So capitalism has the tendency to allow free trade. Corporations get more power and pay less taxes.
In a socialist economy the economy is controlled by the country. There are corporations but they have to pay more taxes, they can only import or export a certain amount of wares. There are more public institutions in socialist countries whereas institutions tend to be private in capitalist countries.
Let me make an example: Tunisia has a socialist economy because every barber has to charge you 4$ for their job. No more, no less^^ Why? Because the country decides how much a barber should charge. That means there is less competition and every barber gets paid equally for their job.
One of the many, many problems Jeb Bush faces in his quest for the Oval Office is his break from Republican orthodoxy on president Ronald Reagan's legacy. In 2012, Bush told a group of reporters that, in today's GOP, Reagan "would be criticized for doing the things that he did"— namely, working with Democrats to pass legislation. He added that Reagan would struggle to secure the GOP nomination today.
Bush was lambasted by fellow conservatives for his comments, but he had a point: If you judge him by the uncompromising small government standards of today's GOP, Reagan was a disaster. Here are a few charts that show why.
Under Reagan, the national debt almost tripled, from $907 billion in 1980 to $2.6 trillion in 1988:
Reagan ended his 1988 farewell speech<span> with the memorable line, "man is not free unless government is limited." The line is still a rallying cry for the right wing, but the speech came at the end of a long period of government expansion. Under Reagan, the federal workforce increased by about 324,000 to almost 5.3 million people. (The new hires weren't just soldiers to fight the communists, either: uniformed military personnel only accounted for 26 percent of the increase.) In 2012, the federal government employed almost a million fewer people than it did in the last year of Reagan's presidency.</span>
Nehru was a great contributor to India's Interdependence and to the first, forming years of the new democracy, contributing to such principles as secularism and democracy.
Explanation:
lots of people criticize the electoral college but it just comes to how much power a party has to change it.
changing it and making it based on popular vote would mean states like Wyoming (small population) would never be able to elect a president. and favor large heavy population states like California
ann dunham and barack obama sr ?
