Discussion

Name:Lecturer:Course:

Date:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Discussion

Question One

Society needs in general and the community in particular needs to ally sustainable practices with the primary view of preserving resources to avoid their misuse and hence depletion. Some of the credible ways of achieving this goal involves recognizing the future generation and demonstrating responsibility towards the future population. This practice is fundamental because it works to preserve existing resources and encourages the development of new ones. Additionally, developing a sustainable community would be a good way of reducing the amount waste that we produce. This comes from then need of controlling both to ensure we live in a safe environment.

Question Two

I believe that the solutions I have provided for sustainable development are possible to apply in the United States context. While sustainability our sustainability is related to past environmental traditions, it is also influenced by some factors unique to this period. Societies such as the U.S need to recognize these factors based on the effect of various decisions made in the last decade. In this regard, there is need to understand that human and natural resources are finite. Local governments including that of the United States is currently facing declining rangelands and forests, unskilled workers, and spiraling utility costs. In the past, sufficient federal funding would have dealt with the problems; communities today are facing overwhelming problems that cannot be overlooked.

Consequently, the American society can become more aware of itself, something that should be accompanied by a tension and a high sense of responsibility. The factors of limited resources, scientific development, urbanization, technology, new economies and social awareness should be acknowledged. When harnessed properly, they can play fundamental roles in developing a sustainable community in America.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Discussion

Name:

Instructor:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Course:

Date:

Discussion

Chapter 2

Inspired by Mahatma Gandhi’s story, Loeb advises us in chapter two of his book Soul of a Citizen against trying so hard to be perfect in achieving the goals that we have set for ourselves. That as much as we want to be persistent and determined, we do not have to overstretch ourselves beyond our limits. We should refute popular perceptions about how to be successful and be honest with ourselves. That to achieve success, one does not have to be extraordinary but just consistent with his ambitions. When we fail, we should be ready to gather ourselves up and try again ready to try another time if we fail again. Upon noticing that some area is not meant for us, we should be ready to move on and seek success elsewhere.

We should be aware of people succeeded before us and know how they managed to achieve their goals so that we can apply this in our own endeavors. The perception that the future is different from the past, and that we cannot learn much from the past is false and should be avoided. We should also appreciate the simple backgrounds of those who have succeeded in the past so that we are challenged and encouraged by how they managed to succeed despite their disadvantaged origins. Another vital aspect of achieving success is comprehending the origin of important ideals in society like democracy, equity, justice, liberty and human rights. It is my opinion that as much as we would want to be successful, we should also be concerned with the general history of the world. We should be in a position to describe the events that have led to the present state of the world.

Works Cited

Loeb Rogat Paul. Soul of a Citizen: Living with Conviction in Challenging Times. St. Martin’s Press, 2010. Print.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

discussion

Name:

Lecturer:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Course:

Date:

Discussion

How big the government should be has been a debate to most of the Americans. In the view of most Americans, the confidence in the governing people is not at its best. Only about 50% are satisfied with the governance. The people think that the size of the government should be determined by how effective it can handle the problems facing Americans. This includes the increasing cost of life and the lack of jobs for most of the young population. When this is tackled, it will increase the confidence of the local population, who are of the opinion that a bigger government is good. Many, who preferred a smaller government, cited the expenses used to pay up the allowances for the government staff as the limitation. They argued that since the federal budget is already on a deficit, having a leaner government was ideal.

Having the government offer a wide range of services is good. This will lead to more people working, and at the same time, the collection of taxes will increase. This is a good thing for the government as it increases its gross domestic income. This will boost the economy. With this, the government will have part of its deficit filled. This will enable the government to invest in areas like Medicare, which form the largest base of social care.

On the other hand, having a wide range of services means more expenditure to the government. This is because the pensionable percentage will rise. Because of the increase in services, the workers will be liable to pension. Pension takes quite a large percentage of the fiscal budget. By going the relatively few services way, which results to fewer taxes, the government shall save on a considerable portion of the budget. This is because, as much as more people get to be employed, the tax returns will not be as economical as the pensions paid off after retirement.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

discussion

Name:

Lecturer:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Course:

Date:

Discussion

Filibuster rules are placed to delay or entirely prevent an action from being taken on a bill in the senate through unlimited debate. It allows members of the senate to advance the debate on a bill until at least two thirds of the senate reach an agreement and get to vote. Many have argued against the effects of this rule on America’s progress now that the majority parties in the senate seem to be undermining the minority. The senate has the closest ties to the people hence is better positioned to advocate for their rights.

Historically, the filibuster has worked well for America, for it has prevented bills from being passed without majority support and informed deliberations. This ensures that voters do not have legislations forced down on them. It is especially so because the majority may use their nominal status to pass bills that have not been adequately debated, as a show of their control in the senate. Although it may seem like the rule stalls legislative processes, the time ‘wasted’ on it helps in preventing a state of tyranny in the senate whereby the majority tramples minority.

However, the rule also helps to shed light on congress’ ability to handle the nation’s problems. It does so by highlighting its weaknesses. This is demonstrated in the way some majority members use the filibuster rule for self-advantage instead of first advancing the concerns of the American voter. In recent times, there have been attempts to alter this rule by reducing the number of legislators needed to block a filibuster. Overall, the rule helps the congress to address the voter’s problems in a better manner by preventing rash legislations from being made and drawing the voter’s wrath.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

discussion

Name:

Lecturer:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Course:

Date:

Discussion

Disenfranchisement of felons is the process by which some people are denied their right to voting. This is because they are felons serving time for the wrongs they did to society. This practice dates back to Roman and Greek era. It was used as a form of punishment to give criminals civil death. This is through denying them the basic human right to vote. People have different views about felony disenfranchisement. It is a form of racial discrimination as criminals are denied their basic human right. They are denied the right to choose the person that will represent them in congress. A representative is supposed to defend people’s interest. A representative should represent the values that a person upholds. If criminals are denied this right, the person chosen cannot represent them because he or she shall not know what they want.

Felony disenfranchisement is accompanied with many other things. People are denied basic human rights. After criminals have served their time in prison, they are normally subjected to discrimination in work places. There are employers that do not want to employ convicted felons. This makes it hard for them to be assimilated back into the community. If the convicts had been given the right to vote, they would have elected representatives that fight for their rights.

By denying them this right, they are being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. They have already paid their debt to society and should not continue to suffer because of one mistake. Felony disenfranchisement is therefore not a rational punishment process, but more of an infringement of the rights of the felons. It is however not a form of racial discrimination as no race is oppressed. It should be abolished or amended for the better of the society.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

x

Hi!
I'm Dianne!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out