Apply The Budget Surplus To Science Essays - Fiscal Policy

Apply The Budget Surplus To Science Essays - Fiscal Policy Apply The Budget Surplus To Science For years, everyone has opined on what to do with the budget surplus: fund new educational programs, cut taxes, and so on. Science needs the money. In some technologies, we are beginning to fall behind other countries. We must not allow this to happen. Everyone reaps the benefits of science; increasing funding for research programs would only enhance these benefits. Where would the United States be today without science? Science is a big part of our economy, but today most research and development occur in the private sector. Why has the government cut spending? Because they know that the private sector will do the work. Money motivates the private sector to perform research; when profitability wanes in a certain area, research by the private sector also declines. Kenneth Brown asserts that private firms often focus on their own product rather than work on a broader understanding of science. Should Uncle Sam allow such a deficiency in research? Increased government spending in science would produce a greater breadth and depth of knowledge. You may ask yourself: why is this important? As the world leader in virtually everything, it is imperative for the US to lead the world in science also. Not only for defense reasons, but also to keep pace with other countries so no country can monopolize a scientific breakthrough. Would we want Japan or Russia to come up with a cure for AIDS and have to purchase the knowledge from them? The US needs to lead the world in science; to maintain this position we must apply the budget surplus to federal science research programs.

King Alfred essays

King Alfred essays Why was King Alfred concerned with literacy and learning? It is clear that literacy and learning played an important role in the life of King Alfred. In his biography of the king, Asser tells us that from an early age Alfred showed an aptitude for book learning which was encouraged by his mother. The reason why Alfred developed this interest from an early age was probably the fact that he was the youngest child of his family and so it was probably expected that he would become a clergyman rather than king and so could focus on more intellectual training needed for work in the Church. Although the reasons that he developed a personal love of learning in his younger years are clear, this does not explain why he put so much emphasis on the literacy and learning of his subjects in later years. One of the ways in which Alfred encouraged literacy and learning was having a number of key ecclesiastical works translated from Latin into English. One of the main reasons for Alfreds huge concern for literacy and learning was his sincere belief that the Viking raids on his kingdom were a punishment from God because the people had abandoned religious learning. Alfred did a lot to strengthen Englands military position by building a huge network of burhs , and by making sure that there was always an equal balance of men working the land and doing military service. However, he felt that these military preparations were merely a temporary solution to the problem. In the long term the King believed that the Vikings would only be stopped when God had been appeased. There are clear indications that in the time of Alfred there was a lack of new manuscripts being created. It is also evident that very few people were educated enough to read Latin and even fewer to write it. Alfred believed that this lack of learning had turned the English into a brutish and uncultured race. He believed that teaching was an important way to bring ...

Are legislatures always weaker than executives Essay

Are legislatures always weaker than executives - Essay Example Fundamentally, the legislative arm of the government has had two inherent contradictory roles: sustaining the executive and holding them to account between electoral cycles. Even though the legislative role of sustaining the executive is not in doubt, parliamentary oversight seems to be a poorly coordinated task that often lets the executive off the hook. Noteworthy, the nexus between sustaining the government and the task of challenging it and holding it to task opens a Pandora box full of fallacious fantasies – a fallacious inequity that, no doubt, tilts the balance of power towards the executive. Despite the wide adoption of democratic principles of governance across nations, an understanding that has significantly strengthened accountability and transparency mecha ­nisms with regard to promotion of evidence-informed policy processes, legislatures remain comparatively weaker in relation to the executive in terms of raw power necessary to effect immediate leadership challe nges. The Executive and Parliament: A Historical Perspective The impact of constitutional structures with regards to their political behavior and performance is central in the study of comparative governments. In particular, understanding the balance power between the executive and the legislature in either the parliamentary or presidential systems has been an area of focus in political research (Mustapic, 2002). Structured governmental control stems much from the historical politics of the mid- and late nineteenth century. Designed at a time when the role of government was limited in scope, the convention of superiority of the executive power over the legislature indeed antedates the modern presidential and parliamentary systems of governments. From inception to the present day politics, there is no pretense that executive autonomy bears much capacity and capability to remedy or compensate for social ills on its own without parliaments’ approval. In his submission on the sub ject, Bagehot, a British economist and journalist, referred to the convention of executive authority as the ‘buckle’ and the lynch-pin in the Whitehall-Westminster model (Flinders, 2002). Though modest in both size and ambition at the time, it was reasonable for a competent minister to have a personal control over small departmental portfolios in the mid-Victorian state. Strikingly similar, governmental administration in the first quarter of the nineteenth century fell under ministerial responsibility. But even then as is it to date, the powers vested in a ministerial mandate were highly doubtful in terms of usage. Supporting the foregoing, Cobbett (1823) wrote: â€Å"Ankle-pinching socks are like ministerial powers; a thing to talk about but for no use; a thing to laugh over; and a mere mockery at those whom real power is vested†. Constitutions the world over are molded around the concept of responsible executive authority for strong and stable leadership. Nothi ng services this claim better than a two-branch debate that culminated in the creation of the United States Constitution – a model constitutional debate that has since served as a roadmap to numerous constitutions around the world. While the federalists such as Alexander Hamilton rooted for ‘