While some policies don't always fix problems, and some create other problems while addressing others, we have to understand why policy exists in the first place.
For example, U.S. government policy. Policy, or in this case legislation, is created out of a crisis situation--or one that is considered a crisis by the majority of the general population. Take the National School Lunch Act of 1946, to exemplify. This policy was brought to the public agenda because the majority of men who had been drafted to serve in the Army in WW2, could not serve because they had physical conditions that were caused by malnutrition. The conditions found were not something that happend within a months time...but over years. These individuals did not have a stable diet when they were children, which in turn gave them disabling conditions that were permanent. You see, it depends on the broadness of the cultural problem (this problem was nation wide--not isolated)...sometimes situations or crises are so large that a small single community is unable to address the problem so it seeks help from a larger entity...such as in this case, the federal government. So, the likelihood of socio-economic and cultural problems being solved without creating or having policy depends on the broadness and importance of the issue.
But, policies in general are also based on the morals and values of society. There are local laws and policies....institutional or organizational policies. If problems occur, I want to know what the policy is to address a certain situation. Such as, what would the policy of a school be if my child were threatend physically by another. My child has the right to attend a school without being threatend. Its a very complex topic.
With anarchy, you get differing opinions about what is right and wrong, even in regard to what is considered respect...policies set guidelines. The most important parts of policy include its creation (writing), implementation (carrying it out), and monitoring (observing how it works, making sure it is carried out correctly, and making adjustments if needed).
2006-12-06 22:21:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by What, what, what?? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because politicians could not be politicians if they didn't have 'a policy'. It merely means a plan for dealing with the socio-economic and cultural problems to which you refer. Sometimes, however, I feel life would be a lot better if they didn't have policies, but just governed leaving things as they are, say for 5 years.
2006-12-06 22:07:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by rdenig_male 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Policy is like a mission statement. It's a framework and guidlines of what to do and who's responsible.
The greatest blunders of the 20th century, and now, is that policy is narrow and limited to a segment. Take welfare for instance. Govn't want to 'help women and children' without fathers, and the "un-intended consequences" is that it produced MORE situations of fathers not at home. Why? Because not being married nor having a man in the house, means that the govn't gives you free money. The more kids you have, - the more 'free' money.
Of course the 'cost' to the family for this free money meant that without discipline from a father, - boys were stealing hubcaps and the girls were getting pregnant. So much for the 'great society' as Pres. Johnson envisioned.
2006-12-06 22:06:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by MK6 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
.The anarchy don't needs policy - why ? => because each one to act with responsability and to respect the straight the other.
.But it is a dream because the society needs limits.
.Excuse my English - I'm learning it.
2006-12-06 22:31:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