Turkey in the European Union

The country of Turkey is typically considered to straddle both Europe and Asia. Turkey occupies all of the Anatolian Peninsula (also known as Asia Minor) and a small part of southeastern Europe. In October 2005 negotiations began between Turkey (population 70 million) and the European Union (EU) for Turkey to be considered as a possible member of the EU in the future. Location While most of Turkey lies geographically in Asia (the peninsula is Asian), far western Turkey lies in Europe. Turkeys largest city of Istanbul (known as Constantinople until 1930), with a population of over 9 million is located on both the east and west sides of the Bosporus strait so it straddles both what are traditionally considered Europe and Asia. However, Turkeys capital city of Ankara is fully outside of Europe and on the Asian continent. While the European Union is working with Turkey to help it move toward being able to become a member of the European Union, there are some who are concerned about Turkeys potential membership. Those opposed to Turkish membership in the EU point to several issues. Issues First, they state that Turkeys culture and values are different from those of the European Union as a whole. They point out that Turkeys 99.8% Muslim population is too different from Christian-based Europe. However, the EU makes the case that the EU is not a religion-based organization, Turkey is a secular (a non-religion-based government) state, and that 12 million Muslims currently live throughout the European Union. Nonetheless, the EU acknowledges that Turkey needs to Substantially improve respect for the rights of non-Muslim religious communities to meet European standards. Secondly, naysayers point out that since Turkey is mostly not in Europe (neither population-wise nor geographically), it should not become part of the European Union. The EU responds that, The EU is based more on values and political will than on rivers and mountains, and acknowledges that, Geographers and historians have never agreed on the physical or natural borders of Europe. Too true! A third reason Turkey might have problems is its non-recognition of Cyprus, a full-fledged member of the European Union. Turkey will have to acknowledge Cyprus to be considered a contender for membership. Additionally, many are concerned about the rights of Kurds in Turkey. The Kurdish people have limited human rights and there are accounts of genocidal activities that need to stop for Turkey to be considered for European Union membership. Finally, some are concerned that Turkeys large population would alter the balance of power in the European Union. After all, Germanys population (the largest country in the EU) is only at 82 million and declining. Turkey would be the second largest country (and perhaps eventually the largest with its much higher growth rate) in the EU and would have considerable influence in the European Union. This influence would be especially profound in the population-based European Parliament. The low per-capita income of the Turkish population is also of concern since the economy of Turkey as a new EU member might have a negative effect on the EU as a whole. Turkey is receiving considerable assistance from its European neighbors as well as from the EU. The EU has allocated billions and is expected to allocate billions of euros in funding for projects to help invest in a stronger Turkey that may one day become a member of the European Union. I was particularly moved by this EU statement on why Turkey should be part of the European Union of the future, Europe needs a stable, democratic and more prosperous Turkey which adopts our values, our rule of law, and our common policies. The accession perspective has already driven forward bold and significant reforms. If the rule of law and human rights are guaranteed throughout the country, Turkey can join the EU and thus become an even stronger bridge between civilizations as it is already today. That sounds like worthwhile goal to me.

