Noun
- the body with the power to make and/or enforce laws for a country, land area, people, or organization.
- the state and its administration viewed as the ruling political power.
- the management or control of a system.
- the tenure of a chief of state.
Government
Read full definition at wiktionary.org
[+] enlarge |
Multimedia LCD Digital...
Hitachi has a long-standing tradition of ensuring the best in quality,... More |
 |
|
|
Multimedia LCD Digital...
Ideal for use with widescreen notebook computers, the NEC NP4001 is designed... More |
...
This entry is from Wikipedia,the leading user-contributed encyclopedia.It may not have been reviewed by professional editors(See full disclaimer)
- 1.USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web Portal
- Official web portal for the United States government. Includes federal, state, and local government resources, a guide to government agencies, online services, ...
- http://www.usa.gov/
- 2.Government - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Detail from Elihu Vedder, Government (1896) ... 3 Positive aspects of government. 3.1 Upper economic class support (Positive? ...
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G
overnment
 |
government???
In Germany who is the head of
the government? What type of
government is it? and how is
it set up? and what type of
climate does it have and
descripbe it thanx! plz help
me. im doing a report on
germany and im not sure of
these questions! thanx again!
byez
|
|
|
|
|
 |
I have given you the link for the most information possible, it is the CIA World Fact Book.......anything you need to know about any country in the world can be found here. If you were unaware of this site then save it for futures use. This will help you answers the questions. https://www.cia.gov/cia/public ations/factbook/index.html ....... Introduction Germany ........ https://www.cia.gov/cia/public ations/factbook/geos/gm.html ........Government Germany............. .........BELOW IS THE TYPE OF .........INFORMATION IN THE LINK Executive branch: chief of state: President Horst KOEHLER (since 1 July 2004) head of government: Chancellor Angela MERKEL (since 22 November 2005) cabinet: It will answer all of your questions just use it. SEE MY SOURCE FOR SEARCH ENGINE |
|
|
|
|
|
How should government Okay let
|
|
|
|
|
|
An interesting and lengthy question that possibly deserves an equally lengthy answer. I have worked for various companies. Everything from a family owned business that employed 3 family members, to a large Wall Street firm that employed roughly 40,000 people. The issue that we have here is that in trying to regulate businesses, it's as if the government is trying to please everyone...and in doing so, they please no one. Like the saying goes, "You can't just be a little bit pregnant". As a shareholder in a wide range of publicly traded companies, I have had a few of my common stocks go to zero, while the companies filed for bankruptcy (Lehman Bros. and WaMu are just 2 of them). Even though it cost me money personally, I am thinking that the best way to go about things is to simply allow the grossly mismanged businesses to fail completely. That is what capitalism is all about; survival of the fittest. The ones that made the biggest mistakes and have taken the biggest falls, are also the ones that were perhaps the greediest. What bugs me MORE is that fact that the executives of these failed companies have now come come to the US government for money to keep their businesses solvent. And, while holding their hats in their hands and asking for a taxpayer funded bailout, they also have their friends in the backrooms writing bonus checks to themselves. As another saying goes, "You make your bed, you have to sleep in it". These folks made their beds. Whether it be in the form of sub-prime lending, or using derivatives to squeeze more profits from their balance sheets, or manufacturing vehicles that American consumers can not afford because of the high cost of fuels, the executives were providing the leaderhip that led to this mess and at the very least, they should suffer the consequence of unemployment themselves. Here's a novel idea. Before these HUG banking conglomorants became what they were, who was servicing those home mortgages in the past? The answer? Local banks! It used to be that when someone in Middletown USA wanted to buy a home, they applied for a mortage with the Middletown USA banks. The loan officer would review the application, look at their own banking records, verify employment with a simple local phone call, and possibly even drive to the property to inspect it to make sure that the home was worth what the buyer was paying (ensuring adequate collateral for the bank). Compare and contrast this rather old fashioned idea to what has been going on for that past 20 years! The mortgage lender is 2,000 miles away and has absolutely no idea who they are dealing with. For all they know, the property is a spruced-up double-wide trailer that they are lending $400,000 against. So, my question is...what's wrong with going back to basics and allowing these motgage banking giants to fail? There will be a void that would quickly be filled by...small town banks. I could go on and on here. But I wish to make one more point. It's time that shareholders take back ownership of the companies. The boards of directors are often bloated with upwards of 15 people that do absolutely nothing in the way of corporate oversight on behalf of the real owners, the shareholders. Often times, these people serve on multiple boards of directors and are paid six figure salaries PLUS benefits from each company. For what? To rubber stamp their approval on everything that the CEOs say? It's time for a change...and the change needs to happen on the ownership level. |
|
|
|
|
|
What are your options when the Obviously taking the
government to court is a non
starter in the country where
the government appoints the
judges. Clearly if you do not
have the means to pursue the
government on an international
arena, the only solution is
peaceful non payment of
anything which the government
thinks you owe it in the
future. That being all future
avoidable taxes of any kind,
including any fines or
government duties.
If the government does not
play fair, then the only
solution is to make the
government redundant.
Does anyone have a more
acceptable solution to
resolving this form of
conflict? (short of stealing
from the government?)
Some judges may be
independent, but you can be
sure that lawyers are not able
to act without conflicting
interest. As the courts
excluded non bar persons from
bringing a case, you cannot
therefore bring a case as no
lawyer will represent you
fairly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only a coup can solve this one. |
|
|
|
|
Recent submissions
IS THERE A SWEEPSTAKES KNOWN AS U.S.HOMELAND REGISTRY?I LIVE IN INDIANA AND RECEIVED A LETTER AND A CHECK TODAY SAYING I AM GRAND PRIZE WINNER. I AM TO CALL THIS NUMBER AND FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS. IT ALSO GIVE NAME OF FEDERAL AGENT FROM INTERNAL REVENUE AND HIS PHONE NUMBER. THANKS
Name: Anonymous888916949
Who are the State Senators for
California?
I'm not looking for the
Federal Senators, just the
State of California Senators
* Indicates a required fieldAdd your knowledge or ask a question:
What are the Federal regulations for the Department of transportation under the U S Patriot Act? For hazardous materials drivers, is therea a section that states requirement of life scan in order to recieve a commercial driver's license?