Question 1. Distinguish the process that a parliamentary system uses to oust a chief executive from the one available in the U.S. presidential system.
Parliamentary systems rely on impeachment, and presidential ones rely on constructive no confidence.
Parliamentary systems use constructive no confidence, and presidential systems have the option of impeachment.
The prime minister can dissolve parliament, and the president can resign from office.
Parliamentary systems can hold a vote of no confidence and presidential ones have the option of impeachment.
Question 2. Describe how the election process in a parliamentary system slightly resembles presidential elections in the United States.
Party chiefs run as candidates for prime minister.
Citizens vote directly for the each new prime minister.
Citizens vote for a party member with the knowledge that the next prime minister will be the head of the largest party.
The prime minister is appointed for a 4-year term and can be reappointed one time.
Question 3. Explain which type of candidate parliamentary systems seek out to become ministers.
Those who have experience winning elections and serving on a parliamentary committee
Newcomers who can bring in a fresh perspective to the ministry
Individuals who possess a great knowledge of the specific ministry's area
Those who have political experience regardless of whether or not they have been elected in the past
Question 4. Describe how today's conservatives use the term political economy.
Conservatives use the term to try to get back to the pure market system advocated by Adam Smith.
Conservatives understand the term within the context of Machiavelli's The Prince.
Conservatives veer toward John Stuart Mill's usage, which advocated utilitarianism.
Conservatives take a neo-utilitarian approach, hoping to benefit the weakest members of society.
Question 5. How do Keynesian economic policies differ from the traditional laissez-faire policies developed by Adam Smith?
Laissez-faire advocates for "cutthroat" capitalism, and Keynesian policies seek to spread wealth equally among a nation's citizens.
Keynesian economics advocate for increased government control of economics, and traditional laissez-faire argues for a hands-free approach.
Smithian policies advocate for increased spending and stimuli for government-run businesses, and Keynesian economics argues for a hands-free approach.
The more liberal Smithian economies distribute wealth more evenly among society, and Keynesian economics tends to distribute wealth among the top 1%.
Question 6. What event is largely considered responsible for deterring Johnson's War on Poverty?
Great Society
Vietnam War
Middle-class entitlements
Tax expenditures
Question 7. Which of the following is an increasing financial concern of the Medicare program?
The proportion of older people in American society is increasing steadily.
Every American citizen on reaching 65 obtains Medicare, regardless of class.
Economic inequality renders Medicare more necessary for some than for others.
Wealthy Americans are taking advantage of the Medicare system.
Question 8. Why are many politicians wary about limiting Social Security and Medicare expenses?
Many would be left without enough to support them.
Caps to these programs would undermine the welfare state.
It can cost them votes.
Both are primary social safety nets.
Question 9. How does the American welfare state compare to those of other industrialized nations?
Much less is allocated to welfare in the United States.
Other nations allocate less to welfare than the United States.
The United States allocates about the same to welfare.
Few nations besides the United States maintain funds for welfare.
Question 10. Many conservative economists argue that some banks are _____, because they would topple the rest of the economy with them.
inherently successful
too big to fail
destined for profit
practically invincible
Question 11. What is the most common response to serious domestic unrest?
Revolution
Coup d'état
Military takeover
UN diplomatic action
Question 12. Describe what can often happen in a changing society when, during times of prosperity, some people get rich faster than others.
Jealousy is aroused.
Politicians pay more attention to poverty.
The very poor revolt.
Economists become confused.
Question 13. What is likely to happen if the people are unhappy and there is no organization to focus their discontent? (Points : 2)
They will almost surely turn to violence.
Not much will happen.
The people will organize themselves, regardless.
They will eventually find other means of achieving contentedness.
Question 14. What are the aims of terrorists via their calculated acts of terrorism?
To panic their enemies, to gain publicity and recruits, and to get the foe to overreact and drive more people to side with the terrorists
To destroy as much of the economic strength of a nation as possible
To kill national leaders
To kill their enemies, to gain recruits, and to get the UN to overreact and cause more people to side with the terrorists
Question 15. What is the crux of radical revolutionary thinking?
An economic plan to back up political ideas
Belief that it is possible to remake society
Belief that violence is the key to change
A purely ideological motive
Question 16. Why is the Middle East currently the breeding ground for considerable terrorist activity?
High birth rates produce many unemployed youth who are attracted to the simplistic lessons of Islamism, which has made the United States an object of hate.
Low birth rates produce too few citizens to keep the economy growing, and poverty breeds unrest.
High birth rates produce many unemployed youth who are attracted to the complex lessons of Islamism, which has made other Middle Eastern nations an object of hate.
Low birth rates produce too few citizens to keep the economy growing, and the poor are attracted to the simplistic lessons of Islamism, which has made the United States an object of hate.
Question 17. Why do some scholars say velvet revolutions are not revolutions at all?
They are not ideologically driven.
They fail to bring about genuine democracy.
They lack the ferocious qualities of violent revolutions.
They don't bring about real regime change.