Essay on Managrial Economics Project - 881 Words

Team 20 | MANAGIRAL ECONOMICS PROJECT 1 | Estimation of the Demand for Combo 1 meals | | Corey Siragusa 106549438 | Yujing Zhang 108672624 | Gary Zhao 108693441 | 11/7/2012 | a) Using the data in Table 1, specify a linear functional form for the demand for Combination 1 meals, and run a regression to estimate the demand for Combo 1 meals. According to the passage, we know that the Quantity of meals sold by Combination (Q) is related to the average price charged (P) and the dollar amount spent on newspaper ads for each week in 1998(A). The price will influence the quantity of demand with inverse relation, and ads may lead to change of demand with positive relation. Household income and population in the suburb did†¦show more content†¦We can have strong confident to conclude that P and A variable has some correlation with Q. However, the Adjusted R-square equals to 0.2337, which is not every large. That is to say, P and A are able to explain only 23.37% changes of quantity of demand. d) Discuss how the estimation of demand might be improved. From Part C, we find that the adjusted R-square is not very high. So we should increase the adjusted R-square by increasing number of variables. We believe that the estimation of demand might be improved, if we can collect more information about competitors, including their price, advertising, product improvement, etc. And the population of tourists can be consideration, even though the permanent population didn’t change obviously. e) Using your estimated demand equation, calculate an own-price elasticity and an advertising elasticity. Compute the elasticity values at the sample mean values of the data in Table 1. Discuss, in quantitative terms, the meaning of each elasticity. When Mean of P=4, Mean of A=10009, then Qd= 100626.05-16392.65P +1.58A=50869.67 Own-price elasticity =-16392.65*4/50869.67= -1.289 Advertising elasticity=1.58*10009/50869.67=0.3109 The own-price elasticity is -1.289, which means that if the price goes up $1, the quantity will go down 1.289, and the revenue will drop. The advertising elasticity is 0.3109, which means that if the investment on

Compensation From Airbus Corporation Ltd †Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Compensation From Airbus Corporation Ltd? Answer: Introducation A contract becomes legally binding and enforceable in the court of law only if there is a valid offer and acceptance between the parties to the contract. The parties to the contract must have legal intention to be bound by the contract. The parties to the contract must agree to the terms of the contract, the offeror has offered to the offeree. Further, after the offeror and the offeree enters into a contract, they become legally bound by the contract irrespective of the fact that either the parties have not entered into such contract without perusing the terms stipulated in the same. Furthermore, the offeree accepting the terms of the contract must not include any additional terms that were not present in the original offer made by the offeror. If the offeree incorporates an additional contractual term, it shall amount to counter offer and shall not be considered as a valid acceptance because under such circumstances, then original offer shall cease to be in effect. the terms of an acceptance must match with the terms be made by the offeror and in case, any additional terms is incorporated in the contract, the original contract shall not exist, as it would be considered as contractual offer. In LEstrange v Graucob [1934] 2 KB 394, a party to the contract is entitled to limit its liability by including an exclusion clause in the contract but the parties cannot restrict their legal liability. A contractual term incorporated by a party which is not usually expected to be stipulated in a contract, must be acknowledged to the other party. If the other party is not informed about such contractual term, and it is detrimental to the other party, such terms shall not be considered as valid. After the contract is confirmed, an additional term cannot be incorporated in the contract as was held in Olley v Marlborough Ltd [1949] 1 KB 532[1]. A condition is a term of contract, the violation of which entitles the aggrieved party to terminate the contract and claim damages from the breaching party. A warranty is a term, which does not, entitles the aggrieved party to discharge himself from the contractual liability. A warranty is not as significant as the other terms of the contract as they do not form the subject matter of the contract. However, if either party fails to fulfill the warranties incorporated in a contract, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to claim damages against the breaching party the court needs to apply the decision held in Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd [1962][2]. The court held that the aggrieved person is granted damages by way of compensation. The court grants compensation that reinstates the parties to the position they were in, before the violation of the contractual terms. The compensation includes any loss that the aggrieved party has sustained due to the infringement of the condition or warranty stipulated in the contract. Application In the given scenario, Qantas shall be said to have entered into a contract with Airbus if there is a valid offer and acceptance between them. Since both the parties have agreed on 545 terms incorporated in the agreement, it implies that the parties have made a valid offer and there was a valid acceptance of the offer, which signifies that the parties have entered into a valid contract. It further implies that the parties to the