Does democracy improve economic performance?
534835
one might be made to think so. democracy itself, is not all what others might want to adopt.for example, democracy exited long time ago in Africa before the west adopted it. democracy in Africa, was through the kings and chiefs. today in some parts of Africa, it still exits. African governments have adopted the western way of democracy, but does not work for them. so I personally, does not think so.\nit does not improve economical performances, but rather make people in power or in high offices to become more corrupt.
282976
it depends on what business you're discussing.\n\nselling arms - they buy a lot\nselling baby diapers - they couldn't care less\n\npro - the money you pump into their economy can raise the standard of living of the populace to the point that they begin desiring more than material wealth, they also desire intellectual, political and religious freedom.\n\ncon - the money you pump into their economy can increase the capabilities of the government to supress any dissident faction, both directly by giving them more material resources and indirectly because they can say, "hey, aren't you better off now thanks to our leadership?"
750601
Yes, with enough support, people can convince society that it is right\n\nBut that does not make it right.\n\nSuch, however, makes the society a democracy also
333241
This question........I could answer so many ways.....but I will just pick one facet.\n\nI think a democracy with bits of socialism would work very well....just as a previous poster noted with some of the Scandinavian countries. \n\nI think one main issue, if not THE issue is economics.\n\nI'll even break it down....I think we need democracy with a collective revenue sharing.  Those familiar with major sports leagues in the US, specifically the NFL, may know what I'm speaking of.\n\nBetter distribution of funds across the board would help our economic bottomline, especially if the excess money given to the "lower classes" are used specifically for encouragement of small business, health care, better schools and teachers, upkeep in neighborhoods, and find ways to not only fight the drug trade inside of neighborhoods, but also (and more important) stop them from ever reaching these at-risk neighborhoods.\n\nIt would help encourage people that moving up in the world, doesn't mean you need to hit that home run.  For parents to know they have quality backing and support, even kids from the lower class have a good chance at life, that means a lot.\n\nNow the rich would suffer a bit....because in the revenue sharing concept, the top teams are penalized for being over the cap line.  With this you would not have a person whose bank account looks like the gross national product of small countries, i.e. Bill Gates.  They would still be wealthy, but not to the detriment of the lower class.\n\nSo.....you would have a top line and a bottom line....but you would maintain all of the other capitalist prinicples, you find in democracy.  There are so many things that go to this, I won't even pretend my idea is foolproof.....but I do think it would help.
60515
It has more disadvantages than advantages, but one of its advantages is the planning of the economy: A clear example of that are the examples of China and Mexico. In Mexico there is a democracy, so the discussion in congress stopped taking measures to attract investment. In China, the economy is centrally planned, so all the reforms needed to attract investment and create jobs were taken very fast, allowing the Chinese economy to grow at rates of 9% while Mexico was stuck.\n\nHowever consider the disadvantages of lack of freedom and that if an inneficient government get to power they can cause more damage.
650037
YES, and it should be carried out by casting ballots. The rate of voters is really low, and it gets lower year by year. An armed revolution hardly ever has any positive result (Cuba, Mexico, Cambodia, China). The power in a democracy is in the People, but if these people don't vote or do so without being informed first, then Democracy is weak, and weak democracies always give off tyrants.
586530
Of course its good for the country, it shows that the economical situations in the country are improving and the investors are earing.\nThere is no bad point i can find about it.
515472
It's not always fair, but it is what makes democracy work because people can retain the faith that they are making a difference in their communtiy and the kind of punishment people recieve.
927837
Your question isn't very well made.  Better in what way or ways.  Better than what?  Make some kind of definition.\n\nAs far as whether they are good for the American economy, I'll give you and unreserved, "Yes."  No economy can exist without small businesses.  The largest business could not exist without thousands of small businesses supplying it services and materials for its daily output.
39849
I guess that depends on what you mean by a culture. There are many places which had basically no government structure, and encountering democracy was just confusing. Democracy itself isn't necessarily going to damage something, but the trappings of our current democratic cultures can interfere with other cultures. Free trade, for example, can cause local communities to be at the mercy of outsiders, when they were living on subsistence prior to that. Changing to a trading culture can cause the local resources to become depleted if population increases around artificial income and outside sources of food, then economic conditions change and the increased population can no longer be supported. Democracy, or come kind of chosen government, vs. a monarchy or dictatorial government is more of a matter of choices by the people. If the people, however, are not informed, or the information they have is wrong, then they could lose their control by voting for things they don't understand, or people who are lying to them. One of the reasons the United States is actually not a democracy, but a republic is so that there are levels of election to counter specific groups. Unfortunately, this system was designed before anyone imagined how powerful that corporate influence could become (buying multiple branches of government, writing laws, being considered 'persons'). Thomas Jefferson's ideal vision was for a country full of small farmers, providing food and resources based on knowledgeable living and care, voting for local representatives and those representatives voting for Federal representatives. This vision was dependent on honesty, intelligence, and fairness, none of which are dominant in today's system. The best example of a culture damaged by democracy is the culture of the self-sufficient person. Democracy demands groupthink. Groupthink leads to propaganda , influence peddling, and the devaluation of the individual in favor of the group. Republicanism (not the kind who are in office now) is supposed to encourage local control of local representatives (feedback by pitchfork, if you will), who, in turn, control their representatives.
731778
Yes because in most democracies the security is typically less than in other forms of government.
135820
No. For some more enlightened and less idealistic-minded people we realize that the democratic system is simply a guide line. That every and any rule set can be circumvented or bypassed. Vote? As long as there are electoral colleges your vote means almost next to nothing. Our government is corrupt and run by influence and pay offs. You're kidding yourself if you honestly believes a flawed and corrupt system such as ours is effective. Look at Katrina relief. Look at the poor inside our country. Look at the homeless child rate. Then look at the golden umbrellas all the CEO's, senators, justices and governors retain even after retirement. There's what they want you to see and then there's the truth. Take the blue pill Neo.
224363
Yes.  Democracy encompasses more than just geographical borders.  It is a philosophy that is largely built upon the foundation of law, and freedom of choice.  As long as men continue to value individual freedom and freethinking there will be democracy.  I don't foresee a world filled with dark, gothic, Batman-like figures devouring the poor without a fight.  That's how France and America became great anyway.  Don't forget.  Lights of liberty we all must be.
1090209
They are not necessary. They are an instrument that allows the people to pick a representative. Without them, it is hard to see how one could have a democracy. However, elections alone are not suffient to have a democracy.
101759
Democracy is an important idea that should be spread across the world. Malaysians would benefit from democracy. Though I have to say, it is never good to be forced fed democracy by a foreign nation; it must come from within the nation, by the people.
126226
True the US fore-fathers revolted against a colonial power and gave US its discernible freedom and democracy much in line with what was happening in France.\n\nHowever, in this day and age, democracy allows us to vote out those we don't want or vote in those we want. however the power of the citizenry is not limited there, they can lobby their senators and can band together via lobbies to influence thinking in white house.\n\nSo to answer your question, it is important that the structures built over the years to develop the checks and balances of governance are not eroded - like the free media etc...so strengthen these..and ou will see a stronger US...
1133616
No to the theocracy in the US - but, in the same sense, I don't think we should push democracy on countries that will seriously be thrown into chaos as soon as it is introduced (USSR, China, Vietnam, Iraq, etc.). I think it's very arrogant of us Americans to think our way is the best way for everyone - the only way democracy truly works is if it evolves on its own when people get tired of the way things are being run.