With that being said higher the age for these government programs for older people would be a good thing. Even increasing the age a little bite would drastically lower the costs from these programs and would also help lower the national debt. The people that would dislike the plan to higher the age to receive these benefits are older generation that are about to retire. The reason why is because they have waited so long that they want to get the money that they deserve. Second plan that I felt would be the best for lowering the national debt would be the article from Ryan Alexander who wrote about Set Military priorities.
Lower reserve requirements will result in more funds being available to loan out. This should, in turn, increase the rate of economic growth. Conversely, a higher reserve requirement will reduce the availability of funds and should slow economic growth. In this case, we need to increase our rate of economic growth in response to the recession, so I choose to lower the reserve requirement. The reason I would make this choice is to stimulate lending to businesses, reduce unemployment and increase household income so that the economy could then recover naturally.
I work two jobs and maintain my financial responsibility. My big payback is the government’s bad decision indirectly affecting my income. A more fair use of the $700 billion plan would have been to let those who took out loans known to be too much and the institutions that created the loan swim or sink. Then disperse the $700 billion to consumers like me who maintain our responsibility. I could certainly use a portion of the money and would most certainly spend it frivolously.
Kennedy says “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country…” this is said backwards so the Americans start thinking about the country as a whole. He wants to get the American people to help the country instead of helping themselves. Another antimetable he uses is “as not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.” He wants Americans to work together to help the country as a whole. He doesn’t want them to just rely on the government to fix things. Alliteration in J.F.K’s speech helps draw attention to his points.
As a U.S citizen and tax payer, I believe the government should worry more about the welfare of our people and the way they live. Instead, it seems the only thing they are concerned about is, health care is costing them too much money, taxes need to be higher, and they want to dump more money into the war on terrorism, yet they still think they deserve a pay raise. The United States Military is a very respectable and honorable organization, that puts their lives on the line every day, and sacrifices the most beloved things in their life. Congress needs to save a little money, so why not stop paying our soldiers while they are fighting a war? Two weeks later, congress gets a raise, because they feel their jobs are more important than anyone else in this country.
But there is a point because if people start working they can be independent. Republicans said “We won’t pay you not to work, but we will pay to support your working” (Attributed to Heritage Foundation) This is an example of Republicans trying to foster independence. They will receive food stamps; however they will need to work to show they want to end their dependence on government. Both food stamps and child care spending should
We are more likely to consult other world powers to justify our reasons for going to war. A just war today, for civilized countries, have to have approval from the United Nations. An argument about the guidelines that St. Thomas Aquinas had suggested is now it is considered too subjective. "What constitutes a just cause is in the eyes of the beholder, as are the probability of success and any estimate of likely costs and benefits." (Haass, 2009) If war is the only answer to save lives, yes it is justifiable not matter the time or the place.
Should university fees be abolished The world is at a massive economic crisis right now, making it vital every decision we make as a nation from here on out should not be judged on fairness but should be judged on practicality and what is best for our country to thrive upon long-term in: business, sports and education. We have to start thinking ahead, long term rather than short term. We are not a third world country; we are a proud and fearless nation, a nation that overcame Hitler’s army and faced complete devastation afterwards rations were given to families to: feed themselves, cloth themselves and water themselves. For any other countries it would have taken years to come out of that poverty and at such a crucial time as well technology had started; phones, computers all of which were coming out, did Britain miss out on these and show itself as a pour country. No!
America’s duty to act where others can not or will not stems from McNamara’s belief that there’s something beyond oneself. Just as a person has a duty and responsibility to the society in which he lives, the nation has a duty to the world. McNamara further argues that, although the United States is economically, politically, and militarily more powerful than any other nation, it should not take it upon itself to act unilaterally. Negotiation and compromise, even if US interests are damaged, should take precedence. If the US is unable persuade or garner support for its actions, perhaps our reasoning is wrong.
They also believe that ever since the terrorist attack on September 11, we should have a national defense that shows true precautions. Furthermore, the Democrats say there is not really much of a need for a national defense, unless of course we have no choice but to go to war. They want to reduce the big amounts of money that has been getting spent on military intelligence. They also feel that the soldiers should not be at war in a foreign country, or anywhere else for no particular reason. The democrats believe that true precautions come from