- UID
- 730267
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-3-2
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
Claim: Major policy decisions should always be left topoliticians and other government experts.
Reason: Politicians and other government experts are more informed and thushave better judgment and perspective than do members of the general public.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to whichyou agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim isbased.
提纲：
1.肯定原因:术业有专攻，政治家与政府专家制定政策考虑角度更全面。 （例子:中国花重金投资非洲）
2.否定结论，人民的观点很重要，否则导致政策失衡。（例子：苏联）
3.听取人民意见促进社会和谐：
3.1 人民参与到政策制定里，获得满足感：民主氛围
3.2 政府听取意见后进行适当政策调整，是人民更好投入工作
30min
When dictating important policies, is it proper to considerthe ideas of politicians and government experts only? The speaker claims so,for the reason that politicians and experts are more informed and thus can makemore perspicuous decision than the public. From my perspective, I partly agreewith the speaker in that the ideas of normal people surely has to be taken intoaccount as well.
Admittedly, Everybody has his/her own major professions. Forpoliticians and government experts, their major area is politics, whichincludes policy making. When considering a certain situation, they are able toconsider it in various angles and thus carry out better decision. On thecontrary, normal people are tend to regard certain events in single angle,considering only their own interest. For instance, China invested billions ofmoney in countries in Africa, trying to enhance nations' influence around theworld. However, people will argue that why such large amount of money could notbe given to people themselves, regardless of the possibility of currency inflammation.Therefore, there is no doubt that politicians and government experts are moreprofessional in dictating policies.
However, given that politicians and experts are moreinformed in policy making, the opinions from public surely could not beneglected. Listening to public enables politicians and government experts tounderstand the desire of people, which helps them to make policy. Withoutinformation from public , politicians and experts are more likely to dictatepolicy diverting from the very interest of majority. We learned various lessonsfrom former Soviet Union,whose decomposition resulted from the differentpurpose between interest of people and politicians. If government of SovietUnion absorbed a part of opinions from public, it would had better understandof the poverty and made adjustment immediately.
Furthermore, listening to ideas from normal people doescontribute to harmony and stabilities of a nation. On one hand, people acquirethe satisfaction of taking part into management of nations, feeling the betterdemocratic environment inside the nation, which consists of the firm ground fora nation to thrive. On the other hand, government can adjust the policiesaccording to the opinions from public more align with the interest of peopleand benefits more people. As a result of that, people are more likely tosatisfy with policies made by government and become more willing to settle downto worker. Once the communication channel were established, a benigncirculation of opinions between government and public would function properly.
In retrospect, there is no denying that politicians andexperts are more informed and can consider a problem in various angle.Nevertheless, we also have to regard opinions from majority, for the purpose ofadjusting improper decision as soon as possible and keeping the stability andharmony of a nation. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-6-9 18:30:15
收藏
收藏
