parliamentary vs. presidential?

Question

pls define each and state the advantages and disadvantages.. pls help me... i badly need it

Answer 1

Parliament (in the U.S., we call it Congress) is an assembled group of elected people, who (are supposed) to represent the people from their elected areas. They usually responsible for distributing money among all the government programs.

Presidential (the president) is an elected leader of the people, who actually runs the government. The president sets national policy (If you live in a kingdom, this person is generally the royal leader & the Prime Minister wrapped into one.)

Answer 2

i might say that your assessment is a sturdy one for the U. S. vs British structures. i'm unsure that "Separate head of state..." is actual of all parliamentary structures via definition. In Britain, if there's a vote of no self belief, they call an election, suited? in the U. S., we've scheduled elections each 4 years. As a corollary to that, the PM's term is set via the people and events, jointly as the President's term is fixed. in the U. S., the President won't be able to be elected extra suitable than two times, jointly as in Britain there is not any such decrease. My effect is that the Parliamentary equipment, or the British people, help extra suitable than 2 events. jointly as in the U. S., whether its by way of people or the institutions, we've in simple terms 2 actual events.

Answer 3

there are two approaches dat is being suggested right now at the Philippine Senate..it is either the parliamentary or presidential form of government.

which is which?

ponder on this statement: cud you fit a circle in a square?

take circle as the Philippines who have this presidential form of government.