Question ThreeShould the bailout have been done? To me the question sh terjemahan - Question ThreeShould the bailout have been done? To me the question sh Bahasa Indonesia Bagaimana mengatakan

Question ThreeShould the bailout ha

Question Three
Should the bailout have been done? To me the question should have been, “do we force cuts in jobs or do we ask for assistance so people can put food on their tables”? Yes, I know that the bailout cost a lot of money and in the end just prolonged the inevitable of GM going bankrupt. I feel it did serve the utilitarian way of thinking. All in all did it go along with rights and caring? To an extent sure, because GM didn’t want to cut the peoples jobs, but did they give anyone a choice as to whether they as the public wanted to pay back their bailout? The answer is no!
The answer to this question is not so black and white. Basically the tax payers did, and will for years, end up paying for the mismanagement of the automotive and banking industries. Do I like it, hell no! A big part of me feels that they should have been made to go bankrupt and fail. But there is also the fallout from letting them fail and what it would have done to our economy and the workers that depended on those jobs. I am not in favor of socialist ideologies. I believe in free trade and free enterprise and privatization. However, I feel that some sort of mixed government controls should be in place to hold private companies accountable that get so big that their lack of management and vision cannot affect our economy and the society in such ways. So ultimately I would say that I am ok with the bailout to a degree. Ethically, I believe that it served a utilitarianism viewpoint as well as caring. It could be argues unethical from the justice and rights viewpoints because it imposed negative impacts on all tax payers and there was relatively little justice for the gross mismanagement of money by these companies.
0/5000
Dari: -
Ke: -
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1: [Salinan]
Disalin!
Question ThreeShould the bailout have been done? To me the question should have been, “do we force cuts in jobs or do we ask for assistance so people can put food on their tables”? Yes, I know that the bailout cost a lot of money and in the end just prolonged the inevitable of GM going bankrupt. I feel it did serve the utilitarian way of thinking. All in all did it go along with rights and caring? To an extent sure, because GM didn’t want to cut the peoples jobs, but did they give anyone a choice as to whether they as the public wanted to pay back their bailout? The answer is no!The answer to this question is not so black and white. Basically the tax payers did, and will for years, end up paying for the mismanagement of the automotive and banking industries. Do I like it, hell no! A big part of me feels that they should have been made to go bankrupt and fail. But there is also the fallout from letting them fail and what it would have done to our economy and the workers that depended on those jobs. I am not in favor of socialist ideologies. I believe in free trade and free enterprise and privatization. However, I feel that some sort of mixed government controls should be in place to hold private companies accountable that get so big that their lack of management and vision cannot affect our economy and the society in such ways. So ultimately I would say that I am ok with the bailout to a degree. Ethically, I believe that it served a utilitarianism viewpoint as well as caring. It could be argues unethical from the justice and rights viewpoints because it imposed negative impacts on all tax payers and there was relatively little justice for the gross mismanagement of money by these companies.
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:[Salinan]
Disalin!
Pertanyaan Tiga
Harus bailout telah dilakukan? Bagi saya pertanyaan seharusnya, "kita memaksa pemotongan pekerjaan atau kita meminta bantuan sehingga orang dapat menaruh makanan di meja mereka"? Ya, saya tahu bahwa bailout biaya banyak uang dan pada akhirnya hanya berkepanjangan yang tak terelakkan dari GM bangkrut. Aku merasa itu melakukan melayani cara utilitarian berpikir. Semua dalam semua tidak pergi bersama dengan hak dan peduli? Ke mana pasti, karena GM tidak ingin memotong masyarakat pekerjaan, tetapi mereka memberikan orang pilihan, apakah mereka sebagai masyarakat ingin membayar kembali bailout mereka? Jawabannya adalah tidak!
Jawaban atas pertanyaan ini tidak begitu hitam dan putih. Pada dasarnya wajib pajak melakukan, dan akan untuk tahun, berakhir membayar untuk kesalahan manajemen dari industri otomotif dan perbankan. Apakah saya suka, tidak ada neraka! Sebagian besar dari saya merasa bahwa mereka harus telah dibuat bangkrut dan gagal. Tapi ada juga dampak dari membiarkan mereka gagal dan apa yang akan dilakukan untuk perekonomian kita dan para pekerja yang bergantung pada pekerjaan-pekerjaan. Saya tidak mendukung ideologi sosialis. Saya percaya pada perdagangan bebas dan perdagangan bebas dan privatisasi. Namun, saya merasa bahwa beberapa jenis kontrol pemerintah campuran harus di tempat untuk mengadakan perusahaan swasta akuntabel yang begitu besar bahwa kurangnya manajemen dan visi tidak dapat mempengaruhi perekonomian kita dan masyarakat dengan cara-cara seperti itu. Jadi pada akhirnya saya akan mengatakan bahwa saya ok dengan bailout untuk gelar. Etis, saya percaya bahwa itu disajikan sudut pandang utilitarianisme serta peduli. Ini bisa menjadi berpendapat tidak etis dari keadilan dan hak sudut pandang karena dikenakan dampak negatif pada semua pembayar pajak, dan ada relatif sedikit keadilan bagi kesalahan manajemen bruto uang oleh perusahaan tersebut.
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
 
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.

Copyright ©2024 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: