Many European countries had an increased sense of nationalism, or pride for their country. The British believed that they were “the finest race in the world, and the more of the world [they] inhabit, the better…” (D #4). Britain believed, as a country that capturing other countries would be beneficial. Many countries also felt that they could “uplift and civilize” other countries by capturing and influencing them (D #7). Since the entire country of Britain supported imperialism, the government didn’t have to worry about any backlash in its own
By only donating money that we spend on things not necessary to survive we are still able to live a life that is comfortable and the idea of rich and poor people can be thrown away. Though this could probably only be achieved with government intervention, the possibilities are endless. Of course a big downside to this idea is the fact that we work hard for our money. It can seem like a waste to give it away after we work long and hard to obtain it. Another con is that after living with an excess of everything for so long, the people who are most prosperous might not be as willing to give it up.
The current cost of spreading technology has fallen. This will help countries be able to afford the technologies in the future and it will keep the countries from going into so much debt to receive the technologies in the first place. In Rethinking Development Economics it was stated that “information is easier to access and the cost of transmitting it has fallen to very low levels” (Rethinking Development Economics, p. 277). Undeveloped countries are able to find greater interdependence. They no longer find themselves having to rely on big brother countries, or flailing in the mud, because no one is aiding them.
Heather Moorehead M4 – Written Assignment 1.) Export capital for production abroad The exporting of capital for production would not be supported by a utilitarian and would be found to be unethical. A utilitarian would argue that by allowing our capital to be produced abroad we would be hurting ourselves domestically by giving up potential jobs to workers internationally and by limiting domestic usage. In today’s economy a company can set up production plants in virtually any country they want, and most tend to go where the cost of labor is least expensive. A utilitarian’s goal is to determine how to obtain “the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone effected by our actions” (Shaw & Barry, 2013).
In terms of consumerism, the good life is damaging to the environment, places too much emphasis on money, and it dwindles the importance of non-market values. According to Annie Leonard’s “The Story of Stuff”, our current materials economy is a commodity chain in which goods go from extraction, to production, to distribution, to consumption, and finally to disposal. The system sounds stable but it is actually in crisis. Anyone with a simple understanding of mathematics can tell you that you cannot run a linear system on a finite planet in the real world. In order for us, the consumers, to get all of our fancy products and up-to-date technologies, a process that we turn a blind eye to takes place.
To play their intended roles successfully, public organizations must also be structured with such interactions in mind. The supporters still argue that private firms are more efficient than government because of balanced economies, higher labor productivity, and fewer level restrictions. We can say that the nature of government services makes many of them inappropriate for privatization. Because of lack of information, contracting may involve hidden costs; therefore the need for monitoring is demanded. In some places for example, creating the competition necessary for effective contracting is impossible, so in practice privatization is more complicated than it
America has countless opportunities for someone to be successful. The average American has a better opportunity to do something special, than someone born in a different less fortunate country. As the 21st century goes on Americans keep growing and expanding with opportunities. On the other hand there are many possibilities to why the United States will not keep booming in the 21st century. Many of the nations jobs have been moved overseas.
You often hear foreigners quote that they want to come to America to live “the American Dream.” This “American Dream” refers to the opportunity to achieve upward economic mobility in America and obtain the “more” that many Americans (and foreigners) chase after. Europeans that lived in poverty in their country would risk their lives migrating to America for a better opportunity. Immigrants who do make it to America begin to live by the core American values that will push individuals towards achieving and obtaining “more”. America will not run out of “more” long as there is a chance and opportunity; one adapts the American core
They knew this would mean that competition would ensue regarding job opportunities, as immigrants would appeal to the employer because they would work cheaply, and yet carry out the same labour as any American would. Immigrants were also open to working for cash in hand – an illegal advantage to both the employer and employee – meaning that they would not be paying tax and therefore not contributing to the expansion of the American economy. Which could be seen as rather ironic as the United States funded for immigrants to be educated, as most would seem to be illiterate. Furthermore immigrants were known to also send surplus amounts of money back home, therefore in a way neglecting their job of contributing to society, and helping their original countries economy by helping mass individuals thrive. A similar issue was bought about by the competition for housing.
In fact, some people argue that these people help in driving important parts of the economy because they willingly accept and undertake the tedious and physical types of manual chores that most Americans would much rather avoid. Such labor boasting long strenuous working hours and cheap wages are positively not on the top of any American’s criteria when searching for employment. Some also report that hose illegal’s that are paying their taxes pay greater amounts than the ordinary American does, and this increase in amount of revenue is beneficial to the nation’s budget use to help improve on such provisions of services like, quality healthcare and Medicare, even though the number of those paying taxes is significantly less than the undocumented evaders. For example, a 2006 report by the Texas Office of the Comptroller found that the state's estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants contributed more in state revenues than they cost in state services during fiscal year 2005. The net gain for the state was $424.7 million, according to the report.