Parliamentary vs presidential system

 

How are different in a parliamentary vs presidential system?

Why is the separation of powers important?

Explain the first past the post system and the proportional representation system.

Write three paragraphs, one for three different theories of international relations.

Sample Solution

Parliamentary vs. presidential system

A presidential system, or single executive system, is a form of government in which a head of government (president) leads an executive branch that is separate from the legislative branch in systems that use separation of powers. Parliamentary system, democratic form of government in which the government in which the party with greatest representation in the parliament forms the government, its leader becoming prime minister or chancellor. The main difference between a parliamentary and presidential system of government is that in a presidential system, the president is separate from the legislative body, but in a parliamentary system, the chief executive, such as a prime minister, is part of the legislative body, or parliament.

trade has led increased access of economic resources to developing countries and utilization of limited available resources thus stimulating their economic and social development. Small developing countries struggle with scarce and underutilised resources. Free trade allows free entry of other countries and investors to small developing countries and as a result, they participate in conversation of the available resources to economic development resources through ‘mobilization of capital and labour thereby improving the status of the country in the economy’ (Unger, 2010 P 171). Moreover, free trade gives small developing nations chances to obtain resources such as capital from already developed countries that assist them to attain economic development resources or utilize what they have. For example, countries from Asia such as India have developed due to trade liberalization where they have been able to obtain capital, labour and other necessary resources from already developed countries. If there were restriction and barriers between countries, it would have been very difficult for countries like India to realize their development. Therefore, free access to economic resources by developing countries have shaped their economies and helped in consecutive developments.

However, free trade has been argued to be unrealistic to small developing countries and instead it is detrimental to its economy by increasing level of unemployment, exploiting domestic companies, increasing pollution and lowering people’s standard of living.
Free trade is viewed as means by which developed countries exploit domestic industries of developing countries thus affecting their economic development. Multinational companies such as Nike have been reported to exploit developing countries, (for example Asian countries) by recruiting cheap labour and taking advantage of reduced barriers to maximise on their profits (Irwin, 2009 p. 204). Free trade causes increased influx of imports in a country resulting to increased supply of goods in the market. This causes decrease in prices of goods and services causing domestic companies and industries to reduce their prices, which may result loss and reduced share of the market. Therefore, they become less competitive. This may affect the domestic industries by causing decreased growth and as a result crippling. Henc

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.