The best party for the United Sates is the Republican party. If we had only one choice, the Republican Party would be best suited to our needs. The party was created in 1854* in response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and has continued to be the second largest affiliated party, presently. The platform of the Republicans was centered around big business, the gold standard, high tariffs, and large pensions for veterans*. Today the party focuses on beliefs such as federalism, laissez fair, and fiscal conservatism*. These policies would help to improve our country. If our government put more faith into gold, we would not have the inflation we have today. Hard currency can not just be printed whenever the need is present. Less inflation would also support our finances overseas, because the dollar would be stronger. Republicans believe that the states should have more power than the federal government. Individual states have a better sense of what their state needs, rather than the federal government making one, big, sweeping motion. For example, a snow emergency law makes perfect sense in New York, but is not plausible in Hawaii. This might stimulate the economy, because if states “competed” against one another, each would want to be the best and have the best for their citizens. This would also provide the people with great opportunities because when businesses compete, the people will win. Fiscal conservatism* would reduce spending, providing the government with a way to become debt free. This would also raise our credibility with other nations, because they would be able to see that the US could manage their funds, and would therefore be well equipped to handle other funds.
The downside of having one party, is the lack of new ideas. It could be hard to break out of a rut, which could cause the country to sag lower and lower. The Republican Party has many good ideas, but on the other hand, some may not be plausible. Social conservatism* would not be good for our society. It would benefit us while restricting drugs, or other illegal negotiations, but could hinder some of our rights. People would not take kindly to this belief if they lost some of the freedoms, they thought non removable. High tariffs might also be frowned upon, in this time of economic recession. Businesses are running a tight ship, tying to save as much money as possible, and a high tariff would not factor well into that plan. Other countries could choose to trade with nations other than the United States, to avoid the high tariffs as well. These problems may seem big, but could be solved, as our government looked at what was best for the people. Having the Republican Party as the only party, would ensure that people could agree, and make decisions quickly.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)
http://www.gop.com/about/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
As a member of a family that has been Republican since the Fremont campaign (1856), it is easy to just smile, and agree with you. There are many historical reasons why the founding principles of the GOP should continue to lead the party's thinking. I do, however, feel that some of the current "Republicans" have lost sight of the ideals of the party founders. Areas of social conservatism might need re-evaluating, as the general planks of the party platform sometimes seem to be resembling particular views of religious groups, rather than objective consideration of our status within the regulations and definitions of the Constitution. Your States' rights position should be amplified, as for the very reasons you begin to mention. A competitive edge needs to be employed throughout the Nation, to keep our scholars' minds sharp. Domestic competition should, I believe, be a better stimulus than out-of-country intervention. Look at tariffs a bit more closely, and see if sometimes, the tariffs are used to protect superiority in manufacturing, and the manufacturing base. If others want to do better with their commerce, let them become better themselves, and offer a better product. (Admittedly, I still drive a Swedish automobile that was superior to any GM product, which led GM to purchase a share of the overseas company, rather than produce its own domestic equivalent.) At any rate, I look forward to your revisions.
Post a Comment