Concepts of Politics and Economics

Concepts of Politics and EconomicsRamon HernandezThe Dictators DilemmaThe dictators dilemma is when an authoritarian rulers oppression is so great that the public greatly worrys him/her, which then leads to suspicion as to how practic altogethery support the ruler actu every last(predicate)y has. This leads the ruler to dismiss more resources than is geted to try to expose who potential rivals maybe or to try to buy out the potential opposition. They then array to hand more and more m singley trying to throttle every ane loyal and oft end up spending too many resources on unriv each(prenominal)ed particular group such as the military. This shews more problems as the groups that bent being represented or argon non being funded write d sustain to feeling more oppressed and less(prenominal) represented. Thus begins a upstart cycle of hoi polloi that the ruler must now try to lure over.The dictators dilemma causes the dictator to compel paranoid and forces verba lize ruler to make drastic changes to his/her agenda. For example authoritarian rulers who wish to meliorate their home regions usually do make improvements at the beginning of their regimen barely as soon as they begin to fearfulness a potential overthrow they start to spend resources on some early(a) regions to turn back the popular support. The dictators dilemma leaves the ruler in constant submits of paranoia because they ar never truly sure how much support or opposition they event. affectionate vs sp ar Market EconomiesA fond market economy is an scotch system that combines a highly productive market economy with an massive and generous welf be state, as closely as unusually alive(p) involvement of both business and labor in economic policy. It combines snobbish enterprise with regulation and state intervention so that it may induce fair competition as well as maintain a balance between high rates of economic growth and beginning levels of unemployment. It i s intentional to promote good functional conditions, social welfargon, public work and dismay inflation. It has many of the foundations of a free market economy such as private property, free foreign trade, and free formation of equipment casualtys. in that respect are provisions to confine the free market such as antitrust codes that financial aid reduce the occurring problems within a free market.A liberal market economy is a system that provides the ability for companies to act with other companies, their employees, customers, and suppliers in whatever mechanisms they prefer, within the broad regulations implemented by a administration. They incorporate a free sets system however they stipulate the potential for monopolies to form as well as the rates they so whizzr a little charge during certain states of the economy. This allows for competition in the market place to grow. Liberal market economies include government activity intervention in order to create a bas is for domestic and international commerce between businesses in the form of legislation that requires business transactions to take place within ad hoc boundaries.Market ExternalitiesMarket Externalities occur when the equal or make headway of the business process is non fully included in the price of the final market transaction, which reduces efficiency. An example of a market externality is the production of a bottle of water. When producing bottles of water, pollution is withal produced. However the cost of alter up the pollution is not a occurrenceor in price of the bottle, nor is a factor in the supply and demand chain.Environmental legal injury is the most common form of market externalities. When factories pollute the air when they make their products, the costs of the long term damage the local residents as well as the environment receive are not paid by the factory accepters. The cost of the bottle is not taken out of the cost for pollution damage. The factory w ould pollute more if they had to pay for the damages however. welfare Policy TypesUniversal Entitlements are benefits that governments provide to citizens more or less equally, usually funded through taxation. An example would be public upbringing in the US. All communities in the US must provide public pedagogy to all school age residents without any exemptions including those who are not born(p) in the US. Public education tends to reduce the identicalliness that a mortal leave alone end up in poverty, which is why public education is a universal benefit. In many European countries families are provided babe or family allowances to help them raise their children. The allowance is adjusted for household income or on the number of children. Some the criticism to these entitlements is that some plenty who do not need them still receive the entitlements.Social Insurance provides benefits to categories of large number who beget contributed to public restitution fund. Example s in the US are social warrantor, disability benefits and unemployment. Workers and employers contribute to the fund and scarcely those who contribute to the fund may benefit from them when they need them for instance when a worker retires.Means- adjudicateed public aid are programs that provide benefits to individuals who fall below a proper(postnominal) income level. feed stamps, subsidized public housing and temporary supporter to needy families are the most common examples in the US. The level of assistance from these programs usually depends on the income level but other factors may contribute such as work requirements. These are unlike universal entitlements where everyone is authorize to their benefits and social insurance where those who contribute guide to partake in the benefits means tested assistance plainly tar becomes those whose income levels are low.Tax expenditures are targeted tax breaks for specific groups of people or activities designed to achieve socia l policy goals. Tax breaks on certain people or expenditures subsidizes activities that the government believes to be beneficial. Tax breaks on people or on expenditures has the same effect as gist of social spending on that group of people or project. ceiling and Trade SystemCap and Trade systems are systems where the government allows a specific core of acceptable pollution in an industry. Once the amount of pollution is reached the government begins to give out vouchers to companies. Companies are allowed to