Yes because they can and because they do
True because of supply and demand. If the demand is higher than the supply, or people cannot afford the supply, the demand must decrease in value so that people can facilitate the supply and keep it going.
Answer:
Pros:
1) The system is a representative democracy, like most of the Western world. That means you get to elect your government and share in the power. Nice.
2) The system is more focused on individuals and their opinions. You elect a president, not a party or a bloc. I can't say that I'd like that to happen in my own country, but it seems like a good fit for America.
3) The concept of legislative, judicial and executive powers go back a long way and it's generally a good idea that the three keep each other checked. This isn't limited to the US system though. We use it Europe too.
Cons:
1) All Supreme Court Justices are appointed by the President, which means he to a degree has authority over the Supreme Court, the judicial branch of the government
2) You have a two party system in which it is practically impossible to start a new party and get voted into your parliament. In Denmark, where I'm from, new parties come and go all the time. You just have to get 20.000 people to sign a document, then you're good to go and they can elect you into the Folketing. This means every segment of the country is represented, not just conservatives (Republicans) and moderate liberals (Democrats)
3) The US is made up of 51 different states, if I'm not wrong. And you collect all of the votes separately, which means that a state is either Republican or Democrat. This renders the votes of the minorities in these states entirely useless. All of the democrat votes in Texas aren't going to matter, when the majority votes Republican. In Denmark, the minority blue-bloc voters in Region Hovedstaden still get a say in the election.
Explanation:
I hope this helps!
