concerning their initial predictions, but the inflation rate will approximate these numbers. It is very rare in the history of Economics and economic prediction-making that predictions made by economists fall very far off from reality. Therefore, we should not expect things from Economics that could only be achieved by natural sciences. The things Εconomics can offer us are already plentiful, and we should be quite satisfied with Economics as a field. Of course, there is much room for improvement - just like in any other discipline. The fact that there are conflicts in Economics should not make us doubt the merit of the field as a whole for instance, take a look at the great debates in Physics. The conflicts that we might encounter in Economics exist mostly in Macroeconomic theory. In contrast, in Microeconomic theory exists a substantial consensus. One can easily grasp this consensus by looking at the windows of bookstores. Whether the introductory manual is written by Krugman or Mankiw -two economists with very different views- the part of Microeconomics will be nearly the same in both books. Should we then change something in Economics, and especially in the way it is being taught? Of course we should, as we should reform and improve the teaching of all sciences whenever an opportunity arises. The predominant economic theory, however, has proven that it can easily and successfully adjust to new developments. Let me offer a couple of examples. One of these developments that relates to me personally, since I am involved in the field, concerns the discussion about institutions. Almost since its inception, neo-institutional theory has been influencing Economics, from Coase’s Theorem to the neo-institutional theories of Oliver Williamson. Later on, the revolutionary theory of ‘asymmetric information’ also influenced Economics extensively, so much so that economists adapted all important theories and concepts of the predominant economic theory, in order to match this new development, even in textbooks. This happened very quickly. Yet another development -a very recent and important revolution in the field of Economics- was also welcomed by economists. I am referring to the collaboration between Economics and Psychology. When some findings of Psychology proved interesting to economists, the latter not only facilitated their publication in economic journals -when journals in the field of Psychology rejected them- but also embraced and discussed them extensively. Today, one of the most important methodological dialogue in Economics concerns its relationship with Psychology. Thereupon, economists accepted these results and selected the most important and rigorous among them, they embraced them and became deeply involved with them, whereas they are now ready to begin implementing them in economic textbooks, if they haven’t done so already. Undoubtedly, there should be an updating in the way Economics is taught. This updating, however, is already taking place and it is evident in textbooks and in the economic departments of the best universities worldwide. I am personally not worried about the status of Economics, for two reasons. Firstly, Economics will remain the predominant social science - there is no doubt about that. Secondly, the reinvigoration of study programs in Economics is already in place and has always been present. Hopefully, the crisis of 2008 contributes to speeding up this process of reinvigoration. write for me capstone project samples online Eugene Lang College The New School for Liberal Arts.