pollute depending on the amount of vouchers they possess. The companies are allowed to trade and sell their vouchers to other companies. The vouchers were designed in order to regulate and reduce pollution in industries. There are two parts designed to reduce pollution. The first part puts a cap on pollution by companies, the reason being is that companies provide not go overboard and pollute as much as they want without having to pay for their future environmental complic ations. The second part was designed to persuade companies to develop cleaner forms of energy. Switching to cleaner forms of energy would get rid of the need for vouchers and other benefits would then be created.However thither are criticisms to the cap and trade system that companies make. One criticism is that it creates monopolies on the vouchers thus creating a monopoly on pollution levels. Big companies pass on begin to acquire all the vouchers leaving smaller companies unable to pollute and make them have to sell out to the larger companies. Bigger companies have more resources and discount use them to their advantage. This allows them to merge all pollution levels and have cover over particular industries. some other criticism is that vouchers will allow the government to have control over private industries. The government would have specific powers over companies and would allow them have their needs meet before the company. The government would in any case have contr ol over who gets the vouchers and how many they arouse recieve.The comprehension of Comparative PoliticsMany people believe that thither isnt a acquaintance behind relative governance, while others believe that there are legitimate reasons as to why and how proportional politics has its own scientific characteristics. There are many examples as to how comparative politics has a science behind it. I will provide a few examples that make comparative politics a science, such as the query method actings and how they are used to compare and contrast various state politics.Comparative Politics is defined as the believe of the domestic politics, political institutions, and conflicts of countries. Scholars have been studying politics among various regimes for centuries. Aristotle and Machiavelli were some of the first pioneers to study comparative politics so that they could gather discipline on the achievement and weaknesses of various governments throughout history as well as th eir own eras. As the years went by different methods were developed in order to better understand government institutions, and as people started to break down around and create new governments around the sphere there was a direction shift from European countries to these new developing countries.There was some other shift in studying comparative politics, this time the focus was not to describe the type of governments that emerged but how they came about and the likelihood of that government entity to survive. As the governments developed and began to create different institutions, scholars were given more things to study and focus on. This brings about why there are people who do not believe comparative politics to be scientific. As is the case with other scientific forms of study, there are biases to research methods of comparative politics. Those that study comparative politics have their own beliefs and opinions and it comes out when researching a specific topic. The people w ho are studying and making observations are the ones who draw up the completions and facts. Their findings could be completely different from people who have different ideas, beliefs, and research methods and this could reply in struggles over what actually happened or what is really going on. This has similarities to other forms of scientific research. Scientists with different beliefs and research methods can come up with one idea and another scientist can come up with something opposite of what that person came up with. Scientist can choose to leave things out that they dont agree with, the same thing can and does happen in comparative politics. Scientists in all fields can determine what is said and they can use it to manipulate readers that are not informed on that specific topic much like in politics where the public believes what politicians assure even when they are not educated on that subject. exclusively when quite possibly the with child(p)gest criticism as to why comparative politics is not a science is the material they have to work with. Politics is all historical in a sense, meaning that politics wasnt created in a lab rather it something that came about through hundreds of years of view and experience. Scientists have many forms of acquiring sources and information where as political scientists get their knowledge from historical events and past regimes. Gathering the information is harder for political scientists as well. They may not be granted access to some of the information they need or the truth could have been kept a abstruse from the rest of the world. By this I mean that past political regimes have kept some of their information a secret. An example of this was Russia after WWII they did not fully disclose the death rate they go about after the war. Incidents like this make it harder on political scientists when they are trying to put the facts together. Another problem that political scientists have to deal with when arguin g for their legitimacy is that they are limited with trials and errors. Scientists can have infinite trials to test their hypothesis they just have to create the experiment, test it, and draw conclusions. Political scientists can only go by either past examples or current examples. Scientist can manipulate their experiments, political scientists cant. Scientists can have multiple tests where as political scientists have to go by assumptions.Although it may visualisem as if political science is not an actual science there is a key part of it that makes it a science and that is that they attend the scientific method of research. Political scientists take the same steps that other scientists take when scrutiny there research. They create a hypothesis as to why a certain political movement occurred in history, and how it affected that country and history. subsequently they test their hypothesis, the same as any other experiment. The forms and methods they use to test their hypothes is are unlike other forms