contract have agreed on the terms incorporated in the original offer when it was made by the offeror, hence, the contract is legally binding upon the parties to the contract. In the given case, it is stated that subsequent to the entering of the contract, Airbus had sent several documents that included Color Schemes, Contract. It also included the liability clause, which was not included in the contract when the offer was made. The liability clause stated that the Airbus Company shall be liable to the extent of $300000. As discussed in above, in Olleys case, party to a contract is liable to incorporate an exclusion clause for restricting the contractual liability of such party. However, as discussed in the Graucobs case, Airbus was under statutory obligation to inform Qantas Airlines about the exclusion clause as if an additional term is included in the contract, the party including such additional term must acknowledge the other party about such incorporation, especially, if such term would be detrimental for the other party. But, Airbus airlines did not notify the Qantas airlines about the exclusion clause it incorporated after formation of the contract . Further, in Graucobs case, it was observed that after a contract is confirmed, neither parties to the contract is entitled to incorporate any additional or e contractual terms in the contract. Furthermore, in order to incorporate any additional or new contractual term, consent of both the contractual parties is required. Hence, the inclusion of the exclusion contract and placing it with the other documents in a big box without acknowledging Qantas airlines about the same cannot be considered as valid and legal. The subject matter of the contract was to provide a plane of good quality along with additional good qualities accessories, which includes video entertainment system with 36 channels. Nevertheless, due to technical issue Airbus provided only 34 channels, which amounts to a breach of warranty and entitle Qantas to claim compensation and rescind the contract. According to the principles of damages in contract law, Qantas may claim compensation for the loss sustained owing to the mistake caused by the Airbus company. Even though the loss suffered by the company is more than $300000 and the new system is to be installed within a week, Airbus is entitled to pay compensation to the Qantas Airlines for incorporating the exclusion clause and not notifying Qantas about the same, thus, rendering the exclusion clause as invalid. Misrepresentation refers to the false statements of facts that induce an individual to engage in a legally binding agreement. However, there is a distinction between puffery and misrepresentation. Puffery is self-evident overstatements, which are used for advertising purposes. puffery has no legal significance and no claim can be made against puffery. On the other hand, in order to establish a claim against misrepresentation, it must be proved that the person causing misrepresentation has made a false statement with a view to induce the aggrieved person to enter into a contract. A misrepresentation claim can only be made if the aggrieved party can establish that he/she was not aware of the false nature of the statements and their judgment is not affected by it. Silence cannot be considered as misrepresentation and the aggrieved party must establish that the party committing misrepresentation must persuade the aggrieved party to enter into the contract. Fraudulent misrepresentation takes place when the party committing such fraudulent misrepresentation is aware of the same and the aggrieved party must rescind the contract and claim for damages suffered by the aggrieved person. Again, agency refers to a form of contract where the principal authorizes an agent to enter into a contract with third parties on behalf of the principal. The principal is bound by the actions of the agents as was observed in Siu Yin Kwan v Eastern Insurance Co Ltd [1994] 2 AC 199[3]. However, an agent binds the principal by his actions only when such action is carried out within the course of employment and the agent has an apparent, expressed or implied authority conferred upon him by the principal. In Watteau v Fenwick [1889], the court ruled that if a third party enters into a contract with an agent without knowledge that the authority of the agent cease to exist the principal shall persist to be bound by the action of the agent. Further, in the Freeman Lockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties [1964], the court held that even if the principal does not authorizes the agent and the third party believes the agent is authorized; the principal shall be bound by the actions of the agent on the grounds of implied authority[4]. In the given scenario, it has been provided that Gamma is an employee of Frank who works in his appliance shop. A customer Tom saw dishwater preset in the shop worth $350 and he told Gamma that he would inform her whether he could buy the dishwater at $350. Gamma was aware that Frances also required dishwater and she induced Frank to sell the dishwater to Frances at $300 and that the dishwater would never be sold at $350. Frank is induced by Gamma as she was the salesperson and authorized her to sell the dishwater at $300. She sold the dishwater to Frances at $300. Frank later found that the customer Tom could have easily paid $350 for the dishwater. Under such circumstances, as per the rules of misrepresentation, Gamma provided false statement of facts to Frank when she was aware that she is providing false facts and induced Frank to authorize her to sell it for less price, Gamma is said to be liable for committing fraudulent