Would a federal government be beneficial to the Philippines?
The difficult part in our supposed transition from a unitary presidential republic to a federal one is the fact that a lot of our economic growth is centred around the National Capital Region (NCR), or as critics of the current system would say, “Imperial Manila.”And this is something that shows no sign of stopping. As the world’s population goes from rural to urban, cities are becoming engines of economic growth. Manila would most likely benefit from this, not just because of the present institutions working in its favor, but also because of the planned projects that would heighten its importance in the country.By passing the TRAIN law, our government has made steps to ensure that billions of dollars of funding are available for infrastructure projects. Many of these projects will be implemented in Manila, including the on-going expansion of the LRT lines to Cavite, the planned partnership with Japan to build the first-ever subway, and the SLEX-NLEX connector. As much as Duterte speaks about federalism and creating new government centers in Clark Green City, his budget still earmarks billions to fund projects in Manila. This shows the priorities of the government.If we are to ensure a successful experiment in federalism, we have to build up institutions in other areas so that rather than having them depend on the federal funds to finance their budgetary requirements (utilities, transportation, urban planning, education, healthcare, police, etc), they can turn to themselves. Better yet, we have to build up local economies so that they can sustain themselves rather than depend on the federal government once federalism is applied.If we look at the United States as an example of successful federalism, it is because the economies of their states can be compared to countries:This means that they can pretty much set local policies because they have the funds to do so.A nightmare scenario is having a federal government implemented but having provinces depend on Manila anyway, which would undermine their supposed independence.Building up local institutions and economies, and creating greater efficiency in our bureaucracy would be a good step. Once we have succeeded in this huge undertaking, can we answer whether federalism is good for our country’s future.
What is the REAL difference between a Republican run government and that of the Democrats?
Are not they both made up of politicians? Are not politicians known for being backstabbing, suck-up liars? Is there really a difference between them, then? Take a few of the issues at hand during this election; Iraq, immigration, and ethics. Neither group will be able to get the troops out of Iraq any time soon. They are there to stay for a while longer. That's a fact. Immigration is one of those issues that resurfaces every ten years. Nothing has changed in thirty years except the number of illegals, and it won't change anytime soon. I don't care how many walls are built. Ethics and politics go together like peanut butter and rotten tuna. The two are not mutually compatible. Both parties have proven this fact countless times. Sure, the Republicans have shown their backsides more than the Dems lately , but the Dems have had their share of scandals too. So, the question remains, what is the REAL difference between a Republican run government and that of the Democrats?
What role do interest groups play in policy making?
Quite a bit, and that's as it should be. Everyone has an interest, and doesn't want their interest ruined by an ignorant outsider trying to score political points. Effective policy makers encourage input from respectable groups representing divergent positions. This is how they form opinions relative to policy. If you were to have a question about the impact of a proposed firearms magazine ban, wouldn't you seek the council of the most recognized interest groups, both pro and con ?
What functions do status, role, primary groups, and secondary groups play in social interactions?
Full question: What functions do status, role, primary groups, and secondary groups play in social interactions between different racial and ethnic groups. List one example of each.
So why wouldn't Medicare for everyone work? Facts please - not diatribes of hate and fear.?
Beesting I am not at all upset with your reply, I just think you have fallen for the lies told by the insurance companies. You say it is a proven fact that when government gets involved cost escalate. Yet the current Medicare system is providing for a far sicker and elderly population than the FOR PROFIT private insurance , and are only paying slightly more per person than the private companies. And Medicare is not just basic care. My mother had two cataract surgeries paid by Medicare. She waited two weeks, because they had to schedule the procedure. My father had Gal bladder surgery, rotator cuff surgery, and coronary bypass surgery while on Medicare. All were covered, all were done within a week, two within 12 hours. So it is all scare tactics to say you will not have good coverage. And the talk of hospitals shutting because of Medicare is false also. My wife works at a Hospital that takes Medicare and Private. Medicare pays more for many procedures than private doe
Do you think American system of election is fair?
1) Why do candidates have to raise so much money? Three short reasons -- A) Because unlike in other countries, the U.S. does not require the major broadcast media to give free time to the candidates. B) Because even direct mail pieces cost a lot of money. C) Because campaigning in 50 states to 200 million voters is expensive. The bottom line is that even the campaigns spending the most money are spending less than $1 per potential voter. 2) If they raise money from pressure groups and companies, will they have to pay them back someway. Actually, companies can't contribute under federal law. But for the most part, you have the way it works backwards. Interest groups tend to give to candidates who already agree with the interest groups (or at least are less hostile to them than their opponent). If I am NARAL, I'm not donating to Mike Huckabee. I might donate to Rudy Giuliani to help him defeat Mike Huckabee on the Republican side, but I am probably donating to Clinton or Obama. 3) Why does one have to be affiliated with a party? Because state law in most of the states gives "established poltical parties" an automatic slot on the ballot. Candidates not affiliated with those parties (and only the Democrats and Republicans are on the ballot in all 50 states) have to get enough signatures to get on the ballot -- a time consuming and expensive proposition. Furthermore, for presidential elections, public financing for the general election is by federal law allocated based on your party's performance in the last election. Why are only 2 parties effective? Because this country uses a "first past the post system." In that system, the candidate with the most votes -- whether it is 52%, 48% or 30% wins the election. That rule encourages parties to position themselves close to the center to get the largest possible share of the vote. It also makes it difficult for a new party to grow into a contender because pulling in 10% of the vote doesn't get you anything.
Civilization begins with a community, people joining together to help each other over tough times. Why do so many conservatives seem to feel that the U.S. is a "Zero-Sum Game" where any dollar that goes to the needy is a dollar stolen from them?
Conservatives have no problem joining to help others. The problem that we have is when government takes over that role.It is not the government’s job to care for every need a person might have.You don’t want that government, even if you think you do.Then you end up with a place like Venezuela. People are eating their pets and are literally dying from hunger.Most people, when they see someone who needs something will try to help. THAT is the joining together that we need.So many people however, feel like, “well, they get food stamps, and section 8 and childcare help…what else could they need?” Or, what could I POSSIBLY do to help them…Social programs are not all bad. But the main role of government is…governing.Protecting the people (via the military, police, firefighters) Having libraries, roads, bridges things individuals would have a hard time with.Putting money toward building a bridge for example, is an investment with a specific outcome. Compared to using the same money toward childcare assistance. Yes, those parents were able to work, that is important. Yes those children had exposure to other kids, ideas and opportunity for growth.But at the end of the day there is nothing to “show” for it.So no, we don’t feel like it is a zero-sum game, but we are looking specifically at what the role of government IS and the actual OUTCOME.