of science but they are still genuine forms of testing. They then come up with a conclusion of their hypothesis. Their conclusions are difficult to accept depending on your political views and own individual(prenominal) beliefs, but they are accurate in their own right. Political scientists follow the scientific method and prove that their field of science is in fact possible and legitimate.Political science faces many of the same criticisms that other forms of science face. There are people that are biased against their beliefs. They have to practise experiments in order to test their hypothesis. They do extensive research on their topics and come up with the best possible answers they can. Political science is a science, even if there arent laboratories and people in white coats doing the research right Democratic StatesThe greatest policy challenges that advanced democratic states face today have to deal with political institutions, societal institutio ns, and economic institutions. Advanced countries are having trouble getting former communist states or lower states to become part of their union. They are also having trouble figuring out how to create social welfare. They are having problems with devolution. Advanced political institutions are struggling to keep the people happy.In Europe the major problems they are facing are within the European Union. They are having worry with several things such as who to grant membership into the union, the notes system, patriotism, as well as fears within the society. Former communist states are having difficulty getting membership into the European Union due to their former governmental policies as well as their economic status. Their transition from communism to democracy has been a difficult one as they are switching from one form of government to a completely different one. Former communist states usually tend to be poorer than the older members of the union which brings up problems when deciding how to fund these governments. Some countries need more help than others and they dont produce as much wealth as the older members which create problems within the EU as to how much help and funds they should receive. Former members of the Soviet Union are not the only ones that are having trouble acquiring membership into the EU countries with a Muslim background have also had problems gaining membership. Turkey has had difficulty because of their predominantly Muslim culture. Allowing predominantly Muslim cultures into the EU causes religious problems as well as societal fears. Predominately Christian states within the EU fear that allowing Muslim states into the EU would result in religious turmoil as well as trigger a rise in terrorist threats. Christians fear that Muslims would outnumber them in members, and the society thinks that this would cause terrorist groups to upsurge. Membership is not the only problem the EU faces, currency is always a problem no matter what. The Euro has been an idea that most EU members prefer but that others do not want. The euro was suggested in order to create a type of currency that would help bring EU members closer as well as create a reserve currency that would have international backing. But some countries such as the United Kingdom and Sweden have refused to centre the monetary system because they see it as a loss of reign which brings up another problem and that is patriotism. Some members of the EU feel as if they are losing their identity, they feel as if they are all merging into one and are losing their cultural identity.Other advanced nations, such as the US face many of the same problems as the EU. The US, EU, and advanced countries all over the world are having to deal with social policies that are designed to help out its people. The US faces difficulties with its welfare programs as to who gets them and how much they are entitled to. Many advanced countries see the importance of helping out th e lower class so that they may decr quench the levels of poverty but also get more people contributing to society in big ways. However some feel that the social policies are not working and that many people are not giving back to society. The poor are not the only ones that get to benefit from these programs. Social security was a program designed to help out the elderly state of the US. Its a program that has helped many, but due to the ever change magnitude population of the elderly as well as the life foresight rate continuing to increase, programs such as social security will be affected in major ways. The US is not the only country that is facing this problem other advanced countries such as Japan have to deal with lower rates of birth and high elderly populations. If this continues to happen many advanced populations will start to see a decrease in population. Immigration would seem to be the termination to this problem, but many countries fear and dislike immigration as they feel like immigration would cause cultures to lose their identity to assimilation. Immigration is something that all advanced societies face and it is something that causes problem within the state. Fear of overpopulation, assimilation, and racial prejudices block immigration from growing.globalization would fix some of the problems that advanced democracies face, however it will not fix all of them. Globalization could fix both racial fears and patriotism. Globalization is a process of international integration arising from the exchange of world views, meaning that countries around the world are communicating, trading, and exchanging personal views. This would obviously ease some of the fears of assimilation that many people think are bad. This could also put a dent in racial prejudices that are faced around the world. Globalization could possibly encourage immigration allow for grand integration of cultures and views. Globalization could possibly help the EU with establishi ng the euro within all of its members. Globalization calls for many countries to come together which could possibly lead to a rise in the need for a single unit of currency. Globalization will not fix all of the problems such as the complications that are involved with welfare programs. It wont stop life foresight from growing, it wont stop poverty, it wont end violence, but it could bring countries closer together and could lead to the solutions to some of the problems that advanced democracies face.