misrepresentation. Hence, frank is entitled to claim compensation of $50 against Gamma for committing fraudulent misrepresentation. In the other scenario, Bob enters into a contract with Angela with whom he frequently sells washing machines. Bib was not performing his duties well and often came to work drunk. Consequently, Frank terminates Bob and his authority as an agent ceases to exist. Bob entered into a contract for selling 10 washing machines for $1000 each with Angela who was not aware of the fact that Bob was fired and did not have any authority to enter into contract with third parties. Angela had transferred $1000 to Bobs account and Bob usurped the amount from the Home Appliance Specialist Bank Account and went overseas. However, after terminating Bob, Frank did not ensure whether Bob left the premises after being fired and rushed to a meeting out of town. As discussed in the Fenwicks case, a principal is bound by the action of an agent even after the authority of the agent ceases to exist if the party with whom the agent enters into a contract is unaware of the fact that agent does not have any authority to enter into a contract. Here, since Bob frequently dealt with Angela with respect to selling of washing machines, Angela entered into a contract with Bob and was not aware of the fact that he has been terminated and that he did not have any authority to enter into the contract with her. Further, in Freemans case, even if the principal does not authorizes the agent to act on behalf of the principal, but if the third party believes that the agent has an authority and enters into as it would be considered as contractual offer.contract with the agent, the principal shall be bound by the action of the agent under such circumstances. Hence, in the given scenario, Frank shall be bound by the contract entered into between Bob and Angela; he must deliver the washing machines to Angela. However, he may claim compensation for damages from Bob. Conclusion Gamma has committed fraudulent misrepresentation by inducing frank to enter into the contract with low price. Frank is bound by the contract of selling washing machines to Angela and may claim damages from Bob. Reference Freeman Lockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties [1964] 1 All ER 630 Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd [1962] 2 QB 26 Watteau v Fenwick [1889] 14 App Cas 33 Siu Yin Kwan v Eastern Insurance Co Ltd [1994] 2 AC 199 Olley v Marlborough Ltd [1949] 1 KB 532 LEstrange v Graucob [1934] 2 KB 39 [1] [1949] 1 KB 532 [2] [1962] 2 QB 26 [3] [1994] 2 AC 199 [4] [1964] 1 All ER 630

what was the most significant event in German history Example For Students

what was the most significant event in German history In considering the process of change in the development of Germany over the whole period 1890-1991, how far can the treaty of Versailles been seen as a key turning point? Jonathan Sokolov The Treaty of Versailles was a monumental stage in German history, helping to shape German history for arguably the best part of thirty years. It can be argued that the Treaty was the most significant event since the unification of Germany in 1890. The short term consequences were also highly prominent as over 300,000 Germans fled to America in the years 1917-23. Moreover many Germans were aggrieved by the Treaty, this lead to public exploits (Kapp Putsch and Munich Putsch) that lead to casualties accumulating into the 1000’s. With so much death and despair in Germany in the 1920’s the Treaty of Versailles effectively crippled Germany both economically and mentally. Furthermore the effects did not only stretch to the late 20’s, Hitler used the Treaty as a major campaigning point to secure chancellorship in 1933. Hitler still held severe indignations over the Treaty of Versailles and still held a personal vendetta with the parent countries that imposed such harsh terms on Germany in 1917. Although the Treaty of Versailles was a pivotal stage in shaping German history there are other corresponding factors such as the erection of the Berlin wall in 1961, consequently perpetually separating East and West Berlin for 28 years. After the wall came down in 1989, Germany became reunified in 1990, arguably the most significant turning point in German history as it enabled Germany to prosper as a whole nation, since then Germany has gone on to establish itself as a world superpower, both militarily and economically. It is difficult to come to a definitive answer on what the biggest turning point is, however I plan to analyse pivotal points in German history, dating from 1917-1990. The war in 1914 was the second time Germany had invaded France, resulting in over 1million casualties this time. Consequently Georges Clemenceau wanted to impose strict regulations that would prevent the threat of attack for the foreseeable future; the result was The Treaty of Versailles. German politicians were effectively forced to sign the treaty after the ultimatum, sign or go to war, was given. Some of the harsher terms were as followed; all German colonies would be given to allies, the Rhineland would be occupied by allies for 15 years and the military was limited to only 100,000 men. Worst of all Germany would have to pay $22 billion in reparations; this amount of money was inconceivable and was impossible to pay for any country, especially one that could not prosper after their Rhineland was taken. This sum of money is so significant that even after it was reduced massively Germany only just paid of reparations from WW1, 92 years later in 2010. Therefore it is evident that th e Treaty of Versailles was a key turning point as Germany was still being affected 92 