Does the government have the responsibility to?

Question

Does the government have a responsibility to support failing industries in order to avoid social problems in potentially depressed areas?

Answer 1

No. The government's responsibilities to the various failing industries is pretty much limited to auditing, unions and welfare. Also, passing legislation allowing taxes from wealthy areas to supplement the taxes from poorer areas is controversial (the wealthy want to keep their money in their own communities, which is both understandable and somewhat selfish, and I don't know what my actual opinion of it is). If they could do that, though, it could help prevent depressed areas in other cities, but not enough to make a huge difference, if you ask me.

There are all kinds of problems. If the government were responsible for ALL of them, it would be even less effective as it is now. Starting up business is a risk, and an investment. There are depressed areas of nearly every city or town in the US. It wouldn't make sense to hold them responsible for depressions that haven't happened yet when there are so many poor people and poor areas out there.


Yo, Reagen: that's a lie. There are rags to riches stories in America, sure, but the fact is, if you grow up in a town that can't offer good schooling, it can hinder you when it comes to going to a good college, and if you can't go to a good college, getting the executive jobs are virtually impossible.

Unlimited resources to get ahead and acheive your dreams is a pretty theory, but for the most part, that's all it is.

Answer 2

Toke, I in specific don't have the direct answer yet I do have a fashion of looking one and the request has been despatched. I commonly tend faraway from this classification yet childrens are childrens and perchance there is a few tips which could benefit you in some regards; as is often the case solutions do no longer continuously furnish what we could hear ~ yet consistent with hazard as a effect it could be used in the direction of an powerful exchange to coverage with collective attempt of you and others close to you. It consistent with hazard early next week until eventually now I hear decrease back yet i'm going to particularly replace my answer if i'm getting one in time. As a conflict historical past geek i stumble on the innocence of youngsters the purest of victims; how inhumane human beings would be. would choose to thank you for the object yet because it places a hollow in my abdomen i'm going to forgo that on the 2d. superb regards, Gerry Edit: Toke, I take it you realize what this suggests ~ there are a number of the clarification why Public Inquiries are held in Canada. they are seperate from a Coroners Inquest specially because of the wide-unfold public nature of the incident. There are a number of old and new public inquiries happening in Canada. (i.e. Inquiry into the dying of Neil Stonchild, J.J. Harper, Manitoba Justice Inquiry, Robert Pickton Inquiry . The criminal expert as a effect does not desire a Public Inquiry because of the fact the policies of info etc are on a decrease familiar than the different variety of inquest which would be quite stringent and controlled.) reckoning on the Inquiry's mandate they are able to make reccomendations or have binding judgements of fault in each and each inquiry. the wide-unfold reason to have a Public Inquiry is to be certain why the incident occurred, what errors have been made, and the thank you to rectify the approach so it in no way occurs back. I experience there's a information tale "nuance" i'm lacking here ~ if the wide-unfold public Inquiry is being contested by the Unions and a Provincial Inquest is being sought would this no longer furnish extra element? i'm lacking something here and experience it particularly is a political hollow. The little female deserved plenty extra effective, plenty quicker ~ least of all and regularly occurring from her dad and mom. Sickens me. thank you for protecting this unfold out long sufficient for me to replace Toke..... Gerry

Answer 3

I think most people would vote for a winner, one that would lead his Country? Don’t you?
The Winner would be for the Country, while the loser would be for himself. While The Government can’t be responsible for any business that opens, It can and does shape where overall business trends head. A responsible government will hopefully look at this as we are all in this together, and what we can do that could help as many as we can.

Winner vs Loser

The Winner is always part of the answer;
The Loser is always part of the problem.

The Winner sees an answer for every problem;
The Loser blames the problem on the Democrats.

The Winner says," It may be difficult but it is possible";
The Loser says,"It may be possible but it is too difficult."

When a Winner makes a mistake, he says," I was wrong";
When a Loser makes a mistake, he says," blames it on the Democrats."

A Winner makes commitments;
A Loser makes promises.

Winners have dreams;
Loser have schemes.

Winners say," I must do something";
Losers say,"Something must be done."

Winners see possibilities;
Losers see problems.

Winners see the potential;
Losers see the past.

Winners choose what they say;
Losers say what they choose.

Winners use hard arguments but soft words;
Losers use soft arguments but hard words.

Winners stand firm on values but compromise on petty things;
Losers stand firm on petty things but compromise on values.

Winners follow the philosophy of empathy: "Don't do to others what you
would, not want them to do to you";
Losers follow the philosophy, "Do it to others before they do it to you."

Winners make it happen;
Losers let it happen.

Answer 4

It's not the governments responsiblity to make you get ahead in life or to support you. We live in a country where you have unlimited potential, you can achieve anything if you want.

Answer 5

No but if needed they will step in and oversee to make the economy stable just like what some presidents have done with automakers,airlines,oil companies

Answer 6

That is a great gray area. Perhaps, if it looked at all possible outcomes of an action and weighed it against all negatives.

Answer 7

No. The U.S. Government's responsibility is to uphold the Constitution and its amendments.

Answer 8

Yes, they do. I don't think they should dump endless amounts of money into businesses that aren't managing themselves correctly, but I do think that government should offer incentives and tax-breaks and even ease regulations sometimes.

Answer 9

No. They're just lining the pockets of friends.