years on. These terms effectively crippled Germany for the best part of 30 years. Furthermore after the Treaty was signed Germany went into economic turmoil, money was being burnt for warmth and a loaf of bread cost 2 million marks in 1924 (cost 1.20 marks in 1920). Moreover thanks to the Treaty of Versailles Germany could not rely on the prosperous Rhineland; consequently a loan was given by America to enable Germany to prosper. However the Wall Street crash of 1929 hindered these plans as America recalled all loans. Therefore, despite the best efforts of Paul Von Hindenburg Germany remained economically unstable as she remained reliant on America. Historian Harold Nicolson argues that the Treaty was â€Å"neither just nor wise†, further suggesting that the terms imposed were ridiculous and unruly as it stopped millions from having a sustainable lifestyle, another reason to argue the Treaty of Versailles was a key turning point in German history. The economic turmoil of the 1920’s can all be linked back to the Treaty of Versailles as it crippled Germany. Further suggesting that the Treaty was a key turning point as it is evident that it was responsible for undermining of Germany. Although William Carr (A History Of Germany 1815-1945 (1985)) argues that as severe as the Treaty was â€Å"it should be remembered that Germany might easily have feared much worse. If Clemenceau had had his way instead of being restrained by Britain and America the treaty could have been much worse for Germany†. However this does not undermine the fact that the Treaty was highly influential in shaping German history. Finally the Treaty can be held responsible for the rise of Hitler in 1933. Moreover Hitler used the Treaty as a major campaigning point because many Germans were still aggrieved by the terns imposed by the Treaty, thus enabling Hitler’s rise to prominence to be swift; however there are many extenuating factors, such as the Reichstag fire in 1933. Due to the fact the Treaty aided Hitler’s rise to power it can be argued it instigated the process of the Second World War, a monumental stage in German history. No one can challenge the fact that the Treaty of Versailles was a key turning point; however it is hard to come to a conclusive statement on whether or not it is the most significant. After the Second World War the Treaty can no longer be influential as it was scrapped following Germany’s defeat in 1945. Following the defeat of Germany in June was the three conferences in 1945 that were highly influential In German history,(Tehran, Yalta, Potsdam) in particular Potsdam. Now it must be understood that this does not undermine the significance of WW2 but merely focuses on promoting the agenda of the long term consequences of the war, rather than focus on the short term, i.e. the casualties. I digress. The Potsdam conference was the most significant as it was agreed by the big three that Berlin would be split into 4 sectors. This created a methodical curtain around Berlin (between West and East) that was supplemented by Churchill’s â€Å"iron Curtain speech†. Berlin was torn; the West was controlled by America, whereas the East was controlled by the Soviet Union, resulting in the capital changing to Bonn. This period of time was known as the divis ion of Germany (1945-1990). In which 7million prisoners and laborers left Germany. The Potsdam conference was clearly highly influential; however it is difficulty to decipher whether or not it is a key turning point. On the other hand the conference was responsible for separating Berlin for almost 50 years, and on this evidence it can be argued that it was a key turning point. Another possible key turning point in German history came 3 years after the Potsdam conference and was the first of two Berlin crisis’. To elaborate in 1948 the Soviet Union imposed a blockade on West Berlin, cutting of supplies for the Western troops. This created civil unrest in Berlin as they did not know who held influential power in their own capital. A year later the crisis was resolved, as the USSR terminated the regime as America refused to accept defeat after they conjured up the successful Berlin air lift. Although the Berlin blockade was only a yearlong it created animosity between the world’s superpowers and made Berlin highly unstable. Avi Shlaim described the Berlin blockade as â€Å"the climax of the struggle for power over Germany and Europe†, suggesting that the blockade could be a key turning point. However the blockade affected the cold war, rather than Germany, therefore I would argue that it is not a monumental turning point. Although this do es not diminish its significance as Berlin almost ended up being the stage for a war, therefore challenging my previous statement but not contradicting it as Germany did not experience much change after the Berlin crisis. Therefore suggesting that the Blockade was of some significance, but not a key turning point, despite historians such as the after-mentioned Avi Shlaim and Rebecca Bymes suggesting it is more than that. 10 years later the second Berlin crisis began in 1958. Khrushchev gave ultimatums to both Eisenhower (in 1958) and to Kennedy (1961) in the hope of finally gaining control of West Berlin, these attempts were futile as America would never back down. Consequently the East and the West remained separate. Thousands of Germans were moving from East to West in the hope of a better lifestyle, in response the USSR erected the Berlin wall in 1961. This separated the East and West for 28 years, this prodigious stage in German History was overcast by death. To elaborate many Germans attempted to cross from East to West and vice versa, this created a problem that was wrongly solved by the slaughtering of thousands as they attempted to climb the wall. The death toll became so significant the zone between the walls was known as â€Å"no man’s land†. Therefore it is obvious that the Berlin wall was a significant point in German history. Moreover the wall emphasized and emulated statem ents made in Churchill’s â€Å"iron curtain speech† by making the methodical iron curtain a physical reality. The extent of the damage caused by the erection of the Berlin wall can never truly be calibrated as families went 28 years without seeing one another, â€Å"this grim concrete edifice scarred the former German capital for a generation† (â€Å"The Berlin Wall† 1961-89 by Frederick Taylor). Accordingly it can be argued that the Berlin wall was the most significant turning point in modern German history, as it was responsible for devastation and perpetual separation for 28 years. On the other hand Edith Sheffer argues that the divisions between the East and West were only symbolized by the Berlin wall; â€Å"divisions that were created on the level of the individual† this argument is highly contentious and totally disregards the magnitude of the wall and places the blame on German citizens, it is apparent this statement is outlandish but still can be considered. However I would choose to oppose this view and advocate the view made by Frederick Taylor that the erection of the wall was a key turning point In German history. The final key turning points were in the years 1989-1990 with the deconstruction of the Berlin wall. This was shortly followed by the re-unification of Germany In 1990. Both events were monumental in developing Germany, allowing them to prosper and become the economic power they are today. Consequently it can be argued fervently that the events in 1989-1990 were the biggest turning points in Germany’s history, additionally in conjunction with Germany’s re-unification Berlin was pronounced the capital of Germany. A significant event for the Germany as Berlin was always the people’s capital, therefore it can be symbolic for German people finally reclaiming their homeland. It is difficult to calibrate to what extent the deconstruction of the Berlin wall impacted Germany but Frederick Taylor describes it as a â€Å"solution of sorts for the German problem that had haunted the world for more than a century†. Judging on this statement it can be argued that the e vents in 1989-90 were the most significant stages in German history as it resolved problems that dated back almost a century, finally allowing Germany to be ruled by the German people, therefore it can be construed that these were the most significant key turning points in Germany’s history. To conclude German history was riddled with significant events in the period 1890-91, consequently it is difficult to comprehensively state which turning point was the most influential, thus the most significant. After the defeat in WW1 Germany was left broken by the terms imposed on them by the Treaty of Versailles, as previously stated the effects of this Treaty can be dated all the up to 1945. Therefore providing large amounts of backing for the argument that the Treaty was the most significant part in Germany’s history as it was also a possible cause for the Second World War, this was foreshadowed by Lloyd George as he said â€Å"we will have to fight another war again in 25 years’ time†. (This statement was made shortly after the treaty was signed) Another possible candidate for the most significant turning point in Germany’s history was the erection of the Berlin wall in 1961. This infuriated the German public, separating the country for 28 years. Ma ny historians argue this is the most significant stage in German history as it was an emphatic response from the USSR, in regards to people migrating from zone to zone, that emulated statements made in Churchill’s â€Å"iron curtain speech†. However I would argue that this was not the most significant turning point and it was rather the events in the period 1989-90 that was the most significant. However this view can come under scrutiny as many historians hold the view that the Berlin wall highlighted many key aspects in German history, therefore should be the most the most significant. Nevertheless I would argue that the deconstruction of the Berlin wall and the re-unification of Germany was the most significant stage in German history as it ended a 45 year spell of division and empowered the German people by allowing them to rule their own country. Since then Germany have become prosperous and prolific, consequently they have gone onto establish themselves as an econ omic power. To come to a judgement although there is a large amount of backing and evidence for other turning points in German history, the events in 1989-90 are the significant as it unifies a country that has been broken for the best part of a century. .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b , .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .postImageUrl , .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b , .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:hover , .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:visited , .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:active { border:0!important; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:active , .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u38e8da7c462ef6a3596bb54bb515270b:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: What Is Your History With Journalism? We will write a custom essay on what was the most significant event in